Pics of my diamond - feather on girdle?

[Postie]

Pics

 

[Postie]

Pic2

 

[Postie]

Pic3

 

[Postie]

Pic4

 

[Postie]

Pic5

 

[Postie]

Last one.

 

[Postie]

Is a GIA EX/EX/EX F Colour SI1.

Have sent it back for the time being to see if they can prong the inclusion. Its the only one I can see and thats looking at it with a 10x loupe also.

If it isn''t strong enough to prong it then who would want something that is structurally not sound?

 

[swingirl]

I can''t see what you are referring to. Do you mean the yellow area?

 

[stone-cold11]

Pic 5, 8 o''clock I think.

 

[mayerice]

They should have no problem pronging it.

 

[Postie]

Sorry the pics are rubbish, did them in a rush.

Yep, Pic 5 at around 8 o''clock

 

[Vancity]

Hi Postie,

Just wanted to say a "thank you" for posting your ring pixs.

I''m considering the exact same setting from BN, and these are the absolute BEST real-life close-ups I''ve seen to date...I now feel I really know what the setting will be like...thank you!

I hope things are rectified to your complete satisfaction.

It''s a gorgeous ring

~Allyson

 

[Postie]

You''re most welcome.

Not the best pics. It looks different in the flesh I must say. In the pics it can look quite high set, but in reality it isn''t. It is hard to see any gap between the ring and the culet. I have requested to have it set a touch higher.

Am really hoping the inclusion (feather?) won''t cause any probs with being pronged or to the longevity of the diamond. All other aspects of the diamond are fab.

Those that have seen my last thread will know that I have two diamonds to choose from, both GIA EX of similar size but one of 60/60 type proportions and this one. To be honest they both sparkled as nice as one another (and I spent HOURS in all conditions), but this diamond looks cleaner and crisper. I guess that''s what happens when you put a F colour next to a H colour.

The setting has a quality feel about it but if I could spec it myself I''d have the prongs slightly thinner if it didn''t risk loosing the diamond. I think the less ring and the more diamond the better though.

 

[HornAround]

nice ring, what''s the size and specs?

 

[Postie]

Round Brilliant
Measurements: 6.02 - 6.08 x 3.74 mm
Carat Weight: 0.83 carat
Color Grade: F
Clarity Grade: SI1
Cut Grade: Excellent

Proportions:
Depth: 61.8%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 35.0°
Crown Height: 15.5%
Pavilion Angle: 40.8°
Pavilion Depth: 43.0%
Star length: 55%
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick, Faceted
Culet: None


Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: Strong Blue
Clarity Characteristics: Crystal, Feather, Cloud

HCA:
Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 1.6 - Excellent

 

[HornAround]

Wow, your diamond is pretty close to what I'm looking for except I went with a G color and VS2 clarity.

Good luck with getting this taken care of.

 

[Rhino]

I wonder if that''s an open feather on the crown?

 

[Postie]

The diamond has been returned to the vendor and they''ve told me that by pronging the inclusion there would be a chance of chipping it (so they don''t want to). They also said they could not rule out the diamond chipped there anyhow.

I''m concerned that a diamond that has passed one of the most respected diamond grading could be structurally weak?

Surely it''s more important that the diamond is structurally sound, rather than grading it for something like fluorescence?

GIA EX/EX/EX

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/27/2009 9:32:07 AM
Author: Postie
The diamond has been returned to the vendor and they've told me that by pronging the inclusion there would be a chance of chipping it (so they don't want to). They also said they could not rule out the diamond chipped there anyhow.

I'm concerned that a diamond that has passed one of the most respected diamond grading could be structurally weak?

Surely it's more important that the diamond is structurally sound, rather than grading it for something like fluorescence?

GIA EX/EX/EX

A diamond can chip anyway with bad luck and a hard knock, especially if you hit it just right on a cleavage plane. There are various schools of thought with these types of inclusions, I assume if it is the grade setting inclusion ( the reason the diamond is graded SI1) that the feather is not of huge significance or it would not get the SI1 grade from a reliable lab. However I have read that some setters prefer to prong near such an inclusion rather than directly on it as this can weaken the feather. As you are uneasy with this diamond then you did the right thing in returning it, maybe VS or above might be a better fit for you as I seem to recall ( could be wrong though) that you have had some other SI which weren't eyeclean.

But fear not, you will find the right one!

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 4/27/2009 9:32:07 AM
Author: Postie

I'm concerned that a diamond that has passed one of the most respected diamond grading could be structurally weak?

It’s not GIA who is calling it structurally unsound, it’s the dealer. This may be telling you more about the dealer than it does about the stone. A stone with an inclusion that the grader believes will materially affects the durability of the stone would not be eligible for an SI1 clarity grade under the GIA system.

That doesn't mean the setter is wrong of course, if they believe their stone to be structurally unsound after their setter inspected it I would give this some credibility and perhaps choose a different one because of it but this is incompatible with what GIA has said. If it's unsound for the setter to put under a prong, it's equally unsound to have in an exposed area of the stone where you can damage it yourself. My theory is that they would just rather not mess with it and they know this excuse usually works.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[Postie]

Thanks for that, I''ve contacted them and told them much the same - just awaiting their reply.

I really don''t have the time to keep looking for diamonds (it''s taken so long already) - so was hoping this one could be resolved.

 

[Postie]

Neil: They agreed with you regarding your thoughts on if the feather is vulnerable, then it''s vulnerable anywhere (pronged or not).

They didn''t agree about the GIA grading and said GIA look more for the size and qty of the inclusions rather than the location. Therefore, just because GIA graded it a SI1, doesn''t mean it is structurally sound.

They are looking for another similar stone, although it looks like I''ll either have to pay more or downsize.

 

[Postie]

Am sooo tired and bored shopping for diamonds. I''ve had 3 now and they''ve all gone back for one reason or another.

Has knocked my confidence buying a diamond unseen.

 

[Vancity]

*plays the music from Rocky, and shakes Postie by the shoulders*

GET A HOLD OF YOURSELF, MAN!!! YOU CAN DO THIS!!!

Your diamond is out there...it''s just waiting for you to find it *wink*

~Allyson