Thoughts

[Crunch2]

Hi, looking at a 1.55 VS1. Concerned about the dark crystal inclusions being visible even though I am told its eye clean. Should I be concerned if its a VS1. Any thoughts? Can see it 4-5 o'clock right off the table in the high res photo. Any other thought very much welcomed as well.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I sincerely doubt you would ever see that super tiny speck in person without magnification; it would be too small and disguised by the facet contrast. But if even knowing it is even there will be a ‘mind-clean’ issue for you, keep looking and maybe consider VVS clarity.

 

[jen2mc]

I can’t even see it in the magnified picture!

 

[flyingpig]

I would be more concerned about the quality of the stone than any inclusion.

 

[blueMA]

You won't be able to see that naked eyes in real life.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Hi, looking at a 1.55 VS1. Concerned about the dark crystal inclusions being visible even though I am told its eye clean. Should I be concerned if its a VS1. Any thoughts? Can see it 4-5 o'clock right off the table in the high res photo. Any other thought very much welcomed as well.

GIA stone? What are the specs?

 

[Rpb]

VS1 are likely to be eye clean when you see it with naked eyes unless magnified you won't see any inclusion. Please get the diamond vetted on PS for your own peace of mind.

 

[Crunch2]

Thanks! Any specific concerns make you say that or just broadly more concerned about quality vs inclusion? Has an HCA 1.1 which gives me a bit added comfort.

I would be more concerned about the quality of the stone than any inclusion.

 

[flyingpig]

Thanks! Any specific concerns make you say that or just broadly more concerned about quality vs inclusion? Has an HCA 1.1 which gives me a bit added comfort.

What are the table size, CA and PA?

 

[Crunch2]

Thoughts? I'm not able to get an ASET image. Thanks!
Table 58
CA 33.5
PA 41.0

 

[skypie]

CA is a bit on the low side and table a bit large.

Thoughts? I'm not able to get an ASET image. Thanks!
Table 58
CA 33.5
PA 41.0

 

[sledge]

Thoughts? I'm not able to get an ASET image. Thanks!
Table 58
CA 33.5
PA 41.0

Others can chime in with more experience, but initial indications are maybe it's okay. Need more data.



According to H&A DNA website, acceptable table is 53-58% with 54-57% being the ideal measurements. In the chart below, it uses the ideal table and angles to determine if a true H&A would fall in the scale. You can see you'd be border line with the ideal table but it appears it may still be a well cut stone.

http://www.heartsandarrows.com/hearts-arrows-diamond-ideal-cut-dna.aspx

 

[TweetyBird23]

If a stone and its perimeter fall within the ideal and hearts and arrows range, does that automatically make it a H&A stone or just has the high likelihood of being H&A? I think the latter, no?

 

[gm89uk]

Most diamonds that fit the parameters of H&A are not H&A

 

[sledge]

If a stone and its perimeter fall within the ideal and hearts and arrows range, does that automatically make it a H&A stone or just has the high likelihood of being H&A? I think the latter, no?

Short answer = no.

Long answer = https://beyond4cs.com/hearts-and-arrows/

 

[TweetyBird23]

Short answer = no.

Long answer = https://beyond4cs.com/hearts-and-arrows/

I appreciate the brevity, haha. That’s what I figured.

 

[rockysalamander]

The photo has the stone tilted downward, so we can't really judge its symmetry and cutting precision. I like to make sure we can see all the arrows "fire" -- ideally at the same tilt angle.

Based strictly on the angles, this diamond should have reasonable light return (assuming the cutting is consistent). But, the wider table and lower crown angle will tend to make the stone have lower fire and a flatter appearance (from the side). I personally prefer over 34 (and up to 36.5), but that is more my preference for the look of a high crown and firey modern stones.

Can you tell us with the grade setting inclusions are? Are there clouds? Is there fluorescence?

Does the vendor have a good return policy? You could purchase it and then shoot your own ASET image.

https://datlas.com/ideal-scope-store/aset-kit/

 

[blueMA]

Thoughts? I'm not able to get an ASET image. Thanks!
Table 58
CA 33.5
PA 41.0

I've seen this combo and the stones with that combo can be great IRL. However we don't have other data and it may be due to a photo tilt but I see some clustering under the table, so ASET/IS images would help with the final decision.

 

[tyty333]

I've seen this combo and the stones with that combo can be great IRL. However we don't have other data and it may be due to a photo tilt but I see some clustering under the table, so ASET/IS images would help with the final decision.

Can you define "clustering under the table"? I have not heard the term used before.

 

[blueMA]

Can you define "clustering under the table"? I have not heard the term used before.

It's the darkness you see at the base of the arrow shafts, usually affected by crown half lenghts

More details here
http://niceice.com/diamond-grading-101/obstruction-light-diamonds/

 

[sledge]

Hey @Crunch2, where are you purchasing from? If it's an online vendor, you do realize you can put the stone on hold while you make a decision? Once the stone is secure, then sharing the link allows us to help you without fear someone else might buy it before you can.

I say this as it'd be super useful to see videos or even more photos.

 

[Crunch2]

Thanks everyone. Specs are below

 

[Crunch2]

With a second image

 

[blueMA]

The proportions are not bad, but I would've liked to have seen either a slightly higher crown angle (34) or slightly less lower girdle halves > 77%, and we would see a bit less clustering with a bit thicker arrows for bigger flashes of light.

However, apart from being extremely critical above, the diamond should be nice and BRIGHT with very good scintillation. If the price was right and if the real life performance is good, it should be a keeper.

 

[WinkHPD]

Hi, looking at a 1.55 VS1. Concerned about the dark crystal inclusions being visible even though I am told its eye clean. Should I be concerned if its a VS1. Any thoughts? Can see it 4-5 o'clock right off the table in the high res photo. Any other thought very much welcomed as well.

The grayish appearance of that inclusion indicates to me that in real life it is a clear crystal. I see this often when I am making videos of diamonds. An inclusion that is clear looks darkish in the light box where the video is taken.

Even if this inclusion were black, it is too small for normal vision to see without magnification of some sort.

Wink

 

[sledge]

In addition to the other comments already made, I might note the GIA cert mentions the stone has medium blue fluorescence. This isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as the stone is cut properly and there aren't clouds, etc which I didn't see any on your cert.

In fact, in slightly warmer colors (G+) it can sometimes be desired as it helps the diamond face up a little whiter than the actual color.

Most the time it's a non-issue. If you do go to a night club with black lights, the diamond will appear to glow FYI. While many people do seek out diamonds with fluor, they normally can be picked up a little cheaper as it's typically seen as "none" or "very faint" is the more preferred option. For this reason, you should be able to get a better deal on a stone with medium fluor vs one with no fluor.

For some great information on this, check out this page. Listen to the video of Brian speaking, and then watch the second video that shows how beautiful one of his "Blue series" stones are when selected properly and cut right!

https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond/brian-gavins-blue-diamonds-with-fluorescence/

 

[Crunch2]

Thank you all, thoughts are very much appreciated!