Ideal Scope image - SI1

[mixnightlife]

Hello price scope community. Please take a look at this ideal scope and let me know of its good. Thank you!

Spec:

SI-1 -- GIA certified
H color
2.05 Carats
EX cut
Ex symmetry
Ex polish
Faint fluorescence
Table 59%
Depth 60.9%
Crown 34.0 (deg)
Pavilion 40.8 (deg)

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

it looks nice.
I expect to see more inclusions in an SI1 of 2ct.
what does the GIA report look like?

 

[mixnightlife]

Hello Gary,

I really appreciate your feedback!

Below is the GIA clarity diagram

GIA Note: Additional pinpoints and clouds are not shown

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

That is nice - not visible and not interupting the light return

 

[bmfang]

This layman totally agrees with Garry. A very nice IS image!

 

[gm89uk]

Garry would the washed out arrow concern you?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Garry would the washed out arrow concern you?

absolutely not

 

[gm89uk]

Thanks for the reply. What is the visual significance of well defined arrows vs washed out ones which lots of members put a strong emphasis to? Would it be slightly reduced broad flash of fire from the pavilion main or simply that the broad flash would come from a different angle of light rather than straight above.

 

[starrylight]

I would be most concerned about

GIA Note: Additional pinpoints and clouds are not shown

People have seen haziness in diamonds that have had that phrase on the certificate.

 

[mixnightlife]

Gents (Garry, gm89uk, starrylight, and bmfang),

I really appreciate your comments and insight. I'm getting a second ideal-scope image for a different SI-1 diamond to compare.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I would be most concerned about

GIA Note: Additional pinpoints and clouds are not shown

People have seen haziness in diamonds that have had that phrase on the certificate.

Missinformation Starry.
this is a very nice stone from the info shown.
The fact the top 2 grade makers are not clouds or twinning means GIA decided not to plot the additional features because they would make the plot un representative.
I do not understand why the buyer would not select this stone.
The interpretation of IS images is sometimes totally ridiculous and this stone has no negative issues. the paler arrow is an alignment issue.

 

[mixnightlife]

Hi Garry,

How does this idealscope image below (diamond#2) compared to the previous one from above (diamond #1)? Price difference is about $800 more for diamond#2.

P.S The diamond#2 arrows looks better but I do see some light leakage at position 12 thru 3. Which one do you recommend if any significant differences.

 

[mixnightlife]

BTW I forgot to include the clarity characteristics for diamond#2

 

[gm89uk]

I'd pick the second if it's eye clean

 

[mixnightlife]

Thank you for your feedback gm89uk

Please let me know if anyone else thinks otherwise.

 

[ac117]

I also prefer the second since the higher crown angle and proportions will favor colored light return over the first, which is a 60/60 style and will favor white light dispersion. Nothing wrong with the first...just a different flavor. I also like the arrows better on the second diamond...the skinnier arrows of the first diamond will produce greater pinpoint sparkle...fatter arrows produce broader flashes of light that I personally prefer. GIA rounds the lower halves so while they both 80 on the report, the second is probably 78/79 while the first is probably 80/81.

 

[mixnightlife]

I also prefer the second since the higher crown angle and proportions will favor colored light return over the first, which is a 60/60 style and will favor white light dispersion. Nothing wrong with the first...just a different flavor. I also like the arrows better on the second diamond...the skinnier arrows of the first diamond will produce greater pinpoint sparkle...fatter arrows produce broader flashes of light that I personally prefer. GIA rounds the lower halves so while they both 80 on the report, the second is probably 78/79 while the first is probably 80/81.

Thank you for taking the time to give me this awesome feedback, ac117! Much appreciated

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

it looks nice