Super ideal cut appearing yellow in some lighting

[headlight]

This makes me feel pathetic, but I don't see any color differences between the stones, even when all lined up!

You are NOT pathetic! You are just not CURSED like I am lol! Be GRATEFUL you don't see the difference!!! I wish I was more like you... my life would be more peaceful, my husband's life would be more peaceful LOL, and my bank acct would be more peaceful!!!!!!!

 

[headlight]

In fact the H in the original comparison pic I put up is the same H as the one I've posted today. So you are saying the H has a big contrast with my current I, compared to the Gs and H?

Both G's are not completely eye clean. but will see what WF come back with on the actual inclusion.

Yes, I believe so... because to me when you first posted your actual stone with the H you didn't take, I could immediately see the difference with not even honing in on my computer screen (whereas I had to a bit more with the new photos). And, quite honestly, if you have to eliminate the 1st G, I would like to see just the H compared to the other G (if that is an options as far as clarity is concerned) because I didn't see as much of a difference between those 2. The G on the left was clear to me. I said that if you can't get that G then go for the other G just off the top given it's a G and not an H and clearly I'm just a color whore lol who needs to get a life!!!
BUT, in the event you cannot get the 1st G, and the other G isn't a good clarity pick either OR if it really is difficult to detect a color difference, then perhaps you go with the H... AFTER ALL, it IS a VS stone. That would get me pretty darn excited!
It's interesting that the H you didn't take is this same H here available to you now. I am really interested in the 1st G, but there's something about things sort of working out or being there for a reason (as I've come to learn in my 54 years), but maybe I just read into this sort of stuff too much....

 

[headlight]

+1. Also, looking at the numbers which are similar to OP’s current stone: table is smaller than others, height of crown is taller proportionally, which gives the crown a nice puffier dimension, and LGF is 76 which broadens the flashes of light, again, just like the Op’s current stone.

OP, you picked a beautiful stone to begin with, and this new G has very similar dimensions. I think it has potential. The dimensions you picked are what I and others here look for (small table, high crown angle and height, smaller LGF percentage). Some feel this gives the flashes of light and the 3D dimensions of the diamond a chunkier look.

So in addition to buying different light bulbs, shades and repainting your walls to eliminate yellow tones, I’d suggest you also compare your current stone with the first G.

COULD NOT HAVE SAID THIS BETTER! I LOOOOOVE a small table and higher crown (hence my 55 table, 16 crown, & 35 CA... although those are GIA #s... who the hell knows what it really is lol!).
And what I DON'T have for my stone (but this one you are considering DOES HAVE) and would definitely put it on "the list" for the future for me lol is to have a LGF in the 70s, so this 1st G is so awesome IMO. Finger's crossed.
Think about all your are saving by not redecorating LOL!!!!!

 

[Gussie]

This makes me feel pathetic, but I don't see any color differences between the stones, even when all lined up!

Same here, thank goodness!

 

[daydreamer24]

+1. Also, looking at the numbers which are similar to OP’s current stone: table is smaller than others, height of crown is taller proportionally, which gives the crown a nice puffier dimension, and LGF is 76 which broadens the flashes of light, again, just like the Op’s current stone.

OP, you picked a beautiful stone to begin with, and this new G has very similar dimensions. I think it has potential. The dimensions you picked are what I and others here look for (small table, high crown angle and height, smaller LGF percentage). Some feel this gives the flashes of light and the 3D dimensions of the diamond a chunkier look.

So in addition to buying different light bulbs, shades and repainting your walls to eliminate yellow tones, I’d suggest you also compare your current stone with the first G.

Thank you all for your feedback on the diamonds - i didn’t get a response from WF on the inclusions so not in a position to make a decision. I have to say, that is one of the main challenges my fiancé (and now I) have had with WF as we live in Hong Kong and sometimes WF do not respond on the same day even if I have emailed before US morning, so it means I don’t see a response till 48 hours after.... not great for someone eagerly waiting and waking up really early to check if I’ve received any emails.

Anyways, I too love the higher crown, smaller table, and fatter arrows!! But now with the added higher colour preference!

 

[daydreamer24]

This makes me feel pathetic, but I don't see any color differences between the stones, even when all lined up!

I too do not see any difference between them all!!! However I must say (in case someone is reading this thread trying to decide if they Are colour sensitive), before reviewing my current I diamond, I didn’t think I was colour sensitive based on not being able to see differences between colours from photos and also in store under jewellery lighting (and under the table in a jewellery store / away from their lights). However it’s only until I had my diamond that I was staring at it in all different lightings that I could see the yellow tint in some indoor lightings. It is icy icy white outdoors and I love it then!!!
My point is (and it could just be me) I’m not sure photos and viewings in jewellery stores are the best place to determine what colour you are comfortable with.

However, having said that, after I started this thread, I cleaned my diamond in warm water and washing up liquid (after 10 days of wearing the ring every day), and it is SPARKLIER and BRIGHTER and CLEARER than the day I received it!!! No idea how that’s possible as my fiancé did not touch the diamond....

 

[daydreamer24]

DARN IT!... I LOVE the proportions of the 1st G!
Are these the only 2 Gs they have as viable options? Will they be having any more coming down the pipeline anytime soon?
Do I dare ask or will your fiancé literally hunt me down if I utter these words: What about an F??? (You can't blame a girl for trying LOL!)

Hahaha... I just did a look for Fs after reading your post.....actually found one that falls within the budget (I say budget but actually I’m just looking at <1,000 difference to my current diamond)

F SI1
Depth - 61.9
Table - 56.5
Crown angle 34.9
Star 49
Pavilion angle 40.9
Star 14.2
LGF 76

What do you guys think?? Although it’s 0.15 x 0.14 mm smaller than the first G....

There are some inclusions - will need to find out whether it’s completely eye clean, and maybe ask for some photos next to the G and H. Does this one sound too good to be true? It’s the same price as the first G!!

 

[daydreamer24]

Yes, I believe so... because to me when you first posted your actual stone with the H you didn't take, I could immediately see the difference with not even honing in on my computer screen (whereas I had to a bit more with the new photos). And, quite honestly, if you have to eliminate the 1st G, I would like to see just the H compared to the other G (if that is an options as far as clarity is concerned) because I didn't see as much of a difference between those 2. The G on the left was clear to me. I said that if you can't get that G then go for the other G just off the top given it's a G and not an H and clearly I'm just a color whore lol who needs to get a life!!!
BUT, in the event you cannot get the 1st G, and the other G isn't a good clarity pick either OR if it really is difficult to detect a color difference, then perhaps you go with the H... AFTER ALL, it IS a VS stone. That would get me pretty darn excited!
It's interesting that the H you didn't take is this same H here available to you now. I am really interested in the 1st G, but there's something about things sort of working out or being there for a reason (as I've come to learn in my 54 years), but maybe I just read into this sort of stuff too much....

Thank you!! I think that’s great advice and I will consider this depending on what WF respond with on my questions regarding the inclusions.

I don’t see the colour differences based on the photos, but I think the fact that the experts here are seeing the difference in colours, I trust that I will too in person.

I also think that about the H too.... it’s like it’s been there this whole time right under my nose.

Although, I have started liking my current diamond more and more after it’s clean the other day - i don’t see that shocking yellow anymore but I still see the yellow tint which I don’t like... I don’t know for sure that it’s to a degree that I NEED to exchange the diamond but I think I WANT to depending on what options are available to me (that my fiancé is happy to exchange)

I shall keep everyone posted on WFs response is!!! Fingers crossed that first Gs inclusions are acceptable

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I'd go ahead and switch it because I think you'll be happier with a higher color. Go ahead and get your fiance used to the idea of changing stones so later you can upgrade!

 

[daydreamer24]

I'd go ahead and switch it because I think you'll be happier with a higher color. Go ahead and get your fiance used to the idea of changing stones so later you can upgrade!

Haha. I think I’ve changed since being on PS... I never in a million years thought I’d ever want to upgrade my e-ring... but here I am 2 weeks into wearing my ring

 

[headlight]

I'd go ahead and switch it because I think you'll be happier with a higher color. Go ahead and get your fiance used to the idea of changing stones so later you can upgrade!

I love this!!!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Haha. I think I’ve changed since being on PS... I never in a million years thought I’d ever want to upgrade my e-ring... but here I am 2 weeks into wearing my ring

 

[Double E]

Thank you all for your feedback on the diamonds - i didn’t get a response from WF on the inclusions so not in a position to make a decision. I have to say, that is one of the main challenges my fiancé (and now I) have had with WF as we live in Hong Kong and sometimes WF do not respond on the same day even if I have emailed before US morning, so it means I don’t see a response till 48 hours after.... not great for someone eagerly waiting and waking up really early to check if I’ve received any emails.

Anyways, I too love the higher crown, smaller table, and fatter arrows!! But now with the added higher colour preference!

With similar experiences and also from HK. I do think the end result will worth the waiting. Just be patient and make your best choice, look forward to your final piece~

 

[foxinsox]

This makes me feel pathetic, but I don't see any color differences between the stones, even when all lined up!

I’m with you - I can see faint differences (I think) but they all look more than acceptably colourless to me! Secretly I’m cheering inside at this since with the crap-tastic NZ dollar, I’ll never be able to go high colour if I want to hit a larger size (which I do!)

 

[MamaBee]

Thank you and I love my I colored stone and I can't say it does't look yellow sometimes but then again Daydreamer24 I am very old and it may affect my brain your ring again is gorgeous, I think we both have the same setting... congratulations!!!

@Tekate you are not very old! Your ring is gorgeous...I just love it!
@daydreamer24 I would suggest having a talk with your fiancé and telling him the truth. I think this will totally gnaw on you..You should love your ring. I really like the idea of getting some czs and seeing how they look in your environment and on your skin. I have a G and I never see yellow in mine...or see it change and take on yellow near yellow walls. My H cushion is bright white but I do see warmth sometimes in different environments...but not yellow..There’s nothing wrong with changing it...Let us know what you decide to do. Good luck..

 

[daydreamer24]

So I heard back from WF and the first G SI1 is not completely eye clean and has a twinning wisp that’s visible from 4-6 inches ..... I’m guessing the inclusion will bother me and so it’s probably not worth getting the G that’s not completely eye clean and I’m better off getting an eye clean H.

This was the first G:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4109152.htm

This is the second G. Which WF confirmed isn’t completely eye clean but it’s not easy to find the inclusion without magnification. But the proportions aren’t so great I think... what do you guys think?
It has a shallower depth and shallow crown? Although a wider spread. But that means darker diamond and less fire?
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4140158.htm

 

[distracts]

I previously noticed the slight yellow / warmth tint in some lightings, which didn't bother me, but I don't know if its because of the shocking YELLOW colour I witnessed which may have now messed with my head a little - the slight tint also bothers me. However, based on my many readings on PS, it seems that it would have only been a matter of time till it got to me?

This is entirely dependent on your personal preferences. Plenty of people on PS prefer H/I/J or even M/N colors. It's ok if you don't.

I would be MUCH more bothered by an eye-visible inclusion than I would be by color... but I also would define a diamond with an inclusion I have to be only 5 inches away to see as "eye clean," because 99+% of the time I am not that close. But since you are already bothered by a slight tint in color, I'd guess you'd be much more easily bothered by an inclusion and should not get one of the Gs.

 

[Wewechew]

I’d rather have an inclusion I can see at 5 inches than tint in my stone

 

[daydreamer24]

So WF got back to me with further info on the inclusions although I’ve asked for more clarification as I was slightly confused... and the SA has left for the weekend so I won’t be getting a response till late Monday evening my time.

The G diamond inclusion is not visible from 6”.... I’ve asked what inclusion is then viewable closer than 6” - it appears it may be a twining wisp but it looks like a thin thread. I’m still waiting for confirmation on that.

Do you think that would be visible - as Lightbright you have said - the ACA will mask that quite well?

The F is slightly smaller. But I guess not by much.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4105095.htm

The SA also advised she could not see any inclusions face up of this diamond but I think she was talking about from 6”. Assuming that there are some inclusions from closer than 6” which are visible I’m guessing it’s at the same level as the G diamond....

In which case should I be going for the G or F? I do prefer the smaller table of the G and generally the proportions, also it’s 0.10mm bigger in diameter. And it’s already 2 colours higher than my current diamond.

Also I love the crispness of my current diamond - but I’m guessing all ACAs should be the same?

 

[Wewechew]

So WF got back to me with further info on the inclusions although I’ve asked for more clarification as I was slightly confused... and the SA has left for the weekend so I won’t be getting a response till late Monday evening my time.

The G diamond inclusion is not visible from 6”.... I’ve asked what inclusion is then viewable closer than 6” - it appears it may be a twining wisp but it looks like a thin thread. I’m still waiting for confirmation on that.

Do you think that would be visible - as Lightbright you have said - the ACA will mask that quite well?

The F is slightly smaller. But I guess not by much.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4105095.htm

The SA also advised she could not see any inclusions face up of this diamond but I think she was talking about from 6”. Assuming that there are some inclusions from closer than 6” which are visible I’m guessing it’s at the same level as the G diamond....

In which case should I be going for the G or F? I do prefer the smaller table of the G and generally the proportions, also it’s 0.10mm bigger in diameter. And it’s already 2 colours higher than my current diamond.

Also I love the crispness of my current diamond - but I’m guessing all ACAs should be the same?

@the_mother_thing Did the CBI have twining wisp”? Did you mention that?

 

[LightBright]

I like the F over the first G. I’m sorry to confuse things for you but that first G concerns me, someone who doesn’t mind inclusions. I see graining and wisps. I really wish you could see the two side by side. I don’t want to be the person to tell you to compromise on clarity sight unseen... I’m okay with inclusions but I prefer to see less than that first G. I don’t think the light performance will be affected, based only on what White Flash tells us about ACA, but I think you really need to see these stones in person, particularly the first G, which may not be possible. This is only my opinion.

 

[Starfacet]

We are here for you!

I heard someone else say that. Who was it?

 

[Starfacet]

This makes me feel pathetic, but I don't see any color differences between the stones, even when all lined up!

Me neither!

 

[daydreamer24]

Oh I should have posted the photos WF sent me. (Brain isn’t functioning as I woke up at 5am desperately checking for WFs response

Here is the G, H then F

 

[gregchang35]

Sorry for the long post. I will echo what most ppl have said above.
I understand your concerns with colours and inclusions, as this is what I know from my journey with diamonds, that tell me:

1) I am colour sensitive
2) I am inclusion sensitive esp if on the table, kite facets and girdle. I am ok with it in Pavillion as long as it doesn’t reflect into the table area.
3) I like smaller tables and higher crowns.

For reference:
I have E colour si1 4 chevron princess studs.
I also have I colour si1 OEC studs.
I got I colour hearts and arrows super ideal MRB (modern round brilliant) si1 studs for my daughters cos I could get bigger bang for my $. Yes it appears white in certain conditions, but I do notice the tint.
All the si1 are noticeable to the trained eye, but I could not see them. I see some si1 and the inclusions are noticeable.

Given where you are- things that I am understanding from you-
1) colour sensitivity
2) inclusion sensitive
3) size sensitive
4) performance sensitive

What I would suggest
1) go up in colour to FG. It would eliminate the tint that you see. But do go to a store to see if the FG colour, excellent cut stone does meet your standards of no tint.
2) at normal viewing distance 6”, the inclusions would not be that noticeable unless you have a scope or you have an eagle eye. What does the inclusion in your I colour appear to your eyes. How does it compare to the stones you are thinking about. You have the images and you have a stone in your hand from the ACA range of WF. Use that stone as your learning stone. I recall you saying that the WF SA has said one stone has at 4” the inclusion which could be noticeable as a thin thread. Can that be hidden with(in) the setting?
3) you are choosing diameter sizes, so with the largest with your budget, knowing that the whiter the stone the more $ it will be.
4) all ACA stones are cut to sparkle, so you can’t go wrong there.


What does all that mean?

It is about understanding your limits/ what bothers you more. Each of the categories that you mentioned above will have tolerances that bother you more than others...yes, it is expensive to find out what they are, and we are here to try and help you understand what your limits are.

As someone says- is it mind clean enough for you?

For me- if I like a stone, I like it.
For my OEC- I love the I colour as it appears white in most settings, but it picks up so much pastel colour from its surrounding that I equally love it for that character.

I am not a MRB person. But I got it for my daughters as it gives a great sparkle. Not that the oecs don’t. But with MRB, there is an exact science to how the stone is cut to give it the best sparkle. OECs were cut in a different era so the criteria is just different. The character is different, and I love that.


I hope that helps and sorry if that confused you even more.

As stressful as it is, use this as a learning time.

One thing will be clearer for you, hopefully, is you will understand your limits. We give OUR opinion as it is OURS, as I have mine. It may not be the same as yours.

Ok- too long a post now.

Enjoy and use the forum as you are.

Have fun!

 

[Starfacet]

Oh I should have posted the photos WF sent me. (Brain isn’t functioning as I woke up at 5am desperately checking for WFs response

Here is the G, H then F

I can see the H in the upside down view

 

[the_mother_thing]

@the_mother_thing Did the CBI have twining wisp”? Did you mention that?

It did; it had a couple of them similar to the plot of the G linked above with TWs. And in the CBI I viewed last week, none of them were visible to my eye no matter how close I got or in any light source I observed; in fact, I had to really search with my loupe just to find them. For reference, this is the diamond.

That said, every diamond is different; just because I couldn’t see them in the CBI doesn’t mean I wouldn’t see them in another SI1 diamond. I’d also point out that I did a LOT of reading on PS about twinning wisps specifically, and 95% of what I read noted that they’re one of the ‘best’ inclusions in a diamond because they’re usually white and invisible to the eye in most SI1s or higher; and, that pictures/videos tend to exacerbate their appearance while - in person - they were practically undetectable. If I was seriously considering a diamond with them and concerned about eye cleanliness based on a picture or video, I’d first ask the SA for his/her in-person observations without a loupe, then bring it in to see for myself. I was genuinely surprised at just how eye (and loupe) clean that diamond was for an SI1.

Hope that is helpful!

 

[nat_can]

Go with highest color you can, nobody will spot the inclusion but may spot the color. In the last picture you posted, G looks whiter than F (to me).

 

[AV_]

I wish I knew what you are seeing!

What comes to mind:

It isn't just the light temperature, but how it plays with the diamond in every place, and transmitted light makes its colour aparent (the colour of the light temperature, that is), reminding you that the stone is not D ... perhaps. There is no 'colour' in the Near Colorless range - hence its name.

The first two pictures - WWW, both side.views of the even more prominent crown of an OP diamond, the first is taken with mainly transmitted light (no reflections off facets caught by the camera, the light must be indirect & diffuse) and looks Fancy Yellow to me, the other imagees side & front show reflected light & hardly any colour. The grade is not near Colourless, but I do not find it easy to tell shades of more or less brownish yellow etc. still - it is a faint pastel; I am rather enjoying this subtle, complicated play of light and colour in these; ice is good for its own reasons.

2p

 

[daydreamer24]

Sorry for the long post. I will echo what most ppl have said above.
I understand your concerns with colours and inclusions, as this is what I know from my journey with diamonds, that tell me:

1) I am colour sensitive
2) I am inclusion sensitive esp if on the table, kite facets and girdle. I am ok with it in Pavillion as long as it doesn’t reflect into the table area.
3) I like smaller tables and higher crowns.

For reference:
I have E colour si1 4 chevron princess studs.
I also have I colour si1 OEC studs.
I got I colour hearts and arrows super ideal MRB (modern round brilliant) si1 studs for my daughters cos I could get bigger bang for my $. Yes it appears white in certain conditions, but I do notice the tint.
All the si1 are noticeable to the trained eye, but I could not see them. I see some si1 and the inclusions are noticeable.

Given where you are- things that I am understanding from you-
1) colour sensitivity
2) inclusion sensitive
3) size sensitive
4) performance sensitive

What I would suggest
1) go up in colour to FG. It would eliminate the tint that you see. But do go to a store to see if the FG colour, excellent cut stone does meet your standards of no tint.
2) at normal viewing distance 6”, the inclusions would not be that noticeable unless you have a scope or you have an eagle eye. What does the inclusion in your I colour appear to your eyes. How does it compare to the stones you are thinking about. You have the images and you have a stone in your hand from the ACA range of WF. Use that stone as your learning stone. I recall you saying that the WF SA has said one stone has at 4” the inclusion which could be noticeable as a thin thread. Can that be hidden with(in) the setting?
3) you are choosing diameter sizes, so with the largest with your budget, knowing that the whiter the stone the more $ it will be.
4) all ACA stones are cut to sparkle, so you can’t go wrong there.


What does all that mean?

It is about understanding your limits/ what bothers you more. Each of the categories that you mentioned above will have tolerances that bother you more than others...yes, it is expensive to find out what they are, and we are here to try and help you understand what your limits are.

As someone says- is it mind clean enough for you?

For me- if I like a stone, I like it.
For my OEC- I love the I colour as it appears white in most settings, but it picks up so much pastel colour from its surrounding that I equally love it for that character.

I am not a MRB person. But I got it for my daughters as it gives a great sparkle. Not that the oecs don’t. But with MRB, there is an exact science to how the stone is cut to give it the best sparkle. OECs were cut in a different era so the criteria is just different. The character is different, and I love that.


I hope that helps and sorry if that confused you even more.

As stressful as it is, use this as a learning time.

One thing will be clearer for you, hopefully, is you will understand your limits. We give OUR opinion as it is OURS, as I have mine. It may not be the same as yours.

Ok- too long a post now.

Enjoy and use the forum as you are.

Have fun!

Thank you for your post and definitely no apologies needed - very valuable insight!

I think it’s definitely about finding a balance between the Cs. Where I stand right now is I feel most sensitive to colour due to what I see in the I colour diamond I have.... I feel less worried about inclusions that can’t be easily seen (only visible at 5” and it’s not easy to locate) but that could just be because my current diamond is completely eye clean and therefore I don’t think about clarity?

I think between the options online at WF,
(1) If I were more worried about colour I should go with the F but it would mean slightly smaller diameter - smallest of all options by 0.10mm
(2) If I wanted the biggest diameter then I would go with the second G (1.39 but that one has less favourable CA/PA (34.2 / 40.6).
(3) If I was going for best proportions, I.e. small table and higher crown angle then I would go for the first G (34.7 / 40.7 / 55.7) but that one has the twinning wisps that may be viewable at 4-6”.

The H on the other hand is in between them all:
- completely eye clean
- good proportions (not the best for me) 56.7 / 34.6 / 40.6
- only 0.04mm smaller than my current diamond
- however the colour is the lowest (although still higher than my current one)

You are right - it’s about finding out what’s important to me and what I can compromise on.... I guess because this is my first ever diamond I’m still trying to work it out and going into jewellery stores doesn’t help me I find as I don’t see any difference in their lightings. Even under the table.