Picture is worth a 1000 words...which words describe this stone?

[hedarud]

This is a GIA stone that is priced 12500, it is triple excellent, 1.8ct, ideal proportions, HCA score 0.7.....H color SI1, does it look good ??? i looked at many pics that are much more complementing, this is a simple snapshot, i am not sure if it is unfair to look at a stone in this manner, can anyone comment or is it not appropriate to comment on a pic like this ?

 

[JulieN]

picture is meh?

but then pictures are all about lighting, lighting, lighting. it "may" be inappropriate to judge in this fashion.

 

[neatfreak]

Well, there''s nothing to compare to, but honestly it is not fair to compare pictures of stones esp. if they were taken under different conditions by different people.

 

[DBM]

You need to take pic with camera as a bird's eye view with flash.. then it should look like what you were expecting.. in general.. pics don't help for seeing how a cut is... alot has to do with seeing the motion of brilliance of hte stone as it is moved... my opinion only

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 7/18/2007 3:16:34 PM
Author:hedarud
This is a GIA stone that is priced 12500, it is triple excellent, 1.8ct, ideal proportions, HCA score 0.7.....H color SI1, does it look good ??? i looked at many pics that are much more complementing, this is a simple snapshot, i am not sure if it is unfair to look at a stone in this manner, can anyone comment or is it not appropriate to comment on a pic like this ?

GIA does not use the term Ideal, so it would be to their excellent proportions.

Stone is at a tilt, hard to tell how far, but girdle reflection is beginning to show in upper portion of table.

Stone shows much dispersion and it is impossible to tell from this angle if stone shows Hearts or arrows.

With HCA of 0.7 it should be beautiful, but the eye can make that determination immediately when you pull it our of the box...

More than that this affiant sayeth not, maybe Paul can illuminate us further.

Wink

 

[hedarud]

ideal proportions was my comment, not that i know much, here is a copy of the cert....

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 7/18/2007 4:07:20 PM
Author: hedarud
ideal proportions was my comment, not that i know much, here is a copy of the cert....

Looks like you know enough to be looking at beautiful stones. Can not tell if the pav angle is 40.6 or 40.8.

Look at the stone, listen to your eyes.

Wink

 

[Regular Guy]

Hedarud,

Everything looks really favorable for this one, with not only the HCA score, but with it trending with both AGS & GIA proportion sets.

Still, Wink is a smart guy. Are you comparing this to others...doing a pepsi test? Can you see the beauty of this diamond youself, too?

Regards,

 

[hedarud]

Date: 7/18/2007 5:04:20 PM
Author: Regular Guy
Hedarud,

Everything looks really favorable for this one, with not only the HCA score, but with it trending with both AGS & GIA proportion sets.

Still, Wink is a smart guy. Are you comparing this to others...doing a pepsi test? Can you see the beauty of this diamond youself, too?

Regards,

Problem with internet shopping is that i simply cant order 3 stones that are each 12-15 grand a piece so i can compare then send back 2 !!!! Pav. angle is 40.6

 

[Regular Guy]

H,

review plan B under my signature. If this is a virtual option...any dealer should be able to call it up. See about finding a bird in hand, and having someone in your court.

 

[strmrdr]

Get an IS or ASET image.

 

[Regular Guy]

Oh...one thing I suddenly note is that the picture on the GIA cert shows virtually no markings...making me newlys suspicious of the SI 1 description. It also says cloud. Could this be dull.

Are you working with someone who can look at these for you, that you can trust.

If not, might you?

 

[hedarud]

Date: 7/18/2007 11:21:43 PM
Author: Regular Guy
Oh...one thing I suddenly note is that the picture on the GIA cert shows virtually no markings...making me newlys suspicious of the SI 1 description. It also says cloud. Could this be dull.

Are you working with someone who can look at these for you, that you can trust.

If not, might you?

RG, do you see the marking as a cloud right in the middle of the stone....it is a faint cloud, I was told it is essentially eye clean looking from top, maybe not from side.....it is marked on the cert though...take a closer look and youll see it, this is also a good thing / bad thing, no sig inclusions, just a cloud....

 

[JohnQuixote]

What's most important is that it doesn't affect the optics. If that were the case it should have been graded SI2. It may be that the pinpoint cluster that makes up the cloud is a little darker than usual and/or since it's in the center it may be a 'reflector' (meaning it can be seen in multiple places - thus the side comment). If it was a bit lighter or positioned differently it could have been an VS2 (?)

Performance: The suggestion to request an IS or ASET is a good one.

 

[Regular Guy]

H, I'd go with John's word on this, but I'm still curious on this...

John...on the grader's cheat sheet...is that where they have the documentation...if degradation of light performance, score SI2...otherwise, SI 1 & above...or what not. Is it just obvious. Just seeking to get any back story.

Also, John, for a further proof check (and even say, if it WAS an SI2)...we would not expect either ASET or IS to pick up on any performance degradation, right? It's a clinical...observation based thing, yes?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/19/2007 3:06:16 PM
Author: Regular Guy

H, I'd go with John's word on this, but I'm still curious on this...

John...on the grader's cheat sheet...is that where they have the documentation...if degradation of light performance, score SI2...otherwise, SI 1 & above...or what not. Is it just obvious. Just seeking to get any back story.

Also, John, for a further proof check (and even say, if it WAS an SI2)...we would not expect either ASET or IS to pick up on any performance degradation, right? It's a clinical...observation based thing, yes?

In fact, grade setting clouds in an SI2 may not hinder performance but it's wise to counsel caution in those cases, especially in the sight-unseen market. If the pinpoints are especially dense in the grade-setting cloud the grader will turn the diamond and a cloud dense enough to impact light performance will often show a 'shimmer.' Alternately, if the cloud/s are light but very spread out through the diamond it/they may set the grade to SI2 but may not be an issue. Such a diamond really should be seen by someone with expertise for a decisive judgment - and yes, a clinical observation.

A lot of this type of info is in formal coursework - but much is still passed down in story and song. My GIA instructors elaborated on many things not listed in the texts. Bob Hoskins turned me on to the 'shimmer' test and PS is a great place to pick up new angles from dyed-in-the-wool pros.

 

[Corseted]

I think it looks yellow.

 

[DiamondExpert]

Photographing the stone yourself and asking for info based on it is not going to get you any useful feedback....due purely to the fact of how difficult it is to properly photograph diamonds...the comments on it already demonstrate my point.

You could solve your "in person viewing for comparative purposes" problem by having 2-3 stones sent to an independent appraiser who is within driving distance. All you would need to do is find the stones and vendors who will accommodate you prior to your purchase and arrange shipping - however, it will cost you a bit extra for shipping/multiple appraisals.

Good luck!

 

[hedarud]

Date: 7/19/2007 9:21:24 PM
Author: DiamondExpert
Photographing the stone yourself and asking for info based on it is not going to get you any useful feedback....due purely to the fact of how difficult it is to properly photograph diamonds...the comments on it already demonstrate my point.

You could solve your ''in person viewing for comparative purposes'' problem by having 2-3 stones sent to an independent appraiser who is within driving distance. All you would need to do is find the stones and vendors who will accommodate you prior to your purchase and arrange shipping - however, it will cost you a bit extra for shipping/multiple appraisals.

Good luck!

I appreciate all the comments so far. The photo is not mine, that is funny. I asked for a photo and that is what I was sent

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

don''t forget that the seller took the time to take the picture. Which not all of them do. So perhaps he didn''t have any REALLY fancy equipment, also, I hear to use some of the equipment to take the really nice pictures can be quite time consuming--but it seems he is probably willing to do what he can for you.

 

[hedarud]

Thread revival....the diamond above was the diamond that I ended up going with. I actually ordered two similar diamonds, for comparison. I had the ring mounted in a setting my wife liked from BN and Union diamond was able to make the setting for us. What a great experience I had with UD btw. Anyways, it has been a couple of weeks since the ring arrived, and I still cant beleive how amazing this diamond is. It looks so brilliant and white. Out in the sun it is Spectacular. The whiteness is really noticeable in outdoor situations (especially in the shade). The fire is intense. i was able to spot the inclusions when I turned the loose stone upside down and looked up from culet at an angle, when mounted i can no longer find the inclusions. All along when looking from the top (face up) I could never notice anything. I feel like I found a real nice almost 2 ct white brilliant eye clean diamond that performs very amazingly at a price that was reasonable IMO. Less impressive diamonds locally at stores were at least 5-10k more. Thanks everyone for helping.

 

[SpeedracerII]

Date: 7/19/2007 8:57:41 PM
Author: Corseted
I think it looks yellow.

That''s because the camera is so close to the stone that you are seeing reflection of the camera making the stone look dark. It is really hard to take a good close up pic of a diamond with a standard digi cam. Like a previous poster said it is all about the lighting and that is not easy for the amateur diamond photog.