- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 9,783
Great points!wolfelot said:I'm under the impression that a good number are eye clean if you are only looking the diamond table up. However if you really really look from the pavilion and every angle imaginable from whatever distance you can see best I think few are. All that being said I have a 1.01 ct, E colored, Ideal cut, SI2 that is 100% eye clean after looking at it under every distance and lighting scenario imaginable for several hours. I think that is fairly rare and I believe that the larger the stone the easier it is to see those inclusions.
Rockdiamond said:I'm not saying SI2's are for everyone- just that they get a bad rap with an undeservedly broad brush
dreamer_dachsie said:Well... seems to me from looking at the usual PS vendor sites that SI2s are very uncommon in the in house inventories, and even more uncommon in the 2ct. plus range. This is despite I think a fair amount of demand for these diamonds by savvy price-conscious consumers. Since most of these vendors will only carry in house stones that are eye clean, this leads me to think that such stones are actually quite rare in the "super ideal" market. Broadening the cut criteria would certainly help open up the contender SI2 field, but I cannot imagine it is a huge increase in inventory.
I would love to hear an estimate by someone who buys a lot of diamonds each year and sees a lot of SI2s. I have read Garry say they are extremely rare, and Brian Gavin also told when I was searching for a diamond that me they are very rare as well.
I also think "eye clean" is in the eye of the beholder. True 100% eye clean on close inspection no matter what lighting SI2s are a truly rare bird I suspect.
dreamer_dachsie said:Well... seems to me from looking at the usual PS vendor sites that SI2s are very uncommon in the in house inventories, and even more uncommon in the 2ct. plus range. This is despite I think a fair amount of demand for these diamonds by savvy price-conscious consumers. Since most of these vendors will only carry in house stones that are eye clean, this leads me to think that such stones are actually quite rare in the "super ideal" market. Broadening the cut criteria would certainly help open up the contender SI2 field, but I cannot imagine it is a huge increase in inventory.
I would love to hear an estimate by someone who buys a lot of diamonds each year and sees a lot of SI2s. I have read Garry say they are extremely rare, and Brian Gavin also told when I was searching for a diamond that me they are very rare as well.
I also think "eye clean" is in the eye of the beholder. True 100% eye clean on close inspection no matter what lighting SI2s are a truly rare bird I suspect.
Lol Wink that cracked me up....Wink said:Just a thought. Have you given consideration that those stones sell VERY quickly? Perhaps that is why there are so few of them in inventories. Such stones do sell very quickly because they represent such tremendous values, In the higher colors the price of an SI2 is dramatically lower. (Conversely, in lower colors, K and down, the price increase for a VVS is only a little above the price of a VS.)
Wink
Karl_K said:Lol Wink that cracked me up....Wink said:Just a thought. Have you given consideration that those stones sell VERY quickly? Perhaps that is why there are so few of them in inventories. Such stones do sell very quickly because they represent such tremendous values, In the higher colors the price of an SI2 is dramatically lower. (Conversely, in lower colors, K and down, the price increase for a VVS is only a little above the price of a VS.)
Wink
That is a bit circular logic...
Since the stocking/pre-screening dealers don't have a bunch in stock they are either:
a: fairly rare
b: not in demand.
Since they are in demand they must be fairly rare.
elle_chris said:When I was looking, I didn't see any in the 2ct+ range that were eyeclean. I decided on a VS2 that I can't' see the inclusions in. But, I had a jeweler spot it without a loupe.
I think it's impossible to say how many are eye clean because it depends on who's looking. Some may see it, others won't.
So eye clean to me, may not be eye clean to someone else.
elle_chris said:rockdiamond- that's the whole point. I can't see the inclusion, WF didn't see the inclusion, no one who's ever seen the stone can spot the inclusion including my appraiser, and numerous jewelers. Except for one, sales assoiciate (this was at William Barthman jewelers, on Broadway. You may know who they are). Does that make it eyeclean?
Eyeclean only matters for the wearer. If they can't see it, then I'd consider it eyeclean.
Rockdiamond said:Cool Panda!
I'd love to see it- are there photos anywhere?
I was originally thinking about stone graded by GIA, but your stone brings up a great point.
It may very be a borderline stone- meaning it might get Si1 one day, and SI2 another.
That is totally possible, as GIA uses humans to grade the diamonds.
In cases of stones with scattered imperfections, there's even more interpretation involved.
Grading stones with a single "gletz" might be sometimes more consistent from one person to another, as compared to scattered stuff.
clgwli said:I have to say I will probably never own a 2ct+ stone so I have little to add to this. But I find this discussion truly fascinating! I have small SI1 and SI2 stones that are not eye clean to my standards. The little black spots annoy me but as earrings I don't mind. Clear inclusions that can be seen with weird bright lighting never bother me though. So while technically not eye clean totally, they are clean enough for me. I am sure things like that will effect others and their perception of eye clean as well.
panda08 said:Rockdiamond said:Cool Panda!
I'd love to see it- are there photos anywhere?
I was originally thinking about stone graded by GIA, but your stone brings up a great point.
It may very be a borderline stone- meaning it might get Si1 one day, and SI2 another.
That is totally possible, as GIA uses humans to grade the diamonds.
In cases of stones with scattered imperfections, there's even more interpretation involved.
Grading stones with a single "gletz" might be sometimes more consistent from one person to another, as compared to scattered stuff.
Sorry, Rockdiamond, I don't have any pics right now but when I do, I'll post them over at Timeless Classics or SMTR.
Thanks for starting this interesting discussion. My appraiser gave my OEC a SI2 because of some graining and it appears the other appraiser did not (I didn't deal with the other appraiser; the appraisal was provided by the seller but the appraiser is an IA that has very good credentials). Both plots of the stone are virtually identical.
My OEC is the 2nd eye-clean SI2 diamond I own, the other is a 1.5 cushion. Eye-clean SI2s are great values, though the search for them takes patience, as it's like digging for a needle in a haystack.
Wink said:panda08 said:Rockdiamond said:Cool Panda!
I'd love to see it- are there photos anywhere?
I was originally thinking about stone graded by GIA, but your stone brings up a great point.
It may very be a borderline stone- meaning it might get Si1 one day, and SI2 another.
That is totally possible, as GIA uses humans to grade the diamonds.
In cases of stones with scattered imperfections, there's even more interpretation involved.
Grading stones with a single "gletz" might be sometimes more consistent from one person to another, as compared to scattered stuff.
Sorry, Rockdiamond, I don't have any pics right now but when I do, I'll post them over at Timeless Classics or SMTR.
Thanks for starting this interesting discussion. My appraiser gave my OEC a SI2 because of some graining and it appears the other appraiser did not (I didn't deal with the other appraiser; the appraisal was provided by the seller but the appraiser is an IA that has very good credentials). Both plots of the stone are virtually identical.
My OEC is the 2nd eye-clean SI2 diamond I own, the other is a 1.5 cushion. Eye-clean SI2s are great values, though the search for them takes patience, as it's like digging for a needle in a haystack.
I just have to respectfully disagree with this. If you are grading from the top down, this is just not the case, there are many of them. probably more that are eye clean than are not. (Depending on eyesight of course.) If you are grading them from the sides and bottoms where the physics of light make it much easier to discern the inclusions then I will agree with you and there will be many VS stones that are not eye clean under this definition. Please understand though that this is not the trade definition of the term.
Wink
panda08 said:Wink said:panda08 said:Rockdiamond said:Cool Panda!
I'd love to see it- are there photos anywhere?
I was originally thinking about stone graded by GIA, but your stone brings up a great point.
It may very be a borderline stone- meaning it might get Si1 one day, and SI2 another.
That is totally possible, as GIA uses humans to grade the diamonds.
In cases of stones with scattered imperfections, there's even more interpretation involved.
Grading stones with a single "gletz" might be sometimes more consistent from one person to another, as compared to scattered stuff.
Sorry, Rockdiamond, I don't have any pics right now but when I do, I'll post them over at Timeless Classics or SMTR.
Thanks for starting this interesting discussion. My appraiser gave my OEC a SI2 because of some graining and it appears the other appraiser did not (I didn't deal with the other appraiser; the appraisal was provided by the seller but the appraiser is an IA that has very good credentials). Both plots of the stone are virtually identical.
My OEC is the 2nd eye-clean SI2 diamond I own, the other is a 1.5 cushion. Eye-clean SI2s are great values, though the search for them takes patience, as it's like digging for a needle in a haystack.
I just have to respectfully disagree with this. If you are grading from the top down, this is just not the case, there are many of them. probably more that are eye clean than are not. (Depending on eyesight of course.) If you are grading them from the sides and bottoms where the physics of light make it much easier to discern the inclusions then I will agree with you and there will be many VS stones that are not eye clean under this definition. Please understand though that this is not the trade definition of the term.
Wink
That's okay, I meant to say that as an opinon based on my own experience. And I should add that eye clean, for me, is at all angles, not just from the top, even though I understand that that is not the trade definition of the term.
Dreamer_D said:In the end, the catch for me when thinking about SI2 diamonds and helping consumers look for them is that technical definitions of "eye clean" are not very meaningful, unfortunately. Working remotely to buy a diamond sight unseen adds complications, and communicating about eye cleanliness is one. Color is another, but at least you can tell people to go see GIA/AGS graded diamonds and they can do so and get a feel for their preferences. With clarity, each diamond is unique, and so it is hard to get a feel for your own preferences by looking at diamonds at a local jeweler, for example.
One person's eye clean is another person's NOT eye clean. Depends on a lot of factors like eye sight, preferred diamond viewing method (up close vs. far away), lighting etc etc. When it comes to SI1s I think that there is probably more overlap between people's definitions of eye clean because it is more likely ther inclusions are completely and utterly invisible to the naked eye no matter the viewing conditions. But with SI2 this is just not the case. My concern with consumers looking at this clarity grade is that they are told "eye clean" by a vendor and may or may not understand what this means in real terms for them when they view the diamond. I really believe that buying an SI2 is a little like buying a J color diamond -- you will see the tint in the latter and you need to accept that; in all but the most rare cases, you will see inclusions in an SI2 in *some combination* of viewing and lighting environments, and you may need to accept that too.
So my advice to shoppers looking for SI2 has been and will remain to see the stone in person before committing. Then you will have all the information available and you can decide if it is eye clean -- to you!
Wink said:snip..... If you are grading from the top down, this is just not the case, there are many of them. probably more that are eye clean than are not. (Depending on eyesight of course.) If you are grading them from the sides and bottoms where the physics of light make it much easier to discern the inclusions then I will agree with you and there will be many VS stones that are not eye clean under this definition. Please understand though that this is not the trade definition of the term.
Wink