Opinions please on this spready diamond with strong fluoresence

[Edie]

Hi all,
I would be grateful for opinions on this diamond...doesnt have the ideal proportions advised in pricescope but AGS ideal? Good spread and fairly eye-clean?...thats what caught my eye.

My main concern would be how sparkly is it? Thanks in advance.

1.82 Carat round diamond

This True Hearts TM diamond, 1.82 carat J color si1 clarity has ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from AGS

www.jamesallen.com

 

[OoohShiny]

The HCA score should still be decent, as the crown and pavilion angles look to match (i.e. work together) IIRC, and AGS000 grading is only awarded to stones that perform well.

Twinning Wisps are a 'good' inclusion to have as they should not affect light transmission or look obvious.

The lower crown angle suggests it might have more bright white light return than coloured fire, but you would need to assess it by eye to see how it matched your personal taste.

 

[Edie]

Thanks. Yes, the HCA score is less than 1 and I'm glad to hear that it should have white light return

 

[Edie]

Btw, does it look cloudy at all?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The ASET map looks good, and the strong blue fluorescence may help with the face-up color on the J. Typically, fluorescence doesn't cause cloudiness (only about 2% of the time), and with twinning wisps that are SI1 off to the side of the diamond, with the table being relatively free of inclusions, it looks like it would be nice face-up. I concur with @OoohShiny about the amount of scintillation (sparkle) based on the crown angle and how it looks to your personal taste. I hope this helps!

Hello Alethea and welcome to Pricescope!

For those not familiar with Alethea's work, she has held very important positions at both GIA and AGS.
She will be a huge "ASET" to the discussions on this forum.

 

[A Inns]

Hello Alethea and welcome to Pricescope!

For those not familiar with Alethea's work, she has held very important positions at both GIA and AGS.
She will be a huge "ASET" to the discussions on this forum.

Thank you Bryan! I'm so excited to contribute in my newest role!!!! I can't believe I haven't joined earlier.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Totally agree with Bryan!!
Welcome @A Inns!!!

I've also seen many a stone with "Twining Wisps" that looked pretty bad on the plot, yet amazing in person!
Also a lover of certain J color with diamonds with fluorescence.
**edited by moderator to comply with policies**
Not that there's an official designation to the term, but in general: The term is used to describe a shallow diamond that looks large for its weight.

 

[A Inns]

Totally agree with Bryan!!
Welcome @A Inns!!!

I've also seen many a stone with "Twining Wisps" that looked pretty bad on the plot, yet amazing in person!
Also a lover of certain J color with diamonds with fluorescence.
**edited by moderator to comply with policies**
Not that there's an official designation to the term, but in general: The term is used to describe a shallow diamond that looks large for its weight.

Thank you, @Rockdiamond! Agreed.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

**edited by moderator to comply with policies**

Welcome Alethea, I am sure we have met somewhere around - probably JCK Vegas.
Michael Cowing and I agree on some stuff and have huge disagreements on many others - but we both agree that twinning wisps are incorrectly graded by labs.
Using backlit microscopes and then checking the grade with a loupe in a dark lab room exaggerates twinning.
Consumers look at diamonds front lit and they almost always appear a grade or two nicer.

Rarely they can be an issue when combined with fluoro

 

[Edie]

I am hugely honoured to have people with such expertise and generosity helping me. Thank you.

 

[Bron357]

Pricescope is such a fabulous place. So many people with vast experience and knowledge willing and able to give fantastic advice
or a learned opinion for free.
love Pricescope.
Best. Forum. Ever

 

[Ella]

Folks, a reminder that trade members may not weigh in on diamonds someone is considering purchasing. A lot of rules being broken in this thread.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Folks, a reminder that trade members may not weigh in on diamonds someone is considering purchasing. A lot of rules being broken in this thread.

Ella,
Could you please clarify what you mean by 'weigh in"? My understanding is that the rule prohibits trademembers from "criticizing or recommending" diamonds. Almost every thread will contain diamonds that are being considered for purchase.

With an outstanding new trademember joining our discussions here, it might be a good time to review the wording and the interpretation of the published policy with regard to trade participation.

Forum Policies

Updated October 3rd, 2017 for clarity) The forum is a cooperative endeavor. To maintain a community conducive to quality, members must agree to the following terms before using this system. By using this messaging system, you agree to abide by the following simple common sense rules as well as...

www.pricescope.com

 

[Rfisher]

And is it trade members that only have/represent companies that actually have gems for sale?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Michael Cowing and I agree on some stuff and have huge disagreements on many others - but we both agree that twinning wisps are incorrectly graded by labs.
Using backlit microscopes and then checking the grade with a loupe in a dark lab room exaggerates twinning.
Consumers look at diamonds front lit and they almost always appear a grade or two nicer.
Rarely they can be an issue when combined with fluoro

Ella for example - here I am discussing a confusing diamond attribute that is often found and with the hope to provide some education and also dispel the idea that the plots often look scary - is that OK?

 

[Rockdiamond]

I humbly apologize for breaking PS rules. It was not my intent- I know how tough moderating this forum must be and you guys do an awesome job of it.

 

[Rockdiamond]

And is it trade members that only have/represent companies that actually have gems for sale?

Some of the top appraisers ( who do not sell jewelry) post here, as well as other folks who are in the trade but no longer selling gems.
It makes for a really broad cross-section of viewpoints and experience.

 

[A Inns]

Welcome Alethea, I am sure we have met somewhere around - probably JCK Vegas.
Michael Cowing and I agree on some stuff and have huge disagreements on many others - but we both agree that twinning wisps are incorrectly graded by labs.
Using backlit microscopes and then checking the grade with a loupe in a dark lab room exaggerates twinning.
Consumers look at diamonds front lit and they almost always appear a grade or two nicer.

Rarely they can be an issue when combined with fluoro

Hi Gary,

We have met a time or two. Definitely at JCK! I agree with your post. Twinning wisps (TW) can have different appearances depending on the lighting environment. Because of the nature of how TW are plotted (usually a long red line on the crown), they can seem "overplotted" which is why in my experience, labs may limit the plot to the most prominent 3 or 5 grade-setting wisps to best represent the diamond clarity and provide a sufficient ID. I agree it's important to check the diamond in a variety of lighting environments.

And a fun fact that twinning and fluorescence can often happen together which may be something some diamond buyers don't know.