Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Thoughts on this diamond?

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
I know, this is another BN diamond, but how does diamond number LD01628166 on bluenile look to you guys?

Specifically, what do you think in comparison to the other BN one I was talking about?
 
I just got an e-mail update on the clarity of the first diamond. In the e-mail they said:

"The inspector noted that there is a very small black inclusion in the center but it is 100% eye clean. I know we discussed the definition of eye clean but I did want to reiterate it and add a little more to it. "Eye clean" means that a layperson examining the diamond face-up from a distance of six to eight inches would not be able to see any flaws, but it is not a guarantee that no flaws would ever be visible no matter how closely you scrutinized the diamond. If you want assurance that the diamond''s flaws would never be visible no matter closely examined, I would recommend choosing a diamond with at least VS2 clarity."

Does you guys think this means I''ll probably be able to see the inclusion if i purchase the diamond?
 
Date: 1/12/2010 3:01:26 PM
Author: BobHope1284
I know, this is another BN diamond, but how does diamond number LD01628166 on bluenile look to you guys?


Specifically, what do you think in comparison to the other BN one I was talking about?
Click to expand...

No thoughts on this stone?
 
Link?
 
Promising from the numbers but grade setting inclusions is cloud that covers quite an extensive area of the inclusion plot, that might have an effect on the light return.

Regarding the email, I would say it means that it would be eye-clean to the passerby but probably not for the wearer.
 
Date: 1/12/2010 3:09:30 PM
Author: BobHope1284
I just got an e-mail update on the clarity of the first diamond. In the e-mail they said:

''The inspector noted that there is a very small black inclusion in the center but it is 100% eye clean. I know we discussed the definition of eye clean but I did want to reiterate it and add a little more to it. ''Eye clean'' means that a layperson examining the diamond face-up from a distance of six to eight inches would not be able to see any flaws, but it is not a guarantee that no flaws would ever be visible no matter how closely you scrutinized the diamond. If you want assurance that the diamond''s flaws would never be visible no matter closely examined, I would recommend choosing a diamond with at least VS2 clarity.''

Does you guys think this means I''ll probably be able to see the inclusion if i purchase the diamond?
Click to expand...
Sounds like my diamonds and I can easily find/see the inclusions. Others cannot and I cannot when I look at my ring as itype, for example. Does this matter to you? Only you will know.

I reccomend getting a simpler/less expesive setting so that you can strecth to get one of the ones that Stone Cold recommended.
 
No way to tell from clarity plot.
 
It is "eye-clean" according to the rep, which means at 8-10 inches in normal viewing conditions and normal lighting conditions. I can''t see my inclusions under those circumstances either. But you will probably be able to see those inclusions if you look hard. If that bugs you then you probably need to go for an SI1. Bu it''ll cost ya!
 
Date: 1/12/2010 8:57:38 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
It is ''eye-clean'' according to the rep, which means at 8-10 inches in normal viewing conditions and normal lighting conditions. I can''t see my inclusions under those circumstances either. But you will probably be able to see those inclusions if you look hard. If that bugs you then you probably need to go for an SI1. Bu it''ll cost ya!
Click to expand...

Yeah, that''s what I''m thinking too. How do women feel about this generally? Does it matter to them that when you look really hard you can see an inclusion?
 
Doing some searches it looks like most people are very please with their eye clean SI2s
 
Date: 1/12/2010 10:03:06 PM
Author: BobHope1284
Doing some searches it looks like most people are very please with their eye clean SI2s
Click to expand...
I'd wager this is because those people have realistic expectations about having an SI2 in the first place - and those without, or who aren't happy with what they wind up with, upgrade to a higher clarity when they can.


People with SI2s must generally accept that in some lights, from some angles, you will see something. There are "good SI2s" in which you see fewer somethings, and "bad SI2s", but I wouldn't recommend an SI2 to anyone who wasn't prepared to accept that reality - afterall, there's a reason they're graded 'slightly included'
1.gif



I have an SI2. From face up in person - totally clean from all distances in all lights (However, this is clearly because the sparkle is masking the inclusions, because they become very clear in blown-up photos). From all 'top-down' viewing angles - clean from all distances in all lights. From the pavilion view you can see the wisps. I'm okay with this, and I'm thrilled that I was able to use the money I saved by skipping VS to gain on size, but plenty of other people would prefer to go a little smaller to ensure cleanliness in all environments. Personal decision.
 
I do not like seeing the inclusions in my SI2, even though it is like Yssie''s in that I have to look for them up close. I would wager most women do not want to see them. But my inclusions are black, whereas Yssie''s are white. Your stone seems like it is more like mine, with some black inclusions.

BUT most women won''t look for them
2.gif
Is your intended diamond savvy? Are her friends or family? This would matter because it would be embarassing to have them looks and scrutinize and find them.
 
That''s the thing neither her nor her friends or family really have any knowledge/interest in diamonds - that''s why this is such a difficult decision.
 
I''m sure she''ll appreciate all the effort you''re putting in when her ring outsparkles anything else she sees
18.gif
 
Date: 1/12/2010 10:21:58 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
I do not like seeing the inclusions in my SI2, even though it is like Yssie''s in that I have to look for them up close. I would wager most women do not want to see them. But my inclusions are black, whereas Yssie''s are white. Your stone seems like it is more like mine, with some black inclusions.


BUT most women won''t look for them
2.gif
Is your intended diamond savvy? Are her friends or family? This would matter because it would be embarassing to have them looks and scrutinize and find them.
Click to expand...

Would it be possible to post pictures of your ring? One from a normal "eye clean" distance and then another from whatever distance you have to be at when you can begin to see the inclusions?
 
Got a response from the BN rep regarding This Diamond and she said it "has one small white inclusion that is near the crown of the diamond but it is eye clean. Taking that into consideration when comparing it to LD01567084, I would personally recommend going with LD01628166. The reason I suggest this diamond over the other is because the white inclusions are less likely to be seen, even under intense scrutiny. The fact that the imperfection is also located near the crown means that it could easily be set to hide it with the prongs. The quality of this diamond is also quite spectacular because the ideal cut paired with the ideal polish and symmetry will create the hearts and arrows pattern that indicates a perfectly cut diamond."

What do you guys think, do I trust her, or should I still be afraid of those grade making clouds?
 
Date: 1/13/2010 12:06:28 PM
Author: BobHope1284
Got a response from the BN rep regarding This Diamond and she said it 'has one small white inclusion that is near the crown of the diamond but it is eye clean. Taking that into consideration when comparing it to LD01567084, I would personally recommend going with LD01628166. The reason I suggest this diamond over the other is because the white inclusions are less likely to be seen, even under intense scrutiny. The fact that the imperfection is also located near the crown means that it could easily be set to hide it with the prongs. The quality of this diamond is also quite spectacular because the ideal cut paired with the ideal polish and symmetry will create the hearts and arrows pattern that indicates a perfectly cut diamond.'

What do you guys think, do I trust her, or should I still be afraid of those grade making clouds?
Click to expand...

Sounds like she does not know the terminology of the trade. If an inclusion is near the girdle, then it is easy to hide with prongs, crown means it is the portion of the diamond above the girdle, could be anywhere. Those clouds, if visible, are not going to be easy to hide with prongs as they are quite extensive.

GIA Ex symm grade does not imply it will have a hearts and arrows pattern.
 
I guess at this clarity level I''ll just pass on BN all together and just deal with paying more at James Allen or Whiteflash
 
I found James Allen to be cheaper than Blue Nile personally.
 
Date: 1/13/2010 2:17:07 PM
Author: Laila619
I found James Allen to be cheaper than Blue Nile personally.
Click to expand...

I haven''t found that to be the case thus far. I guess I haven''t found many apples to apples comparisons between the two, but with bankwire discount and ebates cashback, BN is pretty cheap. And, in the setting I''m looking at, plain 6 prong solitaire in platinum BN is just over $150 cheaper on that alone.
 
Double
 
So, are you set on one of those two from BN?



You can always buy one you like, have it appraised, and return it if it doesn''t work out - BN does have a very generous return policy, and take it to the right appraiser and you can get a Sarin and IS.


Ditto SC.



Just tryin'' to keep up here
5.gif
 
Date: 1/13/2010 2:51:10 PM
Author: yssie
So, are you set on one of those two from BN?


You can always buy one you like, have it appraised, and return it if it doesn''t work out - BN does have a very generous return policy, and take it to the right appraiser and you can get a Sarin and IS.

Ditto SC.

Just tryin'' to keep up here
5.gif
Click to expand...

Haha, no, I''m actually being really fickle about this decision. Yesterday i was pretty much set on one of the two from BN. The 1.39 F, SI2 seemed like such a great deal - i could get the whole ring done for about 6950. Then I got scared that there''d be an inclusion that I could see and I didn''t want to risk it.

I''ve been checking out 2 stones at JA which they are getting me the IS images for. They are 1.38, H, SI1 and 1.40, H, SI2. Both are clean but the total cost will be about 7,600 for the first and 7,300 for the second.

Finally, I''ve been looking at a WF ACA 1.32 I, SI1 that looks good, and that will be about 7,200.

I can''t decide between these stones where to make tradeoffs and if i should take a chance on one of the BN stones (it will cost about $75-$100 to return it if I don''t like it).
 
I''m really liking the WF stone right now. See here
 
Looks good, put it on hold if you are considering it else it can get snatch away.
 
Date: 1/13/2010 4:06:30 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Looks good, put it on hold if you are considering it else it can get snatch away.
Click to expand...

Getting it held now. Does this look like a good compromise (I am going down in size a little (.8-.6) and going down in color to an I). Or would one of the JA options be better?
 
Really depends on you. :P

Wait until the IS for the JA stones are up before deciding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top