Please share your thoughts on these ACA's. VS2 vs SI1

[tdoyledesign]

Hello all,

I really like this VS2 from WF, but am a little unsure if its worth the extra cash if they are both clean. I do like the idea of having a "mind clean" stone, but I don't want to be stupid and stubborn if its not necessary.

VS2:

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2782669.htm

Here is the SI1:

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2782638.htm

Are there any inclusions I am not seeing? It looks pretty clean to my eyes, but you all have more experience! Any thoughts are appreciated!

 

[Missy]

They both look like gorgeous stones! The thing about eyeclean is that it really depends on the person who is viewing it so the viewer cannot say anything more than the stone is eyeclean to them. The only way to know for sure is to get the stone and inspect it in person. Also, how does your FI feel about the mind clean thing? If you ask different people you will get different opinions. None are right or wrong they are just personal opinions. Personally I like the "mind clean" thing of a VS stone but that may not matter to you and your FI if the stone is eyeclean to the both of you.

Good luck with your decision and either way they are both beautiful diamonds!

 

[tdoyledesign]

Honestly my FI could care less about mind clean. It is all in my head She actually wants me to spend as little as possible, but I am the one that has the issue! I have educated myself a lot lately and I have these stupid paradigms in my head. I really like the idea of a VS diamond. I just wanted to make sure this SI1 looked good.

We originally looked at a G SI1 HoF stone and that got the ball rolling on super ideal cuts. My goal was to get a stone comparable or better to that one. I realize the SI1 would be apples to apples. I just have to get it thru my mind that SI1 might be ok if money is an issue

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I am another that needs the mind clean of VS or above, but my daughter has a clean SI1 from WF and really probably never even looked at her diamond report! I am sure both stones are beautiful!

 

[sleeprequired]

On that si1 there are comments that say the clarity of the diamond is based on clouds that are not shown. I think the big thread on why does my diamond appear milky in sunlight also had the same problem.

 

[webdiva]

The SI1 doesn't have anything that mars the idealscope or aset (sometimes you'll see the flaws on there), and the other picture looks eye clean. Have them tell you if it's eye clean from whatever distance away you are used to looking at diamonds, and eye clean from the side (if you have an open setting). It's a $2200-ish difference and I'd save that money for a setting/wedding ring if they're the same!

 

[stargurl78]

On that si1 there are comments that say the clarity of the diamond is based on clouds that are not shown. I think the big thread on why does my diamond appear milky in sunlight also had the same problem.

But this doesn't necessarily mean that this diamond will be milky just because it has the same comment. I'm with webdiva - for the savings I think I'd go with the SI1 stone.

 

[tdoyledesign]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

Where did you read on the WF page which type of inclusions there were? Are there certain ones to steer clear of? Clouds, pins, feathers?

If I don't see a huge imperfection in the Idealscope/ASET images, is it safe to assume the inclusions are small enough to not affect the light performance?