Reassurance please - diamond

[daph]

Hi,

Can you give me reassurance please on this - purchased diamond.

IGI cert - 0.63 ct, E colour, SI1, ex-ex-vg
61.5% table
crown angle - 33deg
Pavilion depth - 40deg
Girdle thickness - slightly thick (Faceted)
No fluorescence

Any thoughts would be welcome?

Thanks,

 

[Doc_1]

Seems table is large can you post the depth?

 

[farmer gal]

Could you also post the price. Have you already purchased this diamond? If so can you return it? Chances are we can find you something if you posts the specs you are looking for along with budget. IGI is know for grading soft when it comes to color and clarity.

 

[daph]

Thanks for your replies

the measurements are 5.53-5.58 x 3.29 mm

It's more the cut that I'm concerned about... not so much the clarity colour.

 

[kenny]

Thanks for your replies

the measurements are 5.53-5.58 x 3.29 mm

It's more the cut that I'm concerned about... not so much the clarity colour.

But color and clarity grades are a major factor in the price.
If you are being lied to about those grades it is impossible to know if it's a good price.
Frankly, I think that's the whole reason for these flaky labs, so the retailer can charge more for the diamond than they could if they sent it to GIA and got lower grades.

I'd only consider diamonds graded by AGS or GIA.
You can believe their grades so you can be confident about the price.
GIA and AGS diamonds are not more expensive; they are just accurately described.

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

What information or assurance are you looking for?

cheers--Sharon

 

[jstarfireb]

Regarding cut, I think it's too shallow and will be prone to the fish-eye effect. I ran the numbers through the HCA (with a calculated depth of 59.2% based on the average of the diameter measurements) and got a somewhat promising result (good for light return and excellent for spread, fire, and scintillation) with a total score of 3.4 - Worth buying if the price is right. However, the dreaded fish-eye warning popped up: "A small amount of tilt will show a fish-eye under the table of this diamond." So if you're within the return period, I'd return it. We typically recommend HCA scores less than 2 to weed out bad performers.

Regarding color and clarity, I'm actually not sure how reliable IGI is compared to GIA and AGS, which are the labs known to grade most conservatively. It's possible that your E/SI1 may be equivalent to an F-G/SI2-I1 if GIA were to grade the same stone, and with an SI1 possibly turning into an I1, I wouldn't want to take that chance. If you do choose IGI, EGL, or any other non-GIA/AGS lab, I would recommend going with a higher clarity like VS1-2 so you're sure you don't end up with a non-eye clean diamond or a diamond whose clarity you're otherwise not comfortable with. Most people wouldn't prefer an I1 in an engagement ring for example.

ETA: I forgot the most important part! Is this a ROUND diamond? Otherwise nothing I said in the first paragraph means a thing!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think the table is too large and you can do better on the cut for sure. If you decide to return it and start over, come here and we can show you examples of GIA Excellent cut stones.

 

[daph]

I'm not really satisfied with the cut.

I plan to go back and ask for a GIA excellent cut stone.

Can anyone describe to me what a fisheye looks eye in reality. I do think i see a shadow/black part in the stone when tilted under certain lights. I want to be on sure ground when I describe this to the store.

For the record, my alarms bells rang a little with the IGI cert but the (reputable, long established) jewellers had put their own "Excellent Cut" sticker on so I skipped out thinking I had gotten this.

When i plug the numbers into the GIA facetware - I only get a GOOD rating.

Advice please?! All answers already v much appreciated. I'm quite depressed about this at the moment.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Be happy you realized it while still able to return the diamond! Many people come here too late. I'd encourage you to look at one of the respected online vendors as you can find many excellent cut stones at very competitive prices.

 

[daph]

Yes, but only exchange. I'm ready for some opposition.

Should I push the issue that the cut really isn't excellent because of the fish-eye/shadowy/black part?

Is this how a "fisheye" looks?

 

[chrono]

The first thing I'll push back on is to get a diamond with a GIA memo because colour and clarity grading is accurate, thus I know what I'm getting. From there, only aim for the GIA 3X with confirmation of the cut specs using the HCA and making sure I like the cut and pattern of the diamond.

An explanation of what is a fish eye with pictures.
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-cut-fish-eye-effect

 

[vishke8]

I would return the diamond and start looking for a GIA certified diamond.
Go for a diamond which has table between 54 - 57 % and Depth between 57 - 62% this will give you the best result.
Color D - G or H, Clarity VS1 - SI1(for eye clean stones).

You need to read a lot diamonds to get the best one inside your budget.

Good Luck

 

[vishke8]

I would return the diamond and start looking for a GIA certified diamond.
Go for a diamond which has table between 54 - 57 % and Depth between 57 - 62% this will give you the best result.
Color D - G or H, Clarity VS1 - SI1(for eye clean stones).

You need to read a lot diamonds to get the best one inside your budget.

Good Luck

Sorry the depth range suggested in my earlier post was a typo.

The ideal depth range is between 59% - 62%.

Good Luck

 

[daph]

From reading the GIA cut article (see link) and looking at the HCA cut grader, I see that some of the GIA examples of excellent cut stones will give lower scores for scintillation and fire than the stone I have.

http://www.gia.edu/research-resources/cut-microsite-pdfs/estimating_cut_grade_chart_lowres.pdf

For example,
HCA gives the following:
Present stone: Light return:Good Fire: Excellent Scintillation: Excellent (Overall score: 3.4 with fisheye warning)
GIA Example of excellent cut: Light return: Very good Fire: Very Good Scintillation: Good (Overall score: 2.8

How do people interpret this? If the jeweler comes back with a GIA excellent cut stone (such as one on the article) - is it possible that overall, it won't look as well as the stone I have already, i.e., just good/very good across the board as opposed to the excellents for some aspects of present stone? Or could it be that it will be just marginally better on paper but perhaps with less scintillation and that the present stone will look better overall?

 

[JulieN]

40 degree PA is definitely a no go zone, return return!

 

[yssie]

From reading the GIA cut article (see link) and looking at the HCA cut grader, I see that some of the GIA examples of excellent cut stones will give lower scores for scintillation and fire than the stone I have.

http://www.gia.edu/research-resources/cut-microsite-pdfs/estimating_cut_grade_chart_lowres.pdf

For example,
HCA gives the following:
Present stone: Light return:Good Fire: Excellent Scintillation: Excellent (Overall score: 3.4 with fisheye warning)
GIA Example of excellent cut: Light return: Very good Fire: Very Good Scintillation: Good (Overall score: 2.8

How do people interpret this? If the jeweler comes back with a GIA excellent cut stone (such as one on the article) - is it possible that overall, it won't look as well as the stone I have already, i.e., just good/very good across the board as opposed to the excellents for some aspects of present stone? Or could it be that it will be just marginally better on paper but perhaps with less scintillation and that the present stone will look better overall?

Ditto PPs - this one's beyond redemption

In this context "fire" is coloured light return and "scintillation" is that on/off of facets changing from dark to light as you rock the stone. What you've got now is a stone that likely shows significant over-obstruction at close range (the entire stone darkens when you lean over it and block direct light), may show less contrast than other stones of similar size w/ different proportions (overly dark up close and no clear obstruction pattern from further away), and most likely shows the fish-eye effect as well (this is exaggerated as you tilt the stone, and IRL Ering stones are often viewed at a tilt - as opposed to say stones for earrings and pendants that are very rarely seen close-up or from anything but face-up). Long story short - it might be a passable candidate for a pendant or an earring but it's a definite no-go for a ring.

Those HCA descrptions are basically telling you that "given the overall quantity and quality of light return that stone is capable of returning, here's what you can expect to see". If you read the Garry's full description of the HCA here http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/09_brill.htm it clarifies the terms and answers your questions. The high fire score, for example, can be explained by the over-obstruction creating a darker background against which any coloured light return is more visible... which is great but still leaves the problem of the over-obstruction in a ring. It's all context based.