What''s your definition of "eye clean"?

[Sparkalicious]

Okay... So "eye clean" seems to hold quite an expansive definition - it means varying things to different people.

I went to a jeweler''s the other day and just wanted to see their diamonds. I asked them if they had any "eye clean" SI1''s. The promptly showed me a diamond in a setting. I was assured that they ONLY carry eye-clean stones since they are kind of a she-she frou-frou type store. I took a look and almost immediately saw a black carbon inclusion on this completely "eye clean" stone. I wasn''t even examining it yet!!

When I asked about it, I was told "they are graded from the table" ... meaning??

If you can''t see it from the table, then the stone is eye-clean? ... Well, I beg to differ ... If I can see it, AT ALL, with my naked, unaided, diamond loving eye, it is not "eye" clean. It certainly isn''t eye-clean if it is only a carat, already in a setting, and before I even bring it close to my eye, I can see the inclusion.

My definition of "eye clean" means that unless you are using some form of magnification, you cannot see any inclusions. This is simply my definition -- maybe my definition is on the boundary of "mind-clean" ...

I am interested in hearing all of your own interpretations or definitions of "eye-clean", as I think it is an interesting point to make note of when you are shopping around for diamonds to avoid disappointment & clarify that your understanding of "eye-clean" is the same as the vendor''s definition of "eye-clean".

 

[Hudson_Hawk]

To me eye clean is just that-clean to MY vision (which is pretty close to 20/20-no glasses or contacts). And as the consumer, my vision is from the top down and the sides with no magnification. However, I am willing to excuse an inclusion that makes a stone NOT eye clean, if it can be placed under a prong or other element of a setting. I have an SI2 stone, however the one feather is under a prong. So unless this stone is out of the setting (which it hopefully never will be), my stone is eye clean (to me).

 

[lyra]

I suppose you could take just about any certified SI stone, age it 20-25 years, and VOILA! It becomes a VS.

JK. My eyesight is so bad now that with bi-focals and a loupe it''s still impossible to find inclusions in my VS1 stone. It could have been an SI. I wouldn''t be able to tell the difference. I trust the opinions of any PS vendors though. Good enough for me.

 

[Gypsy]

My definition is MY vision eyeclean from 6-7 inches away, cause after that I get a headache... and from all sides not just the top. If it's not clean from the top (which is how diamonds are graded for clarity) I want to see the inclusion to decide if it will bug me. IF it's not clean from the side... it will depend on the visibility of the inclusion and setting I'm getting for it. Inclusions are birthmarks though, so I don't mind small ones that help ID the stone.

Asscher girl has an SI Asscher that has a birthmark from top view that wouldn't bother me at all. Just helps with the ID. She has a stunning stone.

 

[FireGoddess]

To me, if I can see it, it''s not eyeclean, no matter what the distance. I am also nearsighted, which means while at a far distance things are blurry, up close I have hawk eyes, so I might be more picky than the next person.

The typical definition is at a distance of 10-12 inches from you...which is why I personally would clarify with a vendor that my own expectations are higher than that.

 

[Lorelei]

Also if you haven't already seen it, check out this thread; also many of us caution newbies to be aware of their definition of eyeclean and to make it clear to the vendor.

Clarity - eyeclean, definition and taste

 

[chrono]

Most vendors define eye clean only from the table view (top down), 10 to 12 inches away. MY definition of eye clean means I can''t see anything from 6 inches away, from all views of the stone.

 

[pauly1]

Good question. I guess I would consider eye clean a stone that no "obvious" inclusions to the naked eye. If I look at my stone from 6 inches away there''s nothing there. If I get closer (this gives me a headache by the way) hold the stone at a very specific angle and under very specific light I can just barely see the feather. If didn''t know where to look though I don''t think I could find it. Is this an eyeclean stone, technically no. But the more important question is, does it bother me and the answer is no.

 

[oldminer]

The eye-clean concept is one that originated with interdealer transactions. THese knowledgeable guys wanted to short cut the grading and examination of SI1 to I1 diamonds and they coined this term. To a dealer, eye-clean means the inclusions and external blemishes are either totally invisible to the naked eye in the face-up position or they are arguably invisible. One dealer mayclaim to see a blemsih or tiny inclusion and offer a little less for the stone, while the seller claims nothing can be seen and holds to the asking price.

They are using about 10 to 12 inches of distance with good lighting for this ritual of haggling and self-abuse. Remember, they have trained eyes, good vision and have highly developed skills of poker faced diamond dealing. Who can say what one sees or doesn''t see? A little exaggeration is not out of the question, is it?

Anyway, when the term came into the public domain it was further abused and liberalized to the point of confusion. It still means good eyes at 10 to 12 inches, in good lighting and face-up, nothing is visble. Some person with xray vision may still see something, but how important is that outlying position? If regular people don''t see anything, then it is eye-clean. Simple enough.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

This is a good point. When I had several asschers shipped in to a couple of different jewellers, my definition of "eye clean" was different from one of the jewellers. I didn''t include any SI stones, but on one stone I could see an inclusion from the side on a VS2. The jeweller considered it eye clean because you couldn''t see it from the top down (because that''s how it is graded), but I didn''t consider it eye clean. For me, I considered "eye clean" to mean no inclusions seen from any angle with the naked eye from 6 or so inches away (only because everything gets blurry if I get any closer

 

[Rhea]

Date: 12/10/2007 2:17:44 PM
Author: Gypsy
My definition is MY vision eyeclean from 6-7 inches away, cause after that I get a headache... and from all sides not just the top. If it''s not clean from the top (which is how diamonds are graded for clarity) I want to see the inclusion to decide if it will bug me. IF it''s not clean from the side... it will depend on the visibility of the inclusion and setting I''m getting for it.

This is my definition as well.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 2:09:22 PM
Author: Hudson_Hawk
To me eye clean is just that-clean to MY vision (which is pretty close to 20/20-no glasses or contacts). And as the consumer, my vision is from the top down and the sides with no magnification. However, I am willing to excuse an inclusion that makes a stone NOT eye clean, if it can be placed under a prong or other element of a setting. I have an SI2 stone, however the one feather is under a prong. So unless this stone is out of the setting (which it hopefully never will be), my stone is eye clean (to me).

Hudson_Hawk - I think that we are like minded in this regard.

My only problem is that if there is an inclusion that can be seen but can be hidden by a prong, why not say that instead of saying that it is "eye clean" ... I feel as though it is more "honest", so to speak, if a vendor says, it is not eye-clean as a loose stone, however, it has an inclusion that can be easily concealed by a prong. I know it is splitting hairs kind of, however, I feel as though positioning it this way makes for a more realistic expectation from the client instead of setting them up for disappointment.

I think that you addressed something really important as well ... As long as you feel as though the stone is eye-clean and you can''t see anything that bothers you, you are all good!

I wish I could have found a nice, eye-clean (by my definition) SI2! ... I''m jealous.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 2:13:14 PM
Author: lyra
I suppose you could take just about any certified SI stone, age it 20-25 years, and VOILA! It becomes a VS.

JK. My eyesight is so bad now that with bi-focals and a loupe it''s still impossible to find inclusions in my VS1 stone. It could have been an SI. I wouldn''t be able to tell the difference. I trust the opinions of any PS vendors though. Good enough for me.

Lyra,

Too funny ... I should have waited a couple of years to get a diamond then ... or at least until our eye sight became less sharp. It would have save us a lot of money.

You make a great point as well ... If you trust a vendor and your definition of "eye clean" aligns with theirs, then you are all good. I guess the problem comes in when you are first dealing with a new vendor and familiarizing yourself with what their definition of "eye clean" is.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 2:17:44 PM
Author: Gypsy
My definition is MY vision eyeclean from 6-7 inches away, cause after that I get a headache... and from all sides not just the top. If it''s not clean from the top (which is how diamonds are graded for clarity) I want to see the inclusion to decide if it will bug me. IF it''s not clean from the side... it will depend on the visibility of the inclusion and setting I''m getting for it. Inclusions are birthmarks though, so I don''t mind small ones that help ID the stone.

Asscher girl has an SI Asscher that has a birthmark from top view that wouldn''t bother me at all. Just helps with the ID. She has a stunning stone.

I''ve always loved that term "birthmark" it sounds so much nicer than inclusion. Can you imagine if we were all graded as slightly included etc based on our birthmarks?

Sometimes, as you stated it helps with ID and it helps to add character.

I don''t know why I can''t get over it personally, however, I just don''t want to see any inclusions in my stone. I don''t mind it if I have to use a loupe to see it but if I can see it with my naked eye, it drives me nuts ... even if it is only in the right lighting.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 2:24:36 PM
Author: FireGoddess
To me, if I can see it, it''s not eyeclean, no matter what the distance. I am also nearsighted, which means while at a far distance things are blurry, up close I have hawk eyes, so I might be more picky than the next person.

The typical definition is at a distance of 10-12 inches from you...which is why I personally would clarify with a vendor that my own expectations are higher than that.

Good point, Fire Goddess! I think that''s exactly what I was going for ... I think that since there is an "eye-clean" range, almost sort of like the "ideal cut" range, it is impingent upon the consumer to clarify what their expectations of eye clean are so that they can ensure that they are getting what they want as opposed to somebody else''s interpretation of what they want.

I''m nearsighted as well ... maybe it is some kind of crazy hawk eye nearsighted thing that makes up pickier than the next person.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Reading this thread it''s easy to see why there is no universally agreed-upon definition.

The trade uses face-up, normal vision and diffused lighting because these are long-established standards.
We added a specific distance (25cm/10 inches) in order to communicate clearly with consumers. It has been very successful.

Some people think of "eye-clean" as nothing visible in any direction when viewed as close as possible. While this is a definition we will work with it''s not realistic for the majority of SI diamonds. Completely face-up clean and side-clean from a very close distance is more likely to occur in the VS range. As long as that''s understood and the working baseline is clear between consumer and seller there is no problem.

Dave''s explanation of the term''s origins was really quite good.

Date: 12/10/2007 4:37:49 PM
Author: oldminer
The eye-clean concept is one that originated with interdealer transactions. THese knowledgeable guys wanted to short cut the grading and examination of SI1 to I1 diamonds and they coined this term. To a dealer, eye-clean means the inclusions and external blemishes are either totally invisible to the naked eye in the face-up position or they are arguably invisible. One dealer mayclaim to see a blemsih or tiny inclusion and offer a little less for the stone, while the seller claims nothing can be seen and holds to the asking price.

They are using about 10 to 12 inches of distance with good lighting for this ritual of haggling and self-abuse. Remember, they have trained eyes, good vision and have highly developed skills of poker faced diamond dealing. Who can say what one sees or doesn''t see? A little exaggeration is not out of the question, is it?

Anyway, when the term came into the public domain it was further abused and liberalized to the point of confusion. It still means good eyes at 10 to 12 inches, in good lighting and face-up, nothing is visble. Some person with xray vision may still see something, but how important is that outlying position? If regular people don''t see anything, then it is eye-clean. Simple enough.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 2:29:25 PM
Author: Lorelei
Also if you haven''t already seen it, check out this thread; also many of us caution newbies to be aware of their definition of eyeclean and to make it clear to the vendor.

Clarity - eyeclean, definition and taste

Wow Lorelei! You are all over it, aren''t you?

What a great thread! I agree. This is a fantastic resources for newbies or lurkers who are training to gain diamond knowledge to empower themselves with making an educated and informed purchase.

I still have to say though that actually seeing diamonds, in person, and viewing what is perceived to be eyeclean is important, sort of like color, so that you can assess your own individual sensitivity level and make your diamond purchase choices accordingly.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 3:10:12 PM
Author: Chrono
Most vendors define eye clean only from the table view (top down), 10 to 12 inches away. MY definition of eye clean means I can''t see anything from 6 inches away, from all views of the stone.

Chrono - Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Your response seems to be the general consensus. Question for you or anyone who might know ... Why are the diamonds, clarity wise, graded from the top down instead of as a whole or in it''s entirety from all views. After all, depending on the setting, the sides may be exposed.

It seems misleading to me, in some ways.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 4:15:31 PM
Author: pauly1
Good question. I guess I would consider eye clean a stone that no ''obvious'' inclusions to the naked eye. If I look at my stone from 6 inches away there''s nothing there. If I get closer (this gives me a headache by the way) hold the stone at a very specific angle and under very specific light I can just barely see the feather. If didn''t know where to look though I don''t think I could find it. Is this an eyeclean stone, technically no. But the more important question is, does it bother me and the answer is no.

You''re right, Pauly! I think apart from any structural concerns with inclusions, the most important part about "eye cleanliness" is how it makes the consumer feel. If you are comfortable with not seeing an inclusion or only seeing it under certain conditions, then you are fine, however, another stone, with a different inclusion, still "technically" eye-clean, may not have been satisfactory for you, thus, it would have bothered you.

I was looking for an "eye-clean" SI1 or 2 but I just couldn''t find one where I couldn''t see the inclusions. I finally just gave up and went to VS2 and this seemed to remedy the problem.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 4:37:49 PM
Author: oldminer
Anyway, when the term came into the public domain it was further abused and liberalized to the point of confusion. It still means good eyes at 10 to 12 inches, in good lighting and face-up, nothing is visble. Some person with xray vision may still see something, but how important is that outlying position? If regular people don''t see anything, then it is eye-clean. Simple enough.

Oldminer - I like your assessment. You are keeping it simple.

As long as consumers understand that this is the definition, I think that the ball is then in their court to determine if this is something they agree with or not.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 4:58:37 PM
Author: NewEnglandLady
This is a good point. When I had several asschers shipped in to a couple of different jewellers, my definition of ''eye clean'' was different from one of the jewellers. I didn''t include any SI stones, but on one stone I could see an inclusion from the side on a VS2. The jeweller considered it eye clean because you couldn''t see it from the top down (because that''s how it is graded), but I didn''t consider it eye clean. For me, I considered ''eye clean'' to mean no inclusions seen from any angle with the naked eye from 6 or so inches away (only because everything gets blurry if I get any closer

That is strange, isn''t it? I just don''t get why only the "top down" no side view included is what is judged instead of the entire stone.

 

[DiamanteBlu]

Date: 12/10/2007 2:24:36 PM
Author: FireGoddess
To me, if I can see it, it's not eyeclean, no matter what the distance. I am also nearsighted, which means while at a far distance things are blurry, up close I have hawk eyes, so I might be more picky than the next person.


The typical definition is at a distance of 10-12 inches from you...which is why I personally would clarify with a vendor that my own expectations are higher than that.

LOL! Thanks for typing what I was going to type!

ETA: Guess I'll have to stick with VS2 and above! I was sooo looking forward to checking out SI1's or 2's! Snarl!

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 6:11:35 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Some people think of ''eye-clean'' as nothing visible in any direction when viewed as close as possible. While this is a definition we will work with it''s not realistic for the majority of SI diamonds. Completely face-up clean and side-clean from a very close distance is more likely to occur in the VS range. As long as that''s understood and the working baseline is clear between consumer and seller there is no problem.

John - This is me!

I have to agree with what you said, I couldn''t find anything eye-clean enough to my satisfaction in the SI range, so I had to graduate to VS2, much to my chagrin. I would have loved to have found a nice SI1 or 2 with inclusions that I couldn''t see whilst piercing the diamond with my laser vision.

 

[Hudson_Hawk]

For the sake of my jeweler''s good name, he never called it an eye clean stone. I''m the one who''s put that label on it.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 12/10/2007 6:29:22 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu

ETA: Guess I''ll have to stick with VS2 and above! I was sooo looking forward to checking out SI1''s or 2''s! Snarl!

Don''t give up. There are exceptionally clean SIs out there. It just takes patience and a clear understanding of your requirements with the seller to find a perfect fit. For some the VS level is a faster solution - or is more "mind clean."

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 12/10/2007 6:26:36 PM
Author: Sparkalicious

That is strange, isn't it? I just don't get why only the 'top down' no side view included is what is judged instead of the entire stone.

Ok. True confessions. I've been puzzling over "top down" because when we say "face-down" in the trade we mean the diamond's table is upside-down (like when graded for color). I now realize some of you are saying "top down" to imply the same thing as what pros call "face-up;" a diamond with it's table in the "up" position (normal viewing). I was not hearing it that way in my own head.

Sorry.

To Sparkalicious' question (a good one)... There is more transparency when looking at a diamond from the side because the facets are acting as windows rather than mirrors. That makes it easier to spot inclusions that may not show themselves face-up. Clarity grading does take this into account when plotting in the VVS range, so it's not technically accurate to say clarity is based only on the face-up view, but it's a practical comment on PS, since most of these "can you see it?" discussions have to do with VS/SI diamonds. When consumers come here wondering if a VS or SI stone can have side-visible inclusions that's when the comment about grading pertaining to the face-up view is tossed out... Those people are trying to help, and in such situations (SI and VS calls) they do set proper expectations for the average layman who is wondering about the side view. In very high and very low clarities there is more to it.

Here is an old thread that gets into more detail if you're interested.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Thanks for all the info John and David, this is very helpful.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 12/10/2007 7:31:58 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 12/10/2007 6:26:36 PM
Author: Sparkalicious

That is strange, isn''t it? I just don''t get why only the ''top down'' no side view included is what is judged instead of the entire stone.

Ok. True confessions. I''ve been puzzling over ''top down'' because when we say ''face-down'' in the trade we mean the diamond''s table is upside-down (like when graded for color). I now realize some of you are saying ''top down'' to imply the same thing as what pros call ''face-up;'' a diamond with it''s table in the ''up'' position (normal viewing). I was not hearing it that way in my own head.

Sorry.

To Sparkalicious'' question (a good one)... There is more transparency when looking at a diamond from the side because the facets are acting as windows rather than mirrors. That makes it easier to spot inclusions that may not show themselves face-up. Clarity grading does take this into account when plotting in the VVS range, so it''s not technically accurate to say clarity is based only on the face-up view, but it''s a practical comment on PS, since most of these ''can you see it?'' discussions have to do with VS/SI diamonds. When consumers come here wondering if a VS or SI stone can have side-visible inclusions that''s when the comment about grading pertaining to the face-up view is tossed out... Those people are trying to help, and in such situations (SI and VS calls) they do set proper expectations for the average layman who is wondering about the side view. In very high and very low clarities there is more to it.

Here is an old thread that gets into more detail if you''re interested.

John - Sorry for the confusion ... Even though I think I have done okay getting myself up to speed as a rookie, that''s just it, I''m still a rookie.

The lady at the jewelry store used the "top down" expression and not until your post did I realize how confusing it was, I guess b/c I knew what she was talking about at the time. You are exactly right, though ... this, of course, just speaks to your brilliance

.. I was referring to "face up".

Thanks for the thread ... Again, very informational! I still cannot believe what a wealth of information this site is. The more and more I get involved in it, the worse I feel for people who are just flying blind on diamond purchases. I guess, as with most things in life, it is really worth the time and effort to get educated.

I will not

make the same rookie mistake again. I would never want to shame my fellow PSers.

Thanks John!

 

[Diamond*Dana]

To me, eye-clean is just that *I* clean, I don''t see anything (from any angle)

.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 12/10/2007 8:46:58 PM
Author: Sparkalicious

I will not

make the same rookie mistake again. I would never want to shame my fellow PSers.

Thanks John!

On the contrary Sparkalicious. The whole point of PS is communication, and coming to recognize what you meant surely helped me.
So thank you.

DD... "I" clean. Very nice. There''s a tagline in there methinks.