shape
carat
color
clarity

Video w/ VS2 with "Clarity grade is based on clouds that are not shown"?

Karl_K

Super_Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
12,094
In my opinion I would probably pass because of the inclusions but there is another issue when a vendor claims super ideal, the next thing to do is say prove it.
If they do not provide proof, h&a images and a light performance image then it is not super-ideal and in my opinion I would take a dim view of that.
Since its not industry defined wording its legal to call what ever you want super-ideal but its still not right in my opinion.
 

mikey2781

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 24, 2021
Messages
16
In my opinion I would probably pass because of the inclusions but there is another issue when a vendor claims super ideal, the next thing to do is say prove it.
If they do not provide proof, h&a images and a light performance image then it is not super-ideal and in my opinion I would take a dim view of that.
Since its not industry defined wording its legal to call what ever you want super-ideal but its still not right in my opinion.

Aside from the super-ideal label, is there noticeable clouding in the video?
I wasn't aiming for a super-ideal and this is not priced as one, but it hits all the ideal angles/length/proportions on paper.

There really isn't a better option for me out there unless I downsize to ~1.35
 

crbl999

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
468
I wouldn't take a chance on this stone due to the grade setting clouds. These need to be evaluated carefully (in different lighting environments) as the clouds can cause transparency issues; even in a VS2.
 

Diamond_Enthusiast

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Aug 28, 2021
Messages
287
I see haze too.

GIA clearly states "clarity grade is based on clouds that are not shown". The plot looks so clean and yet it is VS2, what does that tell you about the clouds?

Cloud as an inclusion is ok but when it is the reason for the clarity grade, I would pass.
 

Diamond_Enthusiast

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Aug 28, 2021
Messages
287
I have it reserved for now while I browse for other ones. Definitely having trouble finding something within my budget of ~11k with some leeway.

In case you will consider other vendors/options, here is a suggestion that is a true super ideal with ASET and H&A images to prove it. Face up spread is a bit smaller than the current stone you've reserved (7.29 x 7.25 vs 7.42x7.37) but cut is top notch and no transparency issues.


Currently BGD has a 8% discount for diamond + setting combo with code "BLKWEEK213" until 11/26 11:59 PM CST.
 

mikey2781

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 24, 2021
Messages
16
Thanks for the suggestion, will put that on my list. Good thing I'm not in a rush as our vacation is in March, had no idea diamonds were THIS complicated.

The merchant insists that it's eyeclean or clean to the naked eye when I asked about the haziness.

I've compared haziness between many different diamonds online and this one does seem a lot less hazy. Like a 10-15%% haze compared to the 50-60% hazes I'm seeing.

What are the chances that this could be eyeclean?
 

crbl999

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
468
Thanks for the suggestion, will put that on my list. Good thing I'm not in a rush as our vacation is in March, had no idea diamonds were THIS complicated.

The merchant insists that it's eyeclean or clean to the naked eye when I asked about the haziness.

I've compared haziness between many different diamonds online and this one does seem a lot less hazy. Like a 10-15%% haze compared to the 50-60% hazes I'm seeing.

What are the chances that this could be eyeclean?

The stone looks hazy in the video. The diamond should be crisp in the video. 10-15% haze is 10-15% too much haze. Chances that this stone won't have transparency issues doesn't look good IMO.

I would be cautious with the merchants opinion on eye clean and haziness. In their opinion this stone is a super ideal make. I agree with Karl's post earlier in regards to this. It's a play on words and is deceptive marketing.

Here is a stone that looks good to the untrained eye but has transparency issues under spot lighting. This stone was carefully screened by WF and was excluded from their top ACA line because of this issue.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4189819.htm?a_aid=PS
 
Last edited:

AllAboardTheBlingTrain

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Apr 22, 2020
Messages
1,962
In case you would be open to considering other options (I went with the stated budget of ~11k):

If you’re willing to go down to J instead of I, there’s this 1.607 ACA (creme de la creme) from Whiteflash at $10,808 wire:

Other options (all of which are either AGS0 or GIA3Ex with HCA<2):

this 1.52 I VS1 from JA:
which has all Ex except for VG for scintillation on the HCA. I think it’s the same stone as this one here from B2C but the B2C link doesn’t have actual images. Still, if it seems promising to you, ask JA for the cert number to make sure that it is the same stone and then you can buy from either (it’s about $500 cheaper on B2C.)
This stone seems a bit biased away from fire and closer to the white light / brightness side of things, with a rather shallow crown, so I’m not sure if others will approve it, but worth a look.


Another JA and B2C similar inventory situation:
This 1.53ct I VS2 from JA with imo safer angles (33/40.8. ) though leaning towards a 60-60 look which I personally like but others might not. I’ve posted the B2C link which seems to be the same diamond as well.
 

crbl999

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
468
In case you would be open to considering other options (I went with the stated budget of ~11k):

If you’re willing to go down to J instead of I, there’s this 1.607 ACA (creme de la creme) from Whiteflash at $10,808 wire:

Other options (all of which are either AGS0 or GIA3Ex with HCA<2):

this 1.52 I VS1 from JA:
which has all Ex except for VG for scintillation on the HCA. I think it’s the same stone as this one here from B2C but the B2C link doesn’t have actual images. Still, if it seems promising to you, ask JA for the cert number to make sure that it is the same stone and then you can buy from either (it’s about $500 cheaper on B2C.)
This stone seems a bit biased away from fire and closer to the white light / brightness side of things, with a rather shallow crown, so I’m not sure if others will approve it, but worth a look.


Another JA and B2C similar inventory situation:
This 1.53ct I VS2 from JA with imo safer angles (33/40.8. ) though leaning towards a 60-60 look which I personally like but others might not. I’ve posted the B2C link which seems to be the same diamond as well.

After searching around I didn't find any options above 1.5 ct I VS2 and under $11k that I personally would buy.

I like the J VS2 ACA.

Here is another option from JA. I would request the report and Idealscope image.

 

AllAboardTheBlingTrain

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Apr 22, 2020
Messages
1,962
After searching around I didn't find any options above 1.5 ct I VS2 and under $11k that I personally would buy.

I like the J VS2 ACA.

Here is another option from JA. I would request the report and Idealscope image.


That stone looks promising! I didn’t check for stones under I at any vendors except WF, but if you’re willing to go down to a J I think the JA one looks good too.
 

Diamond_Enthusiast

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Aug 28, 2021
Messages
287
The merchant insists that it's eyeclean or clean to the naked eye when I asked about the haziness.

I've compared haziness between many different diamonds online and this one does seem a lot less hazy. Like a 10-15%% haze compared to the 50-60% hazes I'm seeing.

What are the chances that this could be eyeclean?

I personally would take it with a grain of salt if the confirmation is coming from a vendor's SA talking about a virtual inventory diamond (not in-house where the vendor has physically examined it). The signature lines of diamonds of vendors like BGD and WF are in-house vetted and so I would be comfortable with their confirmation. Eye clean does not necessarily mean it will be transparent and not hazy IMO. Though it seems that Brilliance has a 30 day return policy you can fall back on.

Transparency doesn't get graded as an item by GIA/AGS but the comment about clarity grade based on clouds that are not shown raises red flags IMO. There are enough diamonds with no transparency issues available that you shouldn't have to rank their haziness level as part of your decision.

Haziness/cloudiness can happen when excessive/dense clouds, twinning wisps and/or internal graining are present. Some will argue that fluorescence can cause haziness too, however it actually seems that fluor isn't the cause by rather it occurs when the stone has transparency issues to begin with.

As for suggestions to go to J color, I personally would not recommend this unless you know the receiver is not color sensitive or you have both seen/discussed diamonds around that size in J. Lowest I'd go for a surprise vacation proposal is H/I if you are unsure of color sensitivity. If something had to be compromised, IMO you are better off with a well cut eye-clean SI1 in H/I.

One more thing you may account for is future upgrade potential. If you might upgrade, go with WF or BGD because their upgrade policies are more generous. At JA, you need to spend double the original. Not sure about Brilliance.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    What diamond 4C is most important?
    What diamond 4C is most important? - 12/06
    A Diva Got Her Diamond: Kristen Chenoweth is Engaged!
    A Diva Got Her Diamond: Kristen Chenoweth is Engaged! - 12/03
    December Birthstones 2021 - Zircon, Turquoise, and Tanzanite
    December Birthstones 2021 - Zircon, Turquoise, and Tanzanite - 12/01
Top