Upgrade from 1.52 to 2.03..yay!! but.....worried about SI1 clarity!!

[slammie]

My SO has has given the green light for an upgrade once again (much to his despair)...shrinkage does exist!!

The problem is that I love that I cannot see any inclusion even with a loupe in my current stone. However, two upgrades later (I know, it's horrible of me!) I've realized that I'd take size over clarity.
I know there has been much discussion on the subjectivity of "eyeclean". I guess I'm nervous that eyeclean from 6 to 8 inches away would still bother me. I have the opportunity to more upgrade from a 1.52 H, VS1 to a 2.03, G, SI1. I don't have any darkfield illumination pictures yet but from looking from the 10X magified picture below, would you think that the drop in clarity is worth it? The inclusion I am worried about is the one on the table. The others I believe are reflections.

Here are the specs:
8.21 X 8.29 X 5.02
Depth: 60.8
Table: 55%
Crown angle: 34.1
Height: 14.8
Pavilion angle: 41.0
Pavilion depth: 43.2
2.03 carats, G, SI1

I was also considering a I color VS1, 2.14 but I don't think going lower in color but higher in clarity makes sense. Plus in this size, I am worried about the "I" ( i do have an .63 I that I am really happy with) and have been told by some stay H or above. Also, it has a bruted girdle - I prefer faceted.

I'd love to hear your opinions!! losing sleep over this

 

[slammie]

Here is the idealscope image..you can see the inclusion at the four o'clock position..

 

[Jennifer5973]

I think it is highly unlikely you'll see the tiny inclusion in the table, which seems to be why it got an SI1. Is this a SuperbCert? I have seen SI Superbcerts and they are so blinding that you can't see anything but sparkle.

Personally, I'd got for cut, size & color over clarity...and an SI1 would be awesome. But if you think you will obsess with the loupe and constantly "try" to find the inclusion, then maybe VS2 is better for you, or another SI1 stone. Only you know you....Look at the stone and see for yourself.

PS My experience with this type of inclusion in the table is that if you hold the stone up to your eye, and tilt it just the right way under the right lights, you may be able to see this crystal(?). But WHO is going to do THAT?

 

[Daniela]

Actually, since diamonds aren't sparkling all the time (some lighting situations are more sparkly than others), I wouldn't buy the whole "cut quality masks inclusions" thing. If you look carefully, you will see it (as Jennifer has also pointed out). And the inclusion is dark, so if you're as clarity sensitive as you sound, then it will probably bug you. Plus, you will likely see the reflections as well.

Take it from someone who returned an SI-1 that had an inclusion that looked much like that one: if you're clarity sensitive, this is probably not the stone for you.

 

[slammie]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 12:00:08 AM Jennifer5973 wrote:

I think it is highly unlikely you'll see the tiny inclusion in the table, which seems to be why it got an SI1. Is this a SuperbCert? I have seen SI Superbcerts and they are so blinding that you can't see anything but sparkle.


Personally, I'd got for cut, size & color over clarity...and an SI1 would be awesome. But if you think you will obsess with the loupe and constantly 'try' to find the inclusion, then maybe VS2 is better for you, or another SI1 stone. Only you know you....Look at the stone and see for yourself.

PS My experience with this type of inclusion in the table is that if you hold the stone up to your eye, and tilt it just the right way under the right lights, you may be able to see this crystal(?). But WHO is going to do THAT?

----------------

Hi Jennifer, thanks for your comments! Actually really glad to hear from you..I LOVE your new diamond..it is absolutely drool worthy!! My desire for this upgrade is partly your fault

. I know you have a SI2, and in that monster of a size, if it doesn't bother you then I guess I shouldn't worry too much

.
Yes, it is a superbcert stone..this would be my third from him but first in this size in this clarity (have .30 ish SIs for earrings). I trust Barry completely but I'm just worried that I am more picky than he is!!
I wonder it would bother me initially but I'll get over it after a while..plus, like my friend says, it's nice having birthmarks to identify your stone with.
Has anyone else started thinking higher clarity initially, but after seeing SI1..they decided to go down to maximize size? Thanks all!

 

[slammie]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 12:09:44 AM Daniela wrote:

Actually, since diamonds aren't sparkling all the time (some lighting situations are more sparkly than others), I wouldn't buy the whole 'cut quality masks inclusions' thing. If you look carefully, you will see it (as Jennifer has also pointed out). And the inclusion is dark, so if you're as clarity sensitive as you sound, then it will probably bug you. Plus, you will likely see the reflections as well.


Take it from someone who returned an SI-1 that had an inclusion that looked much like that one: if you're clarity sensitive, this is probably not the stone for you. ----------------

Hi Daniela..thanks for you input. I forgot to ask Barry if it was a dark inclusion..can you tell from this magnified photo? When I searched for a similar topic..and I read you post. It made me worry even more

Wahhhhh!!! What am I to do? Such slim pickings right now =(

 

[zoobiedo]

Slammie -

I have a J colored SI1 Marquise 1.23 carat. I can't see any inclusion nor do I notice any yellow color in this fancy cut stone so I find it hard to imagine that you would see anything in your new stone to be. Don't lose sleep over it but surely enjoy the upgrade

 

[cflutist]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 12:20:57 AM slammie wrote:

----------------
Has anyone else started thinking higher clarity initially, but after seeing SI1..they decided to go down to maximize size? Thanks all!
----------------

When I searched for my current diamond I was actually looking for an SI1 and that's what I ended up with. I have studied the stone with the loupe, matching the inclusions to the plot, and I for the life of me, cannot see any of them with the unaided eye. I tell my friends/customers that SI1 represents a good value as far as clarity is concerned.

My previous diamond was a 2.05 D-VS2 which I had to pay a premium for when again I was looking for an F-SI1 at the time.

 

[slammie]

thanks Zoo and Cfluist! It sounds like the color of the inclusion is a big factor. So want to pick up the phone and call Barry right now!!

 

[moremoremore]

I'm very sensitive to inclusions. I actually think that the inclusion would be fairly visible. #1- its location. #2- I would prefer to have an Si1 with MORE inclusions that are scattered than one or two that make up the si1 grade...chances of seeing it increase depending on the inclusion type as opposed to having lots of inclusions that would call for the si1 grade but they would be less visible. I read that on nice ice (I think I am reiterating it correctly)

 

[moremoremore]

"Has anyone else started thinking higher clarity initially, but after seeing SI1..they decided to go down to maximize size? Thanks all!"

Actually, I've gone the other way. I had to up clarity and go down in color. Not because I wouldn;t love a COMPLETELY eye clean si1 or 2 (face up...pavillion I don't care THAT much) but b/c I couldn't find one. I've passed on a vs2 with less inclusions in the center than that stone...but then again, I'm seriously mental!

I just checked out the cert. I have to say that I don't know how you wouldn't be able to see it

I would def. trust Barry but understand that everyone's eyes are different and everyone's definition of eye clean if different...

If you're ok with seeing it every now and then....go for it. Not every one has clarity OCD like me. I don't care what grade a stone is- but I can't SEE ANYTHING or I go crazy!!!

 

[quaeritur]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 2:15:16 AM moremoremore wrote:

I'm very sensitive to inclusions. I actually think that the inclusion would be fairly visible. #1- its location. #2- I would prefer to have an Si1 with MORE inclusions that are scattered than one or two that make up the si1 grade...chances of seeing it increase depending on the inclusion type as opposed to having lots of inclusions that would call for the si1 grade but they would be less visible. I read that on nice ice (I think I am reiterating it correctly)----------------

I agree with mmm on this. I think you might be able to see this inclusion, and the reflections too, for that matter. I don't mind inclusions that much, but you have to decide for yourself if you can deal with it. That said, Barry's stones are gorgeous, and I'm sure the amazing cut will minimize what you see. I wouldn't worry if it were a smaller size stone, but at 2cts...

 

[valeria101]

The inclusion is small and hopefully you will never see it without magnification... Why would Superbcert post a picture with all those reflections in place? Usually those only appear at some angles, so this must be the worst possible position. You will get to see the diamond, right?

No reason to shy away from the SI grade off the bat, but with each diamond carying different marks, each has to be seen. So does this one.

Congratulations for the upgrade, btw

 

[Jennifer5973]

slammie, thank you for your compliments. I was lucky and got a great SI2.

After reading some more of your own thoughts here, I think you should get the stone (or go see it if you live near NYC) and see for yourself. While I think that 99.999999999999999% of people will never see that inclusion, if it will bother YOU, it's a no-go. And yes, while I think the circumstances would have to be right, I am sure if you studied it, you'd see it sometimes with the naked eye. Will that bother you? That's a question only you can answer.

I was at Barry's in July and compared an SI1 with a similar inclusion as the stone you are considerign to a VS1 stone. The VS1 was also a G, and the SI1 a J. Face up, I couldn't see much difference at all. And certainly not clarity wise, 10 inches away from my eye in bright lights.

I did go down in clarity to get size--my jeweler had the 3.01 there and I looked at it, louped it, and then asked what was wrong with it--b/c I could see NOTHING. It was only after I looked at the cert plot and looked again that I saw the whisp of the feather in the crown. This is also a white inclusion and it runs parallel to a facet-VERY difficult to see--the only one the stone has. People still ask me if it's flawless (LOL) but I do know that thing is there and I find myself looking for it sometimes--and in rare circumstances, i think I "find" it.

Just this week, a woman I work with saw my new ring for the first tme and said this exact thing: "gee, if my [2ct RB] is a F, VS1, I can only imagine what this is!" She was equating the beauty of the stone with traditional color/clarity specs...she had no idea (and I didn't tell her) that she was looking at a SI2 H.... It is so sparkly, she thought it must be whiter and cleaner than hers... I just said 'Oh, it's an ideal cut stone" and left it at that.

It's going to come down to how much you want size. I think in good SIs, the "brass tacks" become the wearer'sability to live with knowing the inclsuions are there versus any realistic possibility of others seeing them., as MMM suggests.

Good luck.

PS Barry's iron-clad return policy should give you peace of mind also. Try it out.

 

[reena]

yes, it sounds to me like it's a must-see-in-person situation. i am like MMM--i must have good eyesight or something because i can occasionally see inclusions even in a VS2 stone. the cushion that i ended up purchasing, which is a VS2, actually has a small black inclusion on the edge of the table and i CAN see it under circumstances such as those mentioned by jennifer--in just the right light, if i tilt it JUST SO and stare a while, and even then only because i know it's there. i agonized for a bit over whether to pass on it, but i loved everything else about the stone so much--a good cushion is HARD to find!--and i knew that nobody else would ever see it, and that i would only see it if i made a really profound effort to do so, i went ahead with it. i would go look at the stone if i could and then decide.

 

[Jennifer5973]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 9:57:01 AM reena wrote:

i agonized for a bit over whether to pass on it, but i loved everything else about the stone so much--a good cushion is HARD to find!--and i knew that nobody else would ever see it, and that i would only see it if i made a really profound effort to do so, i went ahead with it...

----------------

That's the stuff I'm talking about.

reena was willing to "live" with this small spot; I was willing to "live" with my feather...becasue we love the stones 1,000% otherwise and the chances of anyone seeng these things with the naked eye is slim to none. See it & tell us what you think!

 

[slammie]

Thanks all, Quaeritur, MMM, Valeria...it really helps to get other input on this. And my husband wonders why I'm still on here??

Geez, I feel like I'm on a roller coaster reading your experiences, etc. I envy all of you who live in NY...if it were me..I'll be swinging into the district every lunch hour

. I don't have the luxury of seeing it in person before I have it sent to Chris at AGA. I wonder too, just how picky appraisers are as well with the SI1. I think I need to go out and look at some larger diamonds with an SI1 inclusion on the table to gauge my comfort level. I do like stones with higher clarity ( i guess i equate that to quality) but I need to figure out if the increase in size will quelch the shrinkage issue so much so that the inclusion may not bother me as much as I thought it would.

Also, my first gut feel when I started down this alley was to go with the I, VS1. Ask me that a year ago, and I would have said, "I"? no way!! but seeing my H, 1.52 I was pretty amazed at how white it looked face up. I was going to send both the G and the I to Chris at AGA but when I realized that the GIA cert did not say faceted, I was disppointed as this means a bruted girdle. Am I right in rejecting this one due to this?
Here are the specs for the I:
8.33 X 8.36 X 5.08
Crown A. 34.6
Height: 14.9
Pav. Angle: 40.9
Pav. Depth: 43.2
Table: 56
Depth: 60.9
I, VS1, 2.14

Cost 700 dollars less than G.
The slighter bigger size isn't of importance to me, but like the crown/pav angles a bit better. Would have been happy with a VS2 too.

Thanks for listening!!

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 2:29:53 PM slammie wrote:



I was going to send both the G and the I to Chris at AGA but when I realized that the GIA cert did not say faceted, I was disappointed as this means a bruted girdle. Am I right in rejecting this one due to this?

----------------

No idea... what the absence of the "faceted" word means there. It could be a badly cracked bearded girdle but the chances are this is not remotely the case. Anything really bad and there would have been a note on the cert for bearding or feathers showing near the girdle, or at least some wider variation of girdle thickness.

The Iscope images should give a more precise impression on the two gems than the numbers can, and these two 'scopes are twins. It sounds like a bad case of hair-splitting to hunt down the tiny differences between the two.

Between G and I there should be some visible difference. Is it big hassle to see these together?

Choice is great, IMO, even if the I grade sounds 'safer' on paper for now.

 

[Jennifer5973]

I agree with Ana--the choice is likely between two great stones but seeing them side-by-side would be optimal!

 

[Patty]

I agree that seeing both stones side by side is the way to go!

I have a Superbcert G and a Superbcert I. I can tell a definite difference in the color of the two. The I is still beautiful and it looks great mounted in my yellow gold wedding band, but it's more yellow than the G for sure.

 

[jesrush]

I disagree with some of the earlier posters: It's unlikely you'll be able to see that inclusion. People really tend to overestimate their ability to find inclusions with the naked eye and its a delightful, amusing thing watching friends trying to tell the I1 in our house from the VVS2. So far, about 60% have picked the VVS2 as being "more included." Most of the rest have given up--they don't see anything!

I'd go for it... plus you have the superbcert return guarantee!

-JES

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

About 20% of 20 year olds could see that mark.
I doubt many or any +30 year olds could.

 

[Jennifer5973]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 10:11:30 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:

About 20% of 20 year olds could see that mark.
I doubt many or any +30 year olds could.----------------

yeah--EVERYTHING starts to go down hill at 30.

 

[Patty]

Yup. And once you hit 40, ALL diamonds are eye-clean.

 

[moremoremore]

Jesrush and Gary...I respectfully disagree...coming from a 31 year old!

DO I think that a casual observer or the wearer could see it from a 12 inch distance? No. Do I think that the owner could see it when really looking for it, very close under certain lights? ABSOLUTELY YES!!!! Again, that would not happen often but it would happen. I personally, couldn't handle it.

I think J-Flo hit it right on the head...that it's all about making choices....I mean, if you think about it...it's kind of dumb to pass on an amazing stone that's a great size b/c at times, under certain conditions, you can see a tiny dot. I guess it all depends on how 'mental' you are

 

[moremoremore]

Also keep in mind that looking for an si1 in a .26 is a completely different ballgame than in a 2.0!!! There's probably no way to see it in the .26. Not even I could see it!! LOL

 

[slammie]

MMM, it's actually 0.62 not 0.26

. And yes, 2 carat is another matter altogether! Hope you can give me feeback once I post more pics, "hawkeyes"

Thx!!

 

[moremoremore]

I'm cross eyed this late

bed time!!! But still, I imagine it would be very hard to spot an si1 inclusion in a .62 depeding on location. Anyhoo...that superbcert does look beautiful! Best of luck with your search!!! I know it stinks buying online without seeing it first...but when a great rep and return policy, you can't go wrong!

 

[AGBF]

----------------
On 9/25/2004 10:11:30 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:

About 20% of 20 year olds could see that mark.

I doubt many or any +30 year olds could.----------------

I thought I was the only one reading this thread who was thinking that I would no longer notice an inclusion even if it were there! It isn't that the eyes go after 40...or so.... It's that while nearsightedness is actually *cured*, one starts to see things differently when they are close. I am not at the reading glasses point yet. Now when I want a GOOD look at something up close, I just take OFF my glasses (which I wore for being nearsighted). (And I started wearing them all the time only when I was teaching high school and wanted to see the back row. Prior to that I wore them only for driving and watching movies.)

Did I leave the topic of diamonds?

 

[Jennifer5973]

OK--this is mostly an excuse for me to see if I can post a link (I've been kind of dense about figuring this out--but cflutist and MMM have helped me

)...but here is (hopefully) a link to the pictures of my stone at 15X magnification in a home-made sort of "back light" affect in camera's macro mode:

15X pics SI2

Edited: Yipee! It works! And it's the right page too

--scroll down if you want to see the pics I mentioned.