what do you think of this 1.35 ct I SI2? Please help!

[picante27]

I am getting a diamond from Green Lake through their trade in program. They sent me pictures of 2 diamonds, an I and a J to look at, but I have pretty much ruled out the J because of the inclusion visible to the eye. The I diamond's inclusions are only visible with magnification. I was looking at the GIA report, and it looks like all the dimensions fit pretty well within PS parameters, except for the crown angle, which is 36. How important is that for performance? Am I missing anything important? I am a novice and would really appreciate some opinions on this. I have asked for an IS image, but haven't heard back if that is available yet.

The I diamond is on the left in all of the side by side pictures.
Thanks in advance for your help!

 

[picante27]

and one more pic

 

[tyty333]

Can you get an idealscope image?

 

[picante27]

I have asked for an Idealscope Image, but am still waiting to hear back from them.

Do you think the crown angle of 36 will negatively impact this diamond's performance?

 

[picante27]

Here is the ideal scope image. I'd really love some help interpreting this!

 

[picante27]

I think all the pink is bad? Also it scored a 3.7 HCA. Should I pass?

 

[flyingpig]

It is not well cut.
It is over priced for a GIA 1.35ct I SI2
That's not an IS image. It is a hearts and arrows image, which tells very little about light performance.
In the actual image, the arrows look undefined and washed away; the same in the hearts and arrows image. This is typical of 40.8/36 combo. 36 crown can be good when combined with 40.6 pavilion, but rarely with 40.8 pavilion. The HCA score also supports this.
You asked for an IS. The vendor tricked you.

Walk away. This vendor does not deserve your hard-earned 10k (7k diamond+setting+tax)

edit. nm. it is a trade-up. At least, try to find a different diamond.

 

[picante27]

Thank you for the advice flyingpig. I wonder why they told me it was an IS image.

It is a trade up, so I have to go through Green Lake. Their prices are higher than larger online dealers like BN or JA, I assume because they are a small business.

Anyway, I suppose I will ask them to keep searching.
My max budget is $7500 and the dimesnions need to be around 7.1mm to fit in a setting I already own. Green Lake said with that budget they can only offer SI2 for the size that I am after in an I or J color.

 

[flyingpig]

Is this Green Lake located in Seattle, WA?
If so, you can find a diamond you want using their search engine.
http://www.greenlakejewelry.com/gallery/diamonds.aspx

 

[fair75]

For a GIA triple Ex or AGS triple zero I/J SI2 diamond (eye-clean) that have ideal proportions around the carat weight you are looking for, max budget of $7,500 is going to be very difficult at the retail level, even online. I am not saying it is impossible, but it would be a long shot. You can either go down to K (not many people like the warmer tone of K) or increase the budget a bit to around $8,000. There are some nice ideal-cut diamonds between $7,800 and $8,000.

 

[picante27]

fair75, Yeah, I know I am asking for a lot on a tight budget. I like K in antique cuts a lot, I would consider a K in a RB if it meant getting the best quality diamond.

flyingpig, yes it is greenlake in Seattle. Thanks for the link, I just sent a note asking to see a diamond I found using their search engine. It is a 1.41.I SI1 and scored a 1.2 HCA. It has strong blue flourescence, so I am not too sure about that though.
I had stayed away from their search tool because you can't enter the desired dimensions/papameters, so the searching can be a bit tedious.

 

[flyingpig]

fair75, Yeah, I know I am asking for a lot on a tight budget. I like K in antique cuts a lot, I would consider a K in a RB if it meant getting the best quality diamond.

flyingpig, yes it is greenlake in Seattle. Thanks for the link, I just sent a note asking to see a diamond I found using their search engine. It is a 1.41.I SI1 and scored a 1.2 HCA. It has strong blue flourescence, so I am not too sure about that though.
I had stayed away from their search tool because you can't enter the desired dimensions/papameters, so the searching can be a bit tedious.

Yeap. Their search engine sucks. I was gonna find you one, but... it will take too long.
Unfortunately, it appears that you will need to spend some time and go thru individual stones, and copy and paste each GIA #.

At least, you have a chance to get a good stone.

 

[GearGirly]

I wouldn't let strong blue fluorescence scare you off, I prefer only to buy diamonds with strong or very strong blue, to me hey are so much prettier. The milky thing people talk about sometimes is almost never. I want a diamond that does that and I can't find one. All I've noticed between my strong blues and my diamonds with no fluorescence is that the strong blue looks better in sunlight, and it glowed on a ride at Disney.

 

[Gypsy]

What are the inclusions on the stone? If they are twinning wisps and that is combined with Strong Blue Fluorescence sometimes that can result in a bad combination and a negative impact. So that is something to keep in mind. I would have a VERY honest vendor with an EXPERIENCED GG examine the stone very carefully, this isn't something you should screen for yourself alone (though you should certainly look at the stone and compare it to others without these characteristics, side by side).

 

[picante27]

I wouldn't let strong blue fluorescence scare you off, I prefer only to buy diamonds with strong or very strong blue, to me hey are so much prettier. The milky thing people talk about sometimes is almost never. I want a diamond that does that and I can't find one. All I've noticed between my strong blues and my diamonds with no fluorescence is that the strong blue looks better in sunlight, and it glowed on a ride at Disney.

I have always liked the idea of fluorescence, plus it helps with the cost of the diamond. I have read a bit about the milky/hazey thing happening though and have zero personal experience with it, so it does give me pause. Do you have a picture you can share of your stong blue fluoro diamond? Thanks for sharing your experience with them!

 

[picante27]

What are the inclusions on the stone? If they are twinning wisps and that is combined with Strong Blue Fluorescence sometimes that can result in a bad combination and a negative impact. So that is something to keep in mind. I would have a VERY honest vendor with an EXPERIENCED GG examine the stone very carefully, this isn't something you should screen for yourself alone (though you should certainly look at the stone and compare it to others without these characteristics, side by side).

Uh Oh, it does have twinning wisps. Would the negative impact of fluorescence show up in photos? Here's a cropped portion of the GIA report that maps the inclusions.
Pardon my naivete', but what is a GG? An appraiser?

 

[fair75]

What are the inclusions on the stone? If they are twinning wisps and that is combined with Strong Blue Fluorescence sometimes that can result in a bad combination and a negative impact. So that is something to keep in mind. I would have a VERY honest vendor with an EXPERIENCED GG examine the stone very carefully, this isn't something you should screen for yourself alone (though you should certainly look at the stone and compare it to others without these characteristics, side by side).

Uh Oh, it does have twinning wisps. Would the negative impact of fluorescence show up in photos? Here's a cropped portion of the GIA report that maps the inclusions.
Pardon my naivete', but what is a GG? An appraiser?

I would be very careful about this diamond. Twinning wisps are listed as the primary clarity setter, which means that they have the most impact on clarity. And the comments about additional twinning wisps, pinpoints and surface graining not shown would give me pause. If this were a VVS diamond, I wouldn't worry about it. But an SI2 diamond with these inclusions most likely point to a bigger problem. I wouldn't purchase this diamond without the examination of a professional and reputable gemologist.

 

[picante27]

hmm, ok, this is good to know. I'd still like to look at it and give it a chance. It is an SI1, not SI2, but that probably doesn't change all that mcuh as far as the inclusions are concerned.
So , to get it to a gemologist, should I have it sent to me and then take it to someone in my area? I am on the east coast and green lake is west coast, so I will have to figure out some logistics. I had my green lake ring and sapphire appraised at NAGL, which is in WA, so maybe I can see if they can look at the diamond for me.
Thank you for the advice!

 

[Gypsy]

No. Greenlake should have their own. Ask to speak to them while they are looking at stone and have them tell you what they see. Si1 is significantly better with twinning wisps.

Check to see what gemologist says. Make sure it is okay.

 

[picante27]

Thank you Gypsy. I will ask if they have a gemologist on staff. I have only been in contact with the person who designed my ring and their diamond buyer.
It is encouraging to hear that SI1 might make a big difference. I'll update here when i get more info.
I also found a J they have listed that might be ok. I requested to see it as well. It's a 1.4, SI1 and the HCA is 1.9, so I thought it is worth checking out. It's XXVG though. The I is XXX but the fluorescence factor is up in the air.
I'm so thankful for PS! I probably would've bought that first diamond and been stuck with a subpar rock on my finger if it wasn't for you guys!

 

[picante27]

Just got this note from green lake about the two diamonds I asked about. What do you guys think of this? Is this standard? I'm feelinga bit frustrated, especially since the first 2 diamonds they brought in were not ones that I requested. I guess this is a good learning experience for me.

 

[picante27]

I'm tempted to have them bring in the I diamond anyway and just pay the 50 bucks. I'd like see in pictures and have them view in person, but maybe I should just take their weird for it being milky.

 

[flyingpig]

Providing images for three stones only is reasonable. This is the same as James Allen's policy. Some vendors simply don't provide if they don't have it on hand. Some requires you to buy a stone first to bring it into their office for imaging.

In regards to the IS image... I don't know... It is either they are complete fools, or using a different definition of "idealscope"
And I don't get it. They have not provided a single legit ASET/IS image on any stone. All they sent is actual photos and hearts and arrow images. Now you need to pay $50???

 

[picante27]

I'm especially irritated that those first 2 stones were not requested by me. The ones i asked for were not brought in. Now I have to pay to see them. Ugh
Should i risk having the fluorescent I brougt in. Am HCA of 1.2!plus it's an SI1and a 1.4 ct. I don't know what to do.

 

[fair75]

Based on the information you provided so far, this merchant seems to either avoid giving you the ideal scope image or maybe they just don't have the tool? Do you really have to use this merchant to find you diamonds? I know you have a certain budget, but it just sounds like this is giving you a lot of trouble. In order for you to meet your price point while keeping the diamond at a certain size, I really think you probably need to accept a non eye-clean diamond or go down on color. What is the color of your setting? White gold, platinum, yellow gold or rose gold? If it is yellow gold or rose gold, K or L will be perfectly fine if you are ok with the warmth. Some ideal-cut K diamonds actually face up quite white if they have medium fluorescence. However, they will have some yellow tint when viewed from the side or faced down.

 

[picante27]

I have to go through this merchant because I am going through their trade in program. I bought a sapphire from them last year, never really felt in love with it, so now I am trading it in for a diamond to go in a different setting (which is platinum). I did let them know that I would be open to looking at K diamonds and sent them a link to a nice one listed on JA to see if it was available to them. I was told that since it was VS2, it would be out of my budget. But, I am still open to it. I would rather go down in color than have extremely visible inclusions.

I asked about the image above being a true idealscope, and she said that it was. They can also take ASET images, so I requested ASETS for all future diamonds that I look at.

I did go ahead and ask them to bring in the fluoro I diamond. I feel like if I don't, I will always wonder about it.

I let them know I wish they had told me about their $50 diamond viewing fee ahead of time and also asked for approval before bringing in those first 2 diamonds. Hopefully, I will find a winner soon, because that fee will start eating into the budget rather quickly.

Alright...off to search their listings for pretty K diamonds!

 

[filletmignon]

Here is a well cut (HCA 1.1) 0.7ct SI2 that i bought last week off james allen for comparison.
It is also eye clean, so definitely possible to get better in my opinion.





https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...g-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-1963743

Price : 2060 usd

 

[picante27]

Thanks for sharing filletmignon! Your diamond looks immaculate to me, can't believe that's an SI2!

 

[fair75]

This is my G SI2

 

[filletmignon]

Yes, thanks to the folks at pricescope for help, Im also totally new to diamonds.

Although my crowne angle is slightly lower than what is optimal, and the one you picked is slighty larger.
Mine is a 60/60 diamond which have mixed opinions on "not so good" or "cream of the crop", yours doesent look like a 60/60.

All the best on the hunt for your diamond.