shape
carat
color
clarity

Went And Looked At Two 1ct+ Fancy Intense Yellows Today...

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by JDL, Mar 12, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
  1. JDL
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    54
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    by JDL » Mar 12, 2009
    I have been having a jeweler track down a fancy yellow for me for an engagement ring. Here is what he had for me to look at today. I have the GIA grading report with me for the radiant but I saw the one for the oval as well so if it seems to have less info, that is why.

    OVAL:

    1.13 carat
    Oval Modified Brilliant
    Measurements (I can get this tomorrow)
    Origin: Natural
    Grade Fancy Intense Yellow
    Distribution: Even
    Clarity: VS2
    Polish: Good
    Symmetry: Good
    Fluorescence: None

    $5867

    RADIANT:

    1.10 carat
    Cut-Cornered Rectangular Brilliant
    Measurements (6.46 x 5.69 x 3.46)
    Origin: Natural
    Grade Fancy Intense Yellow
    Distribution: Even
    Clarity: SI2 (Single Feather Inclusion, I saw it under the scope)
    Polish: Very Good
    Symmetry: Good
    Fluorescence: None
    Slightly Thick to Thick

    $6275

    Now, having held both stones, looked at them both under the scope and in both artificial and natural light, the same color grade a side, the radiant is a much more vivid yellow than the oval. The stone is gorgeous (not that the oval isn''t, it just isn''t as "potent"). What I am wondering from you, the experts, is whether or not the prices seem reasonable and should the SI2 rating push me more towards the oval VS2 even if the color is not as rich?

    Thanks in advance,

    Jim (who is constantly learning)
     
    


    


  2. JulieN
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    13,321
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    by JulieN » Mar 12, 2009
    is the radiant eye-clean?
     
  3. JDL
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    54
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    by JDL » Mar 12, 2009
    They both are.
     
  4. JDL
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    54
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    by JDL » Mar 12, 2009
    Completely shameless bump? :)
     
    


    


  5. DiamondFlame
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    680
    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    by DiamondFlame » Mar 12, 2009
    The range in hue even for similarly color-graded FIYs may differ. I''m not sure if GIA price them differently though AFAIK when it comes to fancy color diamonds, the more intense color commands the higher premium. The price difference is not that large and could also be due mostly to the higher grade of polish on the radiant. If it''s for an engagement and both are eye-clean, I''d say go with the stone you love. [​IMG]
     
  6. JDL
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    54
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    by JDL » Mar 13, 2009
    Well the "wow" factor of the radiant from a color brilliance perspective is what is pushing me towards that stone and yes, it is for an engagement ring.

    Thanks,

    Jim
     
  7. Deelight
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    5,543
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    by Deelight » Mar 13, 2009
    Someone correct me if I am wrong but the number 1 factor in fancy coloured diamonds is colour - radiants tend to hold more colour so that might be the reason why it seems more colour vibrant to you :).

    If they are both eye-clean I would go with what you like best.
     
  8. tyty333
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    20,381
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    by tyty333 » Mar 13, 2009
    They say (the PS experts on this forum), buy fancy shapes with your eyes and not by the number. I assume this goes
    doubley for fancy color and shape diamonds [​IMG]. I say if the radiant is most appealing to you (its calling your name)
    then thats the one you should get!
     
  9. Rockdiamond
    Ideal_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    7,606
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    by Rockdiamond » Mar 13, 2009
    Hi Everyone!
    When judging fancy colored diamonds, toss almost all the white diamond rules out the window.
    For example: There is a range of colors called ''Fancy Intense Yellow"
    The lightest stone GIA gives this grade is very close to a Fancy Yellow, and the darkest might get a Vivid Yellow grade on a different day.
    I like to use a 1-10 scale. 1 is almost Fancy Yellow, 10 is almost a Vivid.
    If we are comparing two Fancy Intense Yellows- one is a 1 in color, and Internally Flawless- the other is an eye clean Si2, but the shade is 10...which is worth more?
    Generally speaking, the Si2 with the stronger color.
    There''s no hard fast rules about which shape give the best color either- it''s really based on the rough.
    The prices seem fair, but of course without seeing the stones, it''s a very general comment.

    The ring is also a very important aspect in how the diamond is going to look. Fancy Colors require different setting techniques to some degree.
     
  10. dkodner
    Shiny_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    150
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    by dkodner » Mar 13, 2009
    Hi Jim,

    David is right in that there is always a range even within the same "grade" of color assigned. It is also true that the radiant cut, in general terms, will tend to hold the color better than the oval shape, and that is probably one the factors that makes the color seem better in the radiant. What you are really seeing probably, is the saturation of color throughout the stone is better in the radiant than the oval, but the "color" may be very much the same. The grade of fancy intense is about the "tone" of color, not necessarily how well it shows in the stone. I saw a very large stone recently with a grade of "fancy yellow" that everyone thought would get a fancy light yellow grade. It made the stone seem like a great deal on paper because of the grade. The problem was, when you looked at the stone itself, it had very light color to none almost everywhere but the center of the stone. Not very appealing. But, I could see how it got the fancy yellow grade, because the color you did see, had the tone of a fancy yellow. There was a beautiful fancy light yellow there as well, and even though the tone was lighter, the dispersion of color throughout the entire stone was beautiful, and thus really a more valuable stone. I personally do not care or worry about the difference in clarity. Certainly there are people who will hold the cleaner diamond in higher regard because of it''s rarity, but are you buying it show how clean your diamond is, or how beautiful ? The answer in color should always be beautiful. Remember that the color itself in any colored diamond is a product of impurity. It may be chemical instead of a big chunk of carbon, but it is still an impurity. Buy the diamond that is most appealing to you, that is the number one criteria to value if you ask me. If you buy for beauty, chances are ten years down the road you will look at that ring and still love it as much as the day you bought it, that is true value. Good luck and congratulations!
     
    


    


  11. Dancing Fire
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    29,491
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    by Dancing Fire » Mar 13, 2009
    RD
    can you explain how a consumer go about pricing a yellow diamond since there are no RAP for yellow diamonds? [​IMG]
     
  12. Rockdiamond
    Ideal_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    7,606
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    by Rockdiamond » Mar 13, 2009
    HI Everyone!
    Dkodner- great post- and we agree on much of what you wrote- except that part about Radiant being intrinsically "better" than a cushion, oval, or pear shape.
    If we are comparing Radiant to round, or a step cut, like Ascher or Emerald Cut, absolutely the Radiant is better.
    But if we''re comparing Radiant to Cushion oval or Pear Shape, it''s more of a question of how to use the rough. All of these shapes are modified to suit a fancy color by the best cutters of Fancy Colored Diamonds.
    The reason Round and step cuts are not as good for the fancy colors is that the cutter has less ability to modify the cut to best draw the color out of the rough.

    I agree about the lesser importance of clarity in fancy colors- and that stones that get the next darker grade can sometimes really confuse the issue of prices. I''ve seen many a case where a strong Fancy Light Yellow showed a darker face than a weak Fancy Yellow.

    Dancing Fire- this is integral to your question.
    My position is that having the Rap Sheet is not all that helpful to buyers of colorless, as there are still a lot of variables which can affect the price. I''d suggest using BN for that type of search- it''s more relevant to the actual purchase price.
    With colorless- and especially fancy colors, the dealer plays a crucial role IMO.
    By choosing a dealer, instead of trying to choose the stone, the buyer stands a far better chance of getting the best overall service, and buying experience.
    If an unfortunate buyer chooses an unscrupulous dealer, the bad guy''s generally going to have the upper hand if they are going to engage in deception- that is, unless the buyer is a PS reader...hehehe.
     
  13. JDL
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    54
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    by JDL » Mar 13, 2009
    David / dkodner,

    Thank you for your very thorough replies.

    David,

    I came across a post or two where photography came up and you were specifically identified on the topic. I would like to bring my Nikon D90 down to the jeweler and take some photos of the stone on Monday. Normal photography 101 a side (tripod, no flash, etc...), what lighting should I take pictures of the stone in to give you all the best representation of the stone? These will be tack sharp 12MP unaltered pics.

    Thanks,

    Jim
     
  14. oldmancoyote
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    755
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2008
    by oldmancoyote » Mar 13, 2009
    From personal experience - northern diffused daylight is the best standard for colour - though it produces boring, flat photos. If you can find a "daylight" (5900 K) high intensity bulb you can get some interesting effects still with realistic colour. If you have to get into halogen or non-daylight type bulbs, I''d rather use the flash with a diffuser and/or oriented away from the stone onto a white surface, especially with a fancy yellow. Essential step is to adjust white balance on a sheet of white paper in the same lighting just before you shoot. YMMV.

    Good luck with the shooting!

    David et al: notwithstanding the "range within the grade" issue, isn''t the shape problem fairly irrelevant since fancy colours are graded "face up"?
     
  15. JDL
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    54
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    by JDL » Mar 14, 2009
    Thanks everyone. I am going to buy the stone early next week and have the jeweler hold onto it while he makes my CADs and builds the ring. I will bring the camera and try and get some nice pics of it.

    Jim
     
    


    


  16. Moh 10
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,004
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    by Moh 10 » Mar 14, 2009
    David said, "There's no hard fast rules about which shape give the best color either- it's really based on the rough."

    I thought color is more intense from cuts that cause the light to bounce around inside the diamond more times before exiting out the top.
    (The more colored material the light travels through the more the light becomes tinted)

    I believe light bounces around in a radiant more times than a round.

    This would mean a radiant may get a higher color grade than a round even when both are cut from the same rough.
    This in turn explains why there are so many colored radiants for sale.

    Am I misinformed?
     
  17. dkodner
    Shiny_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    150
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    by dkodner » Mar 14, 2009

    Hi David- That is not what I said, or at least intended to say, that one cut was "better" than another. I''m sorry if it came off that way. The Radiant cut has historically been a style of cut that increases the face up color of yellows and other colors, which is why I said in general terms it may be why the color looks better in Jim''s radiant. The radiant cut is unique in that it''s type of faceting, originally intended to cause more scintillation was found to strengthen the face up color in light yellow diamonds. Doppelt/Glick''s Starburst cut and Henry Grossbard''s Radiant cut are often credited with bringing popularity to colored diamonds in the 70''s and 80''s. In fact, Grossbard took an off color 109 carat in the mid 70''s and recut it to his Radiant cut making it a 79 carat Fancy yellow flawless, showing how important cut can be in adding value to colored material.

    Thus- Oldmancoyote, cut/shape really does have a lot to do with the face up color, which is indeed how colored diamonds are graded. So it is a very important factor in the overall valuing of a stone.

    Moh10- I''m not a diamond cutter, so I am not an expert on how light bounces around the two cuts, but I think you have the correct general idea. I do not think you are misinformed.

    I think what David means by it depends on the rough (correct me if I am wrong, I often am when i start to think too much [​IMG]) is that the rough can often dictate what kind of shape can be cut from it, and what will give the most yield and still show the most intensity of color. So I think you have to take all of these factors, the rough, the inherent body color and the shape of the stone into account when figuring out how nice a colored diamond may come off the cutting wheel.

    If anyone has great interest in colored diamonds, There are many good books with way more information than you will ever want to know in them [​IMG], and I would recommend the first one of them to be GIA''s Gems and Gemology In Review, Colored diamonds. It is a collection of all of their published articles about colored diamonds (well up until it was published). It is a great read for anyone who loves diamonds, and that''s is where I gleaned the story of Henry Grossbards 109 carat recut.
     
  18. Rockdiamond
    Ideal_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    7,606
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    by Rockdiamond » Mar 14, 2009
    HI Guys,
    My point was not that all shapes are equivalent in the cutting of fancy colors- just that Radiant was not superior to Cushion, Pear, or Oval per se.


    That would be why rounds cut to fancy colors are more rare- it's simply not the best use of the rough, generally.
    Moh10- It's likely that radiant is the number one shape for larger fancy colors- but if it is, it's followed closely by Cushion.
    My feeling is that the best cutters of Fancy Colors today will choose cushion, oval, pear or radiant depending on how the rough plots out.
    Some of the most amazing Vivid Yellows I've seen were shapes other than Radiant.
    In terms of the grading and what shape does better....
    Although Fancy Colors are indeed graded for color "face up" there are still some interesting anomalies.
    I've seen a lot of round fancy colored diamonds that were seemingly less saturated that other shaped stones of the same grade. Sometimes I think GIA is easier on rounds when it comes to fancy colors....

    Interesting story about Mr Grossbard, Dkodner....
    The man was a genius.
    Although he is generally thought of as the "father of the modern radiant" there were others that subsequently modified the design further specifically for fancy colored stones- while the Grossbard family focused primarily on colorless radiants





     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

Share This Page