Pretty setting for a side inclusion

[TweetyBird23]

Stunning stone, safe clarity and color but pricey: https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

You'd have to ask if this is eye clean and if there are any transparency issues but at least the inclusions are white: https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

Thanks for the recs, ac117!

The VVS1 is goooorgeous but I'd rather have an eye clean from the top stone with visible side inclusions and pay SI prices (5k difference) if the size, color and cut are comparable.

The 2.53 E SI1 has 80% LF like my 1.61 and I want to try a 75% this time for bolder flashes of light.

If it's down to these 3, I think the 2.5 H SI1 for 23.8k is worth seeing in person.

 

[TweetyBird23]

Btw the 2.5 E SI1 has an ASET. Not looking too good, no?

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamo...iamond&utm_content=organic-passiveSimilarPush

 

[TweetyBird23]

Someone just swooped up the 2.53 E SI1. Oh well. The ASET did not look good.

 

[Lorelei]

Someone just swooped up the 2.53 E SI1. Oh well. The ASET did not look good.

Never mind, I'm fatalistic about such things, it wasn't the one.

 

[TweetyBird23]

Never mind, I'm fatalistic about such things, it wasn't the one.

Haha. Actually, it’s been unswooped. It’s available but doesn’t this ASET show too much light leakage? The 2.51 H looks prettier from the top with fatter arrows.

 

[ac117]

No, you are correct - the problem with GIA is that their numbers are rounded and in this case the CA/PA are likely steeper causing the leakage under the table. This is why light return images are really important bc the numbers don't tell us all.