Blog What is a Good Diamond Clarity?

[bcmacdonald]

John Pollard published a new blog post.

Diamond Clarity Described​

Clarity evaluates a gemstone’s internal and external clarity characteristics. Internal characteristics are called inclusions. These can be elements that were trapped in the stone as it grew or structural defects in the crystal lattice. External characteristics are...

Continue reading the Original Blog Post.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Clearly, it's a subject that bears discussion.
Yet oversimplifying, as this chart does, is a hindrance as opposed to helpful. Just one example- eye clean I1 diamonds are NOT extremely rare, nor should they be grouped with I2 and I3 diamonds in a discussion like this.
SI2 graded diamonds also get needlessly knocked here too.

 

[John Pollard]

Thank you for sharing your opinion @Rockdiamond .

You may have missed the positive statement above the chart?

<< For people seeking eye-clean clarity, there is great news. When graded by a top-tier laboratory, loose diamonds with VS2 clarity and higher are reliably eye-clean. Even better? You can frequently find diamonds with SI1 clarity which are eye-clean. And it’s rare, but sometimes you might even find a SI2 diamond that meets the definition. >>

eye clean I1 diamonds are NOT extremely rare, nor should they be grouped with I2 and I3 diamonds in a discussion like this. SI2 graded diamonds also get needlessly knocked here too.

I'm 100% confident in your abilities. From your office in the NY diamond district, I would imagine you can take an elevator and find eye-clean or eye-cleanish (street definition) I1 and SI2 stones among a number of brokers - especially among those who are aware of your expectations.

However, for new consumers browsing the 1,000,000+ diamonds on PriceScope from their living rooms, eye-clean SI2 graded diamonds, not to mention I1, are far harder to reliably find. This is the case for a number of reasons.

Reason #1 is "grade creep." SI1 and SI2 do not mean the same things today as they did even a decade ago, and certainly don't match the standards of the 1980s. Ratios have fallen. There's also "transparency creep," which is another topic, but somewhat related. Reason #2 is because such stones frequently don't even make it to internet lists, because resourceful dealers gobble them up first. Reason #3 is simply the law of accumulation: The less clean a diamond the longer it's remains listed for sale without being sold - the more such stones accumulate in lists the less clean the overall average becomes.

To that end, you are definitely correct from your position. A consumer working with a vendor like you, or another PS vendor who has resource and connections, stands a much better chance of finding an eye-clean I1 diamond than the average consumer reading a blog post from Riverside, Iowa.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I very much appreciate the kind words John!
It's also from this perch that I form the opinion that definitive statements like the ones on the chart...or even the statement containing this- are not helping consumers....unless we want them all to buy VS+ goods

And it’s rare, but sometimes you might even find a SI2 diamond that meets the definition.

The issue is that by painting with such a broad brush, it unnecessarily prejudices readers against eye clean, SI or I1 goods.
Since the blog is posted here...where education is such a strong feature, it goes counter to the wealth of information posted here.
Sure, for an uninformed buyer, getting a diamond from a virtual site, speaking to salespeople who are miles or thousands of miles away from the diamond they are selling??
Someone who does not know about PS, or the incredible help they can get here??
In that case, sure, stay away from SI goods.

But isn't the whole idea of Pricscope to better educate the members?

PS- it's quite possible the frustration of having...I can't count how many thousands of consumers tell me " I want a VS diamond because I know SI diamonds are all cloudy pieces of junk" ...that might color my perception, sure. But it has always felt like a..... high-pressure rip-off upselling situation telling people to avoid SI goods for the reasons we're discussing here.
I KNOW that's not your intent
But the results are the same.....

PS- it's a super interesting discussion- thanks for having it!!

 

[John Pollard]

The issue is that by painting with such a broad brush, it unnecessarily prejudices readers against eye clean, SI or I1 goods. Since the blog is posted here...where education is such a strong feature, it goes counter to the wealth of information posted here. Sure, for an uninformed buyer, getting a diamond from a virtual site, speaking to salespeople who are miles or thousands of miles away from the diamond they are selling?? Someone who does not know about PS, or the incredible help they can get here?? In that case, sure, stay away from SI goods. But isn't the whole idea of Pricscope to better educate the members?

For better or worse, that's who the blog is written for. There are more than 400,000 unique visitors per month to PriceScope. Most don't make it to the forum. I do hear you on "broad brush." See below.

PS- it's quite possible the frustration of having...I can't count how many thousands of consumers tell me " I want a VS diamond because I know SI diamonds are all cloudy pieces of junk" ...that might color my perception, sure. But it has always felt like a..... high-pressure rip-off upselling situation telling people to avoid SI goods for the reasons we're discussing here.
I KNOW that's not your intent
But the results are the same.....

I share this sentiment, actually. I taught jewelry professionals in stores around America for nearly 20 years - and was frequently asked to come to the counter to help educate customers. I encountered the preconception that SI clarities should be avoided, in many cases, frequently with extreme prejudice.

It may or may not surprise you to learn that the most successful stores - meaning those which grew the most in my time working with them - were those which took the trouble to seek-out, find and show nice, clean options in those grades (along with really nice face-up J-K colors). Essentially, giving the client permission to see and believe and love the opportunity to save some money on clarity, and/or color, versus the preconceptions they entered the store with.

The key word above is "see." That's the advantage to live presentations. You can dispel preconceptions by sneaking that rare, clean SI2 diamond as an option onto the tray, when they presumed you were only showing VS. The reveal is powerful and convincing. Many times you can see the customer decide to become that store's client in that moment - because you just showed them something they didn't imagine existed - and a chance to save money. "What jeweler does that?"

By the way, it doesn't always veer the client away from that mind-clean perception of VS or VVS, but it's a great trust-builder. I am sure you also build trust this way with teachable moments, and I know internet sellers who have their own methods of doing this - shout out to those posting eye-clean judgments and indicating which diamonds in their lists meet those standards.

I'm going to selfishly support my original position with this note: NY is awful nice. It's an absolute bear (hard!) - for jewelers away from diamond hubs like NY, LA and Chi-town to consistently source truly eye-clean SI2 and I1 stones - which also meet tight cut quality standards if the client is nit-picky. As soon as you're limiting the field to a narrow set of proportions you're also limited to (whatever?) eye-clean goods might exist at that moment which are not already tied up on memo.

As for the broad brush strokes - I won't argue but I would frame the status quo as an opportunity for you and other resourceful jewelers to rightly proclaim "hidden treasures are my specialty!" You will certainly be backed up by those you've served - and your body of work - and you'll stand out properly from those who are, as you describe, thousands of miles away from what they are selling.

 

[elle_chris]

Do you consider visible characteristics “birthmarks” which make a diamond special or distracting and intolerable?
It depends on the inclusions and if they hinder the brilliance.
The example with the garnet looks amazing, but since normal viewing conditions are not magnified, I probably wouldn't want it in my diamond.

Are you okay with a diamond that has characteristics that only become visible in certain lighting if you know where to look?
I think I could be Ok with that.. maybe? Hmm.. not sure..

Are you okay with any diamond which is clean to your eyes in all conditions?
With any diamond that's eye clean? Probably not.

Do you prefer to stay at higher clarity grades on principal, as a mental thingy?
I prefer the VS range for mind clean and generally eye clean. But I do have one half carat diamond which is an SI1. I can't see the inclusion (but I'm farsighted.)

Do you pursue collection quality diamonds of the highest clarities and colors for their enduring value?
No.

Do you like the fact that some people can buy lower clarity diamonds as they age, based on changing eyesight?
I don't trust my eyesight as I've always been farsighted and needed someone else with 20/20 to confirm a diamond is eye clean.
So no, I prefer diamonds to be eye clean regardless of eyesight.

If you found a diamond with visible inclusions that spelled your initials would you want it? That’s a silly question, right, since you’d probably want any diamond you just “found!”

 

[Karl_K]

To round centric without specifying that.
vs2 is not a reliably eye clean clarity grade in fancies.
The good ones in times of high demand low supply spend very little time on the lists leaving the ones with eye visible inclusions behind.
vs1 can also be sometimes questionable but not nearly as often.

 

[John Pollard]

To round centric without specifying that.
vs2 is not a reliably eye clean clarity grade in fancies.
The good ones in times of high demand low supply spend very little time on the lists leaving the ones with eye visible inclusions behind.
vs1 can also be sometimes questionable but not nearly as often.

Good call on fancy shapes. Now stipulated

<< When graded by a top-tier laboratory, round brilliant diamonds with VS2 clarity and higher are reliably eye-clean. For shapes which show inclusions more easily (step cuts like emeralds and Asschers) VS2 clarity should be checked on a case by case basis. >>

Added note: VS should also be scrutinized more as one ascends to heavier carat weights, in any shape.

 

[John Pollard]

Are you okay with a diamond that has characteristics that only become visible in certain lighting if you know where to look?
I think I could be Ok with that.. maybe? Hmm.. not sure..

My wife has a diamond with a transparent crystal she can find, uncannily, in any decent lighting. Nearly no one else can find it, even when told where to look, until she gives them a loupe. She takes great pleasure in performing this “party trick” for friends.

 

[Rockdiamond]

The fact is that John and I have the same goal- we just get there differently.
I've been trying to find the right analogy to express it.

If there was a medical condition that frequently caused a specific issue....but not always...( this analogy just might work)
Say you put up a chart warning that if someone has that condition, flying is not allowed, except in rare cases. ( this equates to a chart equating I1, I2, and I3 as a group, and declaring "The included range is not eye clean except in extremely rare exceptions")

The fact is, the statement is correct. Eye clean I1 diamonds are rare....but they definitely exist.
But then again, "Super Ideal" diamonds are extremely rare. Do we discourage people from looking for them because they are rare?
SO, it's not the ideas presented- it's the manner in which they are presented- simplifying to a chart ( IMO) isn't the way to educate people properly about clarity grading- especially on a forum about diamonds......
JMO, for what that's worth

 

[Rockdiamond]

Re-reading my response, it didn’t really convey my intent. My point was that in both cases( medicine and diamonds) it really needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis, for a discriminating buyer.
Hence my objection to issuing recommendations based on these charts.
Having voiced my concerns, let me applaud John for the effort.
I don’t have a “better answer” for the broader audience. For the hundreds of thousands who’ll never visit this wonderful place… sure, use a chart….. and I mean that sincerely. It was never my intent to question the quality or integrity of the presentation.

 

[Wink]

My wife has a diamond with a transparent crystal she can find, uncannily, in any decent lighting. Nearly no one else can find it, even when told where to look, until she gives them a loupe. She takes great pleasure in performing this “party trick” for friends.

This reminds me of a client who asked me to bring in a nice VS2 for his wife. When they came to look at it, she loved it, but he, from across my desk, did not like the eye visible inclusion.

His wife loved the diamond and could not see any inclusion. I thought he was yanking my chain as I could not see it. He insisted he could.

I picked up the diamond in my tweezers, looked at it under the scope to determine exactly where the inclusion was, turned it to a different location and held the diamond up so he could see it. He told me where the inclusion was, correctly, each time I moved it.

I happily sold him a more expensive VS1.

Ten years later he came in again to buy another diamond. He told me I could bring in some VS2's, or even nice SI1s, as working on tiny parts at Hewlett Packard had ruined his eyesight over the years.

Charts make great guidelines. Individual visual acuity will always need to be taken into account for the final selection.