shape
carat
color
clarity

Super ideal cut appearing yellow in some lighting

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by daydreamer24, Aug 29, 2019.

  1. headlight
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,346
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    by headlight » Sep 8, 2019
    How am I even supposed to respond to that when I’m drooling over your amazing diamonds and such beautiful mountings??... not fair!!!
    They (whoever they are lol) do say that D and E are virtually impossible to differentiate except to a very trained expert, whereas they say there is a slightly discernible difference from E to F. With that said, your F is larger so more concentration of color (that’s not there lol).
    But you are presenting an E to an F... that’s very different from, say, an F to an I.
    Irregardless, I’m just going to sit here and “enjoy the view” of your delicious rings!
     
    cflutist and LightBright like this.
  2. headlight
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,346
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    by headlight » Sep 8, 2019
    So I think of OP has the opportunity to go up to an F in another ACA, while only sacrificing a wee bit in size, I say go for it! Who knows when that opp will come again.
    As to the cure for the anxiety... probably staying off this forum would help lol!
     
    Ss52, muesli, daydreamer24 and 2 others like this.
  3. AV_
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,180
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2018
    by AV_ » Sep 9, 2019 at 5:16 PM
    @headlight Not. Neither do tinted sunglasses. Or, I do not understand this detail...
     
  4. daydreamer24
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    May 14, 2019
    by daydreamer24 » Sep 11, 2019 at 9:45 AM
    The time has come to make my decision - I have decided to go with the “first G” that was posted as WF have confirmed the only inclusion that may be visible by the naked eye is a twinning wisp which appears to a very thin thread across an arrow and only at 4-6” distance when viewed under spot lighting.

    1.383 G SI1 (looking to exchange for this one)
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4109152.htm

    1.368 I VS2 (current diamond)
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4118777.htm

    The other diamonds I considered were:

    1.325 F SI1
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4105095.htm

    1.398 G SI1
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4140158.htm

    1.365 H VS2
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4091539.htm

    About to pull the trigger - Please let me know if there are any last minute thoughts on this!

    I am really hoping this is THE ring!!
     
    muesli, Wewechew and AV_ like this.
    


    


  5. AV_
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,180
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2018
    by AV_ » Sep 11, 2019 at 9:55 AM
    I would have expected the F - it is only so slightly smaller.
     
  6. headlight
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,346
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    by headlight » Sep 11, 2019 at 10:12 AM
    I think so many of us here liked the 1st G, assuming the inclusion would not be of issue (to you, at least).
    The only other option I would entertain, as mentioned before, is if you wanted to move into colorless. But I don’t recall the up charge involved not the specs, just that it would be a little smaller. But I’m a bit more into the color and it seems the people here who own super ideals swear by the improved perception of color with these cuts so I believe it to be true based on so, so many testimonials.
    Plus, you are going up 2 color grades so you should really see a marked difference. You were really excited about the small table.
    It seems to me you should be very, very happy. And, ultimately, you will have an amazing upgrade policy so how can you lose? It’s seriously a win-win. If you decide you want to move into the colorless range at a later date you can... but from the rave reviews I’ve heard here about the super ideals, I think you will be happy with the G throughout the course of time.
    Congratulations!
     
  7. LightBright
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    520
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    by LightBright » Sep 11, 2019 at 10:16 AM
    I still worry about the inclusions in the G but I like the proportions. I think the F is cleaner visually, F still has a smallish table 56.5 and LGF is 76 like G and I. In superideals light performance (fire) will be evident in all proportion ranges. Only difference between F and G is slight mm loss and slightly larger table, but higher color and cleaner transparency, IMO. F might be a sweet spot color. So that’s my only other vote for contender.
     
  8. daydreamer24
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    May 14, 2019
    by daydreamer24 » Sep 11, 2019 at 11:27 AM
    243AF250-E8A1-47D4-8744-5E5E8EB75A20.png 223F4FB3-16D5-42B9-A022-F00A3957C046.png
    Thanks for your inputs.... now I feel like I’m getting cold feet on the G!

    Although, I did run both through the HCA tool and the F only had very good. Not excellent. Which put me off a bit. Do you know why it came up as that even though it is under 2.0?

    Below email response is from the WF SA (regarding the G, H and F.

    “All three are fairly comparable in size. The main difference is going to be with the color. I think the images show pretty accurately the color differential. If you currently have an I color and are wanting to improve upon that, I would recommend going with the F or G. I think the H, while it is a color grade higher than what you have currently, won’t be enough of a difference visually.
    With regard to clarity, both diamonds were eye clean even as close as 6” face up for me. They were not eye clean from the side view, but I don’t typically expect Si1s to be.
    The G color diamond has twinning wisps, which are light in color. They almost look like very thin threads within the stone. You can some of them in the magnified image online, for example on the 12 o’clockarrow near the center of the stone, you’ll see a very fine white line there. However this is not something I could see in person.
    The F color diamond has both light and dark colored inclusions. Perhaps the one I found the easiest were under the crown facets, they were dark in color. I could not see these face up though. This diamond also had twinning wisps and feathers which were light in color. Again, you can see a fine white line in the magnified image on the 9 o’clock arrow. But I could not see these in person.


    Personally I couldn’t see any meaningful difference in terms of performance or sparkle. The color difference was the main difference for me.”

    Kind of made me think the inclusions for both are not really visible. It was the other WF SA that evaluated the G and said it was slightly visible aT 4-6 inches
     
  9. LightBright
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    520
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    by LightBright » Sep 11, 2019 at 12:06 PM
    Hmmm. So I read what the WF rep said about the inclusions for both stones. Honestly, the criteria that WF has for inclusions in ACA stones is strict, so the stones have been vetted and I’d trust the Sales Associate that both seem decent. Inclusions will not affect light performance in ACA according to WF. I’ve been wondering if they can send you a “real life” top down video of both the “first G” and the F, side by side. Can you ask them to pull both stones and show at least one comparison video?

    It would be good to see a magnified video side by side. The video(s) you posted of your current I stone are another example of exactly what they should replicate (Eg on the hand in ring holders). In your video, the excellent light performance of your diamond is obvious. I would, personally, like to see if there is a meaningful difference in size, color and any differences in light play. When I bought my E SI1 .95 CBI, I was given a video showing it next to a 1 carat CBI with same color but different proportions. I could see the difference in light play/ performance and size and think I went into the purchase educated about my choices better.

    Is there any way for you to obtain a comparative video of the two stones (one close up, one on hand with ring holders) before you make a decision?
     
  10. daydreamer24
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    May 14, 2019
    by daydreamer24 » Sep 11, 2019 at 7:18 PM
    I did ask for a video but they said they do not provide non magnified videos. As for the picture side by side, we previously requested for one (when deciding between the I and the H) and I didn’t feel it was very helpful. See below (H on left and I on right) so I didn’t bother this time around. Also the 12 hour time zone difference and having to wait 24-48 hours for responses is tiring me out.
    B6A3EC43-51F3-4697-854E-0C42ACC36F29.jpeg

    Also the last email I sent asking for more details on both diamonds (I had like 10 questions), she only came back with a few sentences saying all inclusions (for all 3 diamonds) are minute and barely visible and no noticeable differences on performance.

    It sounds like CBI/HPD really went above and beyond to provide you with everything you needed to make sure you felt comfortable and confident with your purchase. That is awesome!

    Unfortunately we are going through quite a stressful time as we are also in the process of relocating and we are away on holiday for 3 weeks in 2 weeks time, so everything is feeling quite overwhelming.

    Anyways, I will have another think. Worst case If I go with the G, I don’t like it, I can always return and get the F (if still available) or wait for an upgrade....

    Thank you @LightBright and everyone else that has been so helpful and supportive throughout this process - continually providing advice and suggestions despite my craziness and obsessiveness over getting the “perfect” diamond. I really appreciate it! Honestly don’t know what I would have been like without this forum!!! :wall:=)2
     
    AV_ and LightBright like this.
    


    


  11. LightBright
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    520
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    by LightBright » Sep 11, 2019 at 9:28 PM
    I like your plan. I think the G is a beautiful choice and can’t wait to see it on your hand. Honestly, you will love any ACA. Good luck with your relocation and please post many many hand shots when you get your new diamond.
     
    daydreamer24 and muesli like this.
  12. RunningwithScissors
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    120
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2019
    by RunningwithScissors » Sep 14, 2019 at 10:26 PM
    @Tekate With all due respect, the average person doesn't have the training or the visual hardware to be able to see, and understand what they see, when it comes to the nuances of the visual world around them.

    I do. Detecting these nuances is my job and my training for the last 25 years. My ability to see and understand the visual world pays my mortgage.

    REFLECTED light and color are NOT what I'm talking about. I'm speaking about BODY COLOR.

    I'm sure you have a beautiful diamond, that is not in question.

    However, there is tint in your diamond. I know that I would see it, probably from many yards away. To my color trained eye, an I colored diamond is very tinted. I also know many other people who would also see the the tint.

    I'm happy it looks white to you and you are pleased with it. That however, does not mean that it is objectively white.

    Let me say one more time (though I know it will go over most people's heads) that JUDGING COLOR FROM A PHOTOGRAPH, ANY photograph (ALL photographs) is COMPLETELY USELESS. For more reasons than I have time to go into here, ANY object can appear ANY color in a photograph. For starters, how many of you know how to use a white balance card when calibrating your camera and that you need to use one before EVERY shot to even get close to an accurately-colored photograph? Do you know how to calibrate your computer monitor? And is it calibrated? Those are just two of literally hundreds of ways photos have ZERO bearing on what the actual color is on an object.

    And I know for a fact that the companies we love routinely Photoshop their images to make them look better.

    Look, all I'm advocating for is 1) buyers to do their homework and SEE diamonds in person, as many as possible, to understand their own color sensitivity and preferences before buying and 2) people stop saying that H, I, J etc diamonds are objectively white because they are not. They simple are not. They may look white to someone who is not particularly color sensitive, but to someone who is or someone who is trained in visual nuance, they are not. NO ONE IS SAYING H,I,J isn't beautiful or well cut. No one is saying that everyone should get a D/E/F. I am saying that everyone should look at diamonds, lots of them, in person, before buying. That's the only way to "know thyself."

    [Note: this post is NOT about the OP's choice between an F and a G diamond. I agree, the average person probably won't see much difference between F and G and will be happy with either. This post is addressing the people who advocate for newbies to buy an H/I/J/K- color because they can't see a tint in their own H/I/H and erroneously assume there isn't one.]
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2019 at 11:05 PM
    mochiko42, tigertales, AV_ and 7 others like this.
  13. RunningwithScissors
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    120
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2019
    by RunningwithScissors » Sep 14, 2019 at 10:41 PM
    These are gorgeous. Truly beautiful.
     
    cflutist likes this.
  14. icy_jade
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,700
    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    by icy_jade » Sep 15, 2019 at 6:44 AM
    If the differences are minute, I’ll go for F simply as I have a G and sometimes see a tint.

    It’s hard to tell via photos (personally I can’t) but irl I do see a diff between F and G. There is a reason why F is considered colorless and G is not.
     
  15. TreeScientist
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,241
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2018
    by TreeScientist » Sep 15, 2019 at 9:17 AM
    Count both myself and my wife among those who can also easily detect body color. Like you, my job is dependent on being able to differentiate subtle nuances in color, and I'm quite good at it. I've always loved looking at color palates, so I guess my profession chose me haha. And while my wife's profession doesn't really deal in colors, she's also a lover of color palates and color in the natural world. Both of us can easily detect body color in the near colorless range in indoor/incandescent lighting, even from a meter away. And no, it's not "beige walls or yellow shirts," because my wife's D color never exhibits any body color no matter what wall she's standing next to or what color shirt she's wearing.

    One of the problems with internet forms is that personal antidotes, if repeated enough times by enough vocal members, are accepted as gospel. Back when I purchased my wife's E-ring diamond at the beginning of 2018, the opinion (gospel) of these forums was something along the lines of:

    "Anything higher than an H is a waste of money, because no-one can tell the difference between a D and the near-colorless range anyway. If you don't get the largest I color, VS2/SI1 SuperIdeal that you can afford, you're doing it wrong."

    As you said, it's important for every person to see many different diamond colors in person prior to making their selection. However, I would go one step further and say that it's important to see many different diamond colors in a variety of different lighting environments. If one only tests their color sensitivity under jewelry store lighting conditions, they're likely to think that most diamonds in the near colorless range look "white." I know that, to me, G and even smaller H color diamonds look fairly white face up in jewelry stores, but in incandescent lighting I can even detect a bit of body color in an F.
     
    


    


  16. icy_jade
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,700
    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    by icy_jade » Sep 15, 2019 at 10:45 AM
    Clearly @TreeScientist @RunningwithScissors @cflutist are examples of PS-ers who can clearly see tints in higher color diamonds.

    Has there ever been a PS survey asking PS-ers when they can see the tint in diamonds when looking at diamonds in real life (non-store lighting)? (I think pics don’t count cos it’s dependent on so many factors from the lighting to the camera used to the screen being used to view the pic).

    Just curious as I wonder what’s the % that can tell the higher colors apart. That can maybe explain the flood of advice re: going for lower colors if the majority of the population really can’t tell the difference? No offense meant, as I do think it’s a blessing not to be able to see tints in lower colored diamonds and be able to go bigger.
     
  17. distracts
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,557
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2011
    by distracts » Sep 15, 2019 at 11:10 AM
    I have a set of CZ that goes from D-M. In sunlight or indirect sunlight, and some kinds of interior light, I can barely tell D and M apart faceup. It is VERY easy to do so from the side, of course. In most indoor lighting environments, I can see that the lower colors are slightly off-white, the way most "white" paint is, and I can see the difference between colors but it's subtle. It's funny because I'm terrifically bothered by off-white paint, preferring stark white, but definitely prefer slightly off-white diamonds! Only in some lights are the differences obvious to, say, my husband, who is much less observant about colors. Even then I would say to most people probably only J and below would look tinted.

    I also don't know that to call them "not white" is correct... off-white, or tinted white, because it is white with a slight yellow modifier, yes. But to call an I or even J or K "not white" is wrong to me because they are so clearly not another color. I DO think they are objectively white... because nobody is going to look at them and think they are another color. They will think they are a warm white/off-white/tinted white... which I and most people would still classify as white. Most people aren't bothered about having a slightly off-white diamond, because to most people that is still white, even if it is not entirely white. The vast majority of people - even people who are trained in color differentiation, aren't going to see a modified color as not the main color at all, which is what some people here seem to be saying. Like, just because lime isn't pure green doesn't mean it's not green, or whatever.
     
    lovedogs, AV_ and Pimberly like this.
  18. cflutist
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,790
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    by cflutist » Sep 15, 2019 at 1:45 PM
    Agree that each of us has different levels of color acuity. I didn't miss any on the Munsell Color test, but hubby missed 35. He just can't see the differences while I can. He also can see very well at night while I am stumbling around in dark parking lots.

    Yes I am aware of White Balance and am aware of Kelvin temperature ratings in light bulbs. Traditionally diamonds were color graded by a north facing window which is most closely duplicated by 5500 to 6500 Kelvin.
    I have such an LED light at home that I used for the photo comparing my E vs F from the sides on a diamond grading tray. Technically diamonds should be color graded unmounted so this is not a good comparison either.

    I think there are diamonds for everyone's palate but the tint is very real. From the top in a superideal, not so much because of their superior light return.

    I have compared my F-colored pear (graded by the supossed stricter GIA) on an overcast day with my F-colored CBI (graded by the supossed softer AGS) and my CBI blows the pear away.

    Clarity grading is another talking point on PS. Yes, I missed the one pinpoint in a VVS1 that I was grading during GIA diamond grading class, but I have read that some PSers can't see any inclusions with a 10x loupe in a SI2. By definition, they should be easy to find as they are in an SI1. But SI stones represent a great value.

    However, there are some of us who are very nearsighted and can focus 3 - 4 inches away where that one inclusion near the girdle in my SI1 CBI was as clear as day. I used to wear the ring upside down so that I wouldn't have to look at it. I took care of that problem by trading in a larger 2.21 F-SI1 for a SMALLER 2.18 E-VS1. Now I am very happy with both of my ering CBIs. 34.5 CAs and 40.8 PAs on both.

    Bottom line, there is something out there for all of us in diamond land and each of us should consider which of the Cs are important to us.. :mrgreen2:
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2019 at 1:50 PM
    Arcadian, lovedogs, AV_ and 1 other person like this.
  19. TreeScientist
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,241
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2018
    by TreeScientist » Sep 15, 2019 at 2:22 PM
    Count me among the "blind as a bat" crew. :mrgreen: I have an astigmatism, so even with glasses my ability to get small objects "in focus" is piss poor without the use of a loupe/microscope. Pretty sure you could show me an SI2 diamond with clear* crystals/feathers and I would never be able to make out the inclusions with my naked eyes no matter how close I held the stone. My wife is a bit better than me, but she is farsighted and also has trouble focusing up close even with glasses. Pretty sure we could've gone down to the SI1/2 level if it hadn't been for the necessity of going with VS clarity or above to please the asian in-laws haha.

    *I mention clear, because I can easily detect black carbon specs due again to the color acuity. I might not be able to tell you where exactly the black spec is located in the diamond, but I could at least tell you there was one. :mrgreen:
     
    Mamabean likes this.
  20. AV_
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,180
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2018
    by AV_ » Sep 15, 2019 at 3:40 PM
    I go by the same token: 'whites' - plural.

    GIA has a point with their 'colorless', 'near colorless' etc. lingo, not naming colors until they yell, reserving 'white' for translucent not transparent diamonds. Vernacular white is relative.
     
    junebug17, Mamabean and distracts like this.
  21. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,419
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Sep 15, 2019 at 5:19 PM
    Interesting you mention this. I cannot see in the dark. Like for real I HATE driving at night unless it’s an area I know. I was also able to do a blind color test in person and was able to line up an H, I, and J in order. I wonder if the two are inversely related.
     
    tigertales likes this.
  22. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    347
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Sep 15, 2019 at 7:16 PM
    how weird.i'm the same! can discern color a mile away, but utterly lost at night.
    which makes me think it's not a vision issue pe se, but our brains interpretation of what we see.
     
  23. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,419
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Sep 15, 2019 at 7:22 PM
    I had an ex that I swear could see in the dark, and I was so intrigued by it that I did some research at the time. People who can see better in the dark have more rods or more cones in their eyes. I wonder if color sensitivity would be having more of the other in your eye.
     
    tigertales likes this.
  24. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    347
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Sep 15, 2019 at 7:50 PM
    Yes, the extra rods, and Vitamin A help night vision.

    Night vision for me is more of an orientation issue...the fact that I can't see landmarks and the horizon as well...that kind of thing.

    With diamond color, it's not just vision though, it's almost a sixth sense...can't explain it. And even though I can keenly sense the color, that doesn't mean lower color grades bother me. That's a K in my Avatar, surrounded by G's...and I love love love the contrast and did it on purpose.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2019 at 8:16 PM
    Wewechew likes this.

Share This Page