I actually love diamonds with a little warmth. I looked at some H colored stones and I couldn't really tell a difference. Super white diamonds are beautiful, they just aren't for me. Personal preference
Found a new stone
- Thread starter gatorpooh
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
I actually love diamonds with a little warmth. I looked at some H colored stones and I couldn't really tell a difference. Super white diamonds are beautiful, they just aren't for me. Personal preference
I do love the stone. I'm just terrified of what I may see in the future. It's a tough call.
I actually have my heart set on a Tacori. I have always wanted one and they have so many that I love.
I honestly don't mind switching vendors. JA has been great, but if they don't have what I want, I will go elsewhere. My boyfriend is going out of the country tomorrow for the next 2 weeks. He told me if I decide I am unhappy with what I have, to choose something different and he will take care of it. He can pay by credit card from another country. My big concern about letting this diamond go is that it is so sparkly and beautiful. But I'm sure it isn't the only one. I do love the super tight cut though. That is what draws me to the stone I have.
I don't think the one you have is really "the one" either, honestly. I think you guys are rushing this to meet your ideal window, but don't just settle. There is a LOT to this 'mind clean' thing. If you know it's there, and you're constantly looking for it, you're going to find it, and then it will gnaw at you. There are some pretty cool inclusions worth keeping. Often little garnets, rubies, sapphires, etc, will get in there, but even those can be there without being visible. I mean, if it was the starship enterprise shaped thing, sure, keep it for cool factor 
But this one...eh I think it's worth looking either elsewhere or for new stock.
But this one...eh I think it's worth looking either elsewhere or for new stock.Very interesting discussion.
Ok, so no matter what grading is subjective as everything that is done by people. It is the people at the labs who grade; e.g., at HRD three clarity graders assess the stone and come up with clarity grade each independently from one another. If there is a disagreement a supervisor comes in and decides alone. While they use amazing technology (HRD really does), all their programs are only aids.
Just talking from experience diamond graders will often disagree; I have seen both agreement and complete disagreement. Just some examples although these are examples of color, about five different people graded my engagement ring's stone and here there was pretty much an agreement that the color was J, we then used a colorimeter (at least you can be sure in case of color and confirm with technology) which confirmed our results. Now when I sold my friend's engagement ring there was huge disagreement on color; in European terminology I graded it a Cape or Very Light Yellow, someone else graded it a Light Brown, a third person graded it Crystal, there is a vast difference between these color grades and all people involved were professionals. The stone definitely had very poor color.
Clarity is even harder as there is no program to assign a grade to a stone. There is a vast difference between an SI1 and another SI1, one I have seen had a humongous burn mark all over the table, to me this was terrible and extremely visible. Another may have two dark carbon inclusions on the crown facets which could be completely covered by prongs making the stone flawless to the eye when set.
Technically speaking it is possible for a stone to get a VS2 grade with an inclusion under the table; my stone is a VS2 with one inclusion under the table and one under a crown facet, neither is visible and one has to search really really hard with a loupe to even find the inclusion under the table. In the case of the stone concerned here that inclusion would make me instantly assign an SI1 grade to this stone.
Yes, an inclusion under the table would drop the clarity normally by at least one grade, sometimes many more depending on the inclusion>; e.g., one huge black carbon inclusion under the table would likely result in an I1-I2 if not I3. In the present case I have to wonder how much the program the vendor uses influences the visibility of the inclusion, this we cannot know but still I would refrain from buying this stone just to be on the safe side.
As to the question of color everyone in the trade has always advised me to get the best color you can get, so much is true, I personally own my J stone and love it but today I would select a higher color grade. That is not to say I would not keep my J stone, I would still proudly wear it and I often see amazing tinted stones at auctions, it all depends, I have no problem with it though I have to point out that an ideal cut stone with a very high color grade is truly amazing, icy white, which emphasizes brilliance in my opinion. I generally prefer higher than an H, G-H are very nice, F-s are probably a great value for how white they are, they are my faves.
That said it is not true that lower grades are not worth buying, they may be harder to resell and be tagged the so-called budget stones in the trade just like SI1-s but that may not be a bad thing at all. Same stands true for clarity; while I generally prefer a clarity grade higher than SI I have recently seen an amazing 1 carat pear with an F color and I1 clarity and I instantly fell in love with that stone and despite the clarity grade would be thrilled to own such a stone, now would I buy it to sell it? I would think about it but again many will sacrifice 1 C for the others. Such stones can have a market too.
Ok, so no matter what grading is subjective as everything that is done by people. It is the people at the labs who grade; e.g., at HRD three clarity graders assess the stone and come up with clarity grade each independently from one another. If there is a disagreement a supervisor comes in and decides alone. While they use amazing technology (HRD really does), all their programs are only aids.
Just talking from experience diamond graders will often disagree; I have seen both agreement and complete disagreement. Just some examples although these are examples of color, about five different people graded my engagement ring's stone and here there was pretty much an agreement that the color was J, we then used a colorimeter (at least you can be sure in case of color and confirm with technology) which confirmed our results. Now when I sold my friend's engagement ring there was huge disagreement on color; in European terminology I graded it a Cape or Very Light Yellow, someone else graded it a Light Brown, a third person graded it Crystal, there is a vast difference between these color grades and all people involved were professionals. The stone definitely had very poor color.
Clarity is even harder as there is no program to assign a grade to a stone. There is a vast difference between an SI1 and another SI1, one I have seen had a humongous burn mark all over the table, to me this was terrible and extremely visible. Another may have two dark carbon inclusions on the crown facets which could be completely covered by prongs making the stone flawless to the eye when set.
Technically speaking it is possible for a stone to get a VS2 grade with an inclusion under the table; my stone is a VS2 with one inclusion under the table and one under a crown facet, neither is visible and one has to search really really hard with a loupe to even find the inclusion under the table. In the case of the stone concerned here that inclusion would make me instantly assign an SI1 grade to this stone.
Yes, an inclusion under the table would drop the clarity normally by at least one grade, sometimes many more depending on the inclusion>; e.g., one huge black carbon inclusion under the table would likely result in an I1-I2 if not I3. In the present case I have to wonder how much the program the vendor uses influences the visibility of the inclusion, this we cannot know but still I would refrain from buying this stone just to be on the safe side.
As to the question of color everyone in the trade has always advised me to get the best color you can get, so much is true, I personally own my J stone and love it but today I would select a higher color grade. That is not to say I would not keep my J stone, I would still proudly wear it and I often see amazing tinted stones at auctions, it all depends, I have no problem with it though I have to point out that an ideal cut stone with a very high color grade is truly amazing, icy white, which emphasizes brilliance in my opinion. I generally prefer higher than an H, G-H are very nice, F-s are probably a great value for how white they are, they are my faves.
That said it is not true that lower grades are not worth buying, they may be harder to resell and be tagged the so-called budget stones in the trade just like SI1-s but that may not be a bad thing at all. Same stands true for clarity; while I generally prefer a clarity grade higher than SI I have recently seen an amazing 1 carat pear with an F color and I1 clarity and I instantly fell in love with that stone and despite the clarity grade would be thrilled to own such a stone, now would I buy it to sell it? I would think about it but again many will sacrifice 1 C for the others. Such stones can have a market too.
Very interesting! Clarity does seem to be the most subjective part of grading a diamond. Unfortunately for me, it happens to be one of the most important. I am now looking at stones that are VS1's and higher (thanks ame) as I think I will be more comfortable sticking to this range. From what I have read, VS1's are always eye clean.
Almost always, yes. Most importantly: they're MIND CLEAN. There are a few folks with freak eyes that can find em. That's the grade I go for, because clarity is big for me too. The list I sent you would be absolutely eye clean stones and at least a few would probably even be loupe clean stones.
While grading IS subjective, there ARE standards as to what the "grademakers" are.
Personally I think any black pique should be SI clarity. That's not how the labs see it, as annoying as that is to someone like me. But that's for me a grademaker, and I am a harsh critic. Every lab is different, but GIA is the standard lab, and they set their list of "standards" for what qualifies per clarity grade. Every stone is graded by multiple people, and they discuss each graders assessment to decide it's final grade. After Type, Location and Size are the biggest factors. VVS stones don't generally have anything within the crown, they'd be tiny "outer edge" inclusions, often within the pavilion. VS stones do tend to have inclusions in the crown, sometimes right smack in the middle of the table--though those are usually VS2s. VS2s can have a black pique qualify, in the table, which I don't personally agree with, but it's based on size and type.
Whether it's prongable or not really doesnt factor in because they're not thinking about how it's going to be set, they're looking at this stone face down, plotting it, and deciding based on what's included in the stone and where, what grade it is based on pre-set guidelines.
Personally I think any black pique should be SI clarity. That's not how the labs see it, as annoying as that is to someone like me. But that's for me a grademaker, and I am a harsh critic. Every lab is different, but GIA is the standard lab, and they set their list of "standards" for what qualifies per clarity grade. Every stone is graded by multiple people, and they discuss each graders assessment to decide it's final grade. After Type, Location and Size are the biggest factors. VVS stones don't generally have anything within the crown, they'd be tiny "outer edge" inclusions, often within the pavilion. VS stones do tend to have inclusions in the crown, sometimes right smack in the middle of the table--though those are usually VS2s. VS2s can have a black pique qualify, in the table, which I don't personally agree with, but it's based on size and type.
Whether it's prongable or not really doesnt factor in because they're not thinking about how it's going to be set, they're looking at this stone face down, plotting it, and deciding based on what's included in the stone and where, what grade it is based on pre-set guidelines.
I agree with a lot of what you said Ame, agree that any black should qualify as SI, also that there are standards, of course there are standards everywhere but the standards can be very confusing; e.g., in Hungary they qualify a tiny inclusion as VVS and a very small inclusion as VS but now it is up to interpretations like in law many times. But yes very well said!
If you feel it is right, then it should be yours. But in the empirical sense of things, I would not knowingly spend 13K and get a stone with a very obvious blemish like this.
I am SO glad I decided to exchange the stone. JA is sending me a FedEx label this morning so I can start the process. In the meantime, I decided to try it on one last time because it is a beautiful stone. It is in a tension setting. I was sitting on my couch last night working on my computer and I just happened to look down and see black. At first I thought I was mistaken or that it was just a shadow. I was wrong. I could totally see a dark spot. Granted, it was from the side, but it was right near the girdle and it was glaringly obvious. And that was it. I hated that stone. I can't wait to return it.
I guess I am a bit miffed that a VS2 could have such an obvious inclusion. Again, I never saw it from the top without a loupe, but I could see it from the side when it was about 2 feet away and I wasn't even looking for it. Maybe I was just seeing the reflections. I don't know. But it was ugly. All of the Tacori rings I am considering have some sort of basket, but the inclusion is toward the top and I find it hard to believe any setting would hide this.
I have to agree that any stone that has an inclusion in the table should NOT be considered a VS2
I guess I am a bit miffed that a VS2 could have such an obvious inclusion. Again, I never saw it from the top without a loupe, but I could see it from the side when it was about 2 feet away and I wasn't even looking for it. Maybe I was just seeing the reflections. I don't know. But it was ugly. All of the Tacori rings I am considering have some sort of basket, but the inclusion is toward the top and I find it hard to believe any setting would hide this.
I have to agree that any stone that has an inclusion in the table should NOT be considered a VS2
There are better inclusions than that one that are fine in the table in a VS2. That's absolutely a low VS2, I think THAT stone, personally, should be an SI. Stones are graded for clarity from the top-down. Side-view is not factored in to the clarity grade. I hope this one makes its way back to JA asap and you get the new one and you love it.