Seeking Advice for Diamond

[ia2t2tg]

Hello Everyone,

I've performed a fair bit of research and in the end I tried to narrow my diamond selection based on the following guide: https://beyond4cs.com/step-by-step-guide/

Specifically, the guide recommends the following:
Table % 54.0% to 57.0%
Depth % 61.0% to 62.5%
Crown Angle 34.0° to 35.0°
Pavilion Angle 40.6° to 41.0°
Lower Girdles 75% to 80%
Star Facets 50% to 55%
Girdle Thickness T – M – ST

Given that, I found the following diamond, which looks good to me except for several small inclusions that show up in the zoomed image (more visible in their 'Super Zoom' feature, which requires an account):
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...g-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-4495114

Here is the Idealscope image for this diamond:


I would really appreciate any insight as to whether this is a good diamond, especially if all of the small inclusions throughout the diamond will be noticeable and/or affect the overall performance of the stone.

 

[farrahlyn]

BEAUTIFUL stone. Slightly deeper than usually recommended but it's gorgeous. the inclusions are probably fine, you can always ask JA to examine the stone to make sure the cloud is not inhibiting the performance of the stone. but as a VS2 it SHOULD be fine.

 

[HappyNewLife]

beautiful. that IS is stunning!

 

[ia2t2tg]

Thanks for the replies.

The majority of the stones I've looked at have an inclusion here or there, but when I view this one in the in the 360 view, I can see very small inclusions pretty much throughout the whole diamond (especially visible with the super zoom tool).

This doesn't ring any alarms for you guys?

 

[flyingpig]

I wish it was cheaper.

How about this?
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-g-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3824047

 

[farrahlyn]

Thanks for the replies.

The majority of the stones I've looked at have an inclusion here or there, but when I view this one in the in the 360 view, I can see very small inclusions pretty much throughout the whole diamond (especially visible with the super zoom tool).

This doesn't ring any alarms for you guys?

Go pull out a ruler and look at how small 6mm is. Now look at those tiny tiny TINY specs and imagine how tiny they will be. you're not going to see them in real life. AT ALL. it is a very clean VS2 so i would absolutely ask about the cloud mentioned in the comments and whether or not it's impacting performance. Clouds can inhibit light return so it's always good to ask.

 

[rockysalamander]

I like the one @flyingpig suggested better. Larger (in mm, the visible size), less expensive and better clarity. Grading report includes light performance that is also very good.

 

[ia2t2tg]

Thanks for the recommendation!

I have requested the Idealscope image of that stone, so I'll see how it looks and report back.

 

[Bfelix]

I wish it was cheaper.

How about this?
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-g-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3824047

I like this diamond better and it is cheaper. It will be eye clean and save you a bit of money for a slightler bigger diamond. This one has a bit better optics.

 

[TreeScientist]

Thanks for the recommendation!

I have requested the Idealscope image of that stone, so I'll see how it looks and report back.

I recommended that one (the .92 G) to another pricescope poster a few weeks back. They got an IdealScope image for it and it looked absolutely beautiful. They eventually went with another diamond because they were scared about the crystal (which is hardly visible) but I was doing a mental facepalm when they passed on it.

I would highly recommend that .92 G. It is a beautiful stone at a great price right now. Don't forget to ask for the "pricescope discount" when purchasing from James Allen

 

[TreeScientist]

Thanks for the replies.

The majority of the stones I've looked at have an inclusion here or there, but when I view this one in the in the 360 view, I can see very small inclusions pretty much throughout the whole diamond (especially visible with the super zoom tool).

This doesn't ring any alarms for you guys?

I would be wary of that first stone you posted. I can also see the diffuse clouds that you mentioned and the stone does appear somewhat "cloudy" to me, though it could just be the video. I too am wary of any stone were cloud is the grade-setting inclusion in VS2 and below clarity grades. I personally wouldn't buy a stone with cloud as the grade-setting inclusion unless it was VS1 or above or unless I was buying from one of the vetted dealers like WhiteFlash, Brian Gavin, HPD, etc. who could do an in-person confirmation that the clouds weren't impacting performance (I would trust their judgement). While grade-setting clouds typically don't impact performance at the VS2 level, there have been cases on here where VS2 stones have appeared cloudy, so it would be a peace of mind thing for me. VS1 and above is the level where you can really be 100% (OK, 99.99% ) sure that the clouds wouldn't affect light performance.

 

[ia2t2tg]

It seems like the consensus is that the second stone (9.2 G - https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-g-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3824047) is better than the first.

I've been told that since the setting for the ring will be yellow gold (albeit with platinum-colored prongs), going down to H in color wouldn't make a noticeable difference - please correct me if I'm wrong.

So given that information, would you recommend the following stone over the 9.2 G (I found this one recommended in a previous post on pricescope)?
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...-color-vvs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-4401415

This 9.0 H seems much cleaner, but if the 9.2 G is really guaranteed to be absolutely eye-clean, perhaps that one is better since it's larger, has a better color, and is cheaper.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[ringo865]

The g all the way. It's whiter, cheaper, has a smaller table -- and if that's not enough -- its AGS ideal

 

[tyty333]

It seems like the consensus is that the second stone (9.2 G - https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-g-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3824047) is better than the first.

I've been told that since the setting for the ring will be yellow gold (albeit with platinum-colored prongs), going down to H in color wouldn't make a noticeable difference - please correct me if I'm wrong.

So given that information, would you recommend the following stone over the 9.2 G (I found this one recommended in a previous post on pricescope)?
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...-color-vvs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-4401415

This 9.0 H seems much cleaner, but if the 9.2 G is really guaranteed to be absolutely eye-clean, perhaps that one is better since it's larger, has a better color, and is cheaper.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Call JA and ask them to evaluate the .92 G for eye cleanliness. It would definitely be eye-clean to me (older eyes). I dont really think its an issue
but call JA for reassurance. Ask them from how far away are they evaluating it. Ask them if they can see anything from closer...or any other question
you might have.

I dont see the price on anything since they are reserved but sounds like the .92 G is cheaper and bigger, plus AGS000 lab report with Ideal (0) light
return.

Are you in the US? And your final back up, if required, is that JA has a 30 day return policy for any reason.
https://www.jamesallen.com/guarantee/hassle-free-returns/

I believe JA is running a 15% off settings for any stone over $4k right now...

 

[ac117]

I agree with others - I'd much prefer the G .92. Cut is great, cheaper, slightly larger and G VS2 is my personal sweet spot. In this size, absolutely eye clean plus the AGS 0 grade means excellent light performance, as well!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I would be wary of that first stone you posted. I can also see the diffuse clouds that you mentioned and the stone does appear somewhat "cloudy" to me, though it could just be the video. I too am wary of any stone were cloud is the grade-setting inclusion in VS2 and below clarity grades. I personally wouldn't buy a stone with cloud as the grade-setting inclusion unless it was VS1 or above or unless I was buying from one of the vetted dealers like WhiteFlash, Brian Gavin, HPD, etc. who could do an in-person confirmation that the clouds weren't impacting performance (I would trust their judgement). While grade-setting clouds typically don't impact performance at the VS2 level, there have been cases on here where VS2 stones have appeared cloudy, so it would be a peace of mind thing for me. VS1 and above is the level where you can really be 100% (OK, 99.99% ) sure that the clouds wouldn't affect light performance.

I think this is a very good analysis and advice. I concur that VS2 can occasionally be problematic in terms of transparency. Therefore VS1 is a safer bet. However, you can sometimes get assurance from the lab report. For instance, if the cloud plotted is small and not centrally located, it is less likely to be an issue. (Of course in a dossier report like the stone in question there is no plot to help you understand that aspect). Conversely, if the VS2 has cloud as grade setter AND comment of clouds not shown, that is cause for extra scrutiny. If the clarity grade (in report comments) is 'based' on clouds, that is cautionary for transparency.

 

[ia2t2tg]

Here is the Idealscope image for the 0.92G:


Does anyone see any issues with this image?

 

[ac117]

Here is the Idealscope image for the 0.92G:


Does anyone see any issues with this image?

Gorgeous - go for it!