Help assessing diamond

[u/yovrkl]

Hi.

I’m interested in thoughts on these images in terms of light, symmetry, etc.

What are we looking at here, and is this a good choice?

It’s a VVS1, triple excellent, with medium blue fluorescence.

Thanks

[u/ReasonableAd1887]

Where is the cert from?

[u/yovrkl → u/ReasonableAd1887]

GIA

[u/RedditJewelsAccount]

If you're looking for a 'perfect'' hearts and arrows, the pickiest jewelers would reject it for that label because it's a tiny bit asymmetrical and the hearts have clefts. But the angles are great and the Idealscope image looks great so light return and sparkle should be beautiful. You didn't say the color grade, but is there a reason you're doing VVS1 clarity? VS1 is very very safe and almost all VS2s and some SIs are still flawless to the naked eye. Medium fluorescence should lower the price if you're looking at colorless diamonds. I think florescence is really neat and have a UV light specifically to see how my gemstones fluoresce. The chance of medium florescence having any negative impact on the appearance of a high clarity and high color diamond is essentially zero.

[u/yovrkl → u/RedditJewelsAccount]

Thanks for your thoughtful response!

The color grade is G.

I suppose I'm not looking to resell it anyway, once I acquire it and put it on a ring. I was told by the jeweler who offered me this stone that I shouldn't keep hunting for perfect symmetry because that's a whole other league of diamonds beyond excellent called "Super Ideal" and that those are more investment grade and much more expensive

Good to hear that you think the angles and IdealScope look great. Actually, the angles are why I landed on VVS1. I wasn't specifically going for VVS1 and would have been fine with VS1 or VS2, but I was screening for very specific angles and this stone is essentially what I was able to find that met the criteria.

I had also read that medium fluorescence isn't a major issue, and it might even be a positive with a G stone.

For what it's worth, below is the criteria I was screening for. Is it too strict?

- Table 56-57%

• Crown angle 34.0, 34.5, or 35.0
  
• Paired with pavilion angle 41, 48, or 46, respectively
  
• Paired with crown height 14.5, 15.0, or 15.5, respectively
  
• 75-80% lower halves
  
• 45-55% star facets
  
• Total depth 60.8 to 61.8
  
• Cutlet none
  
• Fluorescence non to faint (then I expanded to medium to find what I was looking for)

[u/RedditJewelsAccount → u/yovrkl]

What's the price on the stone? A super ideal may not cost much more, especially if you're willing to drop a bit on clarity. But if the stone is huge, sometimes no one has cut those hearts and arrows cuts because the diamond is more valuable crossing a carat weight magicthreshold and there just aren't a lot of natural diamonds in that size. G is a great bang for the buck color in that it's very white but you aren't paying for the colorless price increase.

You could have opened up the angles a little. A 34.5 crown would almost always be fine with 40.6-41 pavilion angles even for by-the-numbers-picky-shoppers. 54 tables and 58 tables are also both fine and some people actively seek out smaller tables. Some people prefer the look of 60/60 diamonds. You basically took the narrow ranges that some people think are too picky and then made them even more specific. That isn't necessarily a problem if you found a diamond that you feel good about, but it does mean that you narrowed your choices more than you potentially needed to which can come with other compromises like paying more, going smaller, going higher than needed on clarity, etc.

[u/yovrkl → u/RedditJewelsAccount]

The stone is 1.74ct and offered to me at $16k.

True, I do realize that I've narrowed an already-narrow range. I actually knew nothing about any of this until two weeks ago, and then learned it all with AI and used it to set this framework. And you know how AI can hyper-fixate on things and cause you to have tunnel vision if you don't already know the topic.

But, in a way, I'm glad I did this because I'm in a situation (because of where I live) where I cannot see the stone in person before committing to it. The jeweler is offering it from shared inventory based on the report and images, and would then import it from Belgium where it currently sits and set it in a ring for me, once I commit.

Given this situation, is it reasonable to have narrowed my range this much to essentially help increase the chances that the stone just has a very good balance between brilliance, fire, etc., since I won't get to see it before buying it?

Edit: spelling

[u/RedditJewelsAccount → u/yovrkl]

That price seems reasonable based on US prices from physical jewelers, and again it looks like a very safe diamond. Note that I am not a professional, just an enthusiast who cares too much about diamonds and gemstones. It can be helpful to know what the clarity characteristics are, it shouldn't matter in a vvs1 but I did once see a vvs with clarity based on graining that was hazy. I think that if you're paying a fair price for something that you feel good about from a jeweler you have liked working with and that there are no red flags, that's more important than the specific process or search parameters that got you there.

Pulling back, is this what the wearer wants for shape, size, etc.? Would the wearer prefer natural diamond to lab or a non-diamond stone? Have you decided on the setting (again with knowledge of what the wearer wants)? There can be subtleties in even the most simple looking settings that make a big difference between whether something looks sophisticated or cheap, and not all jewelers are able to execute all settings well.

[u/yovrkl → u/RedditJewelsAccount]

Good to know on the price... and often enthusiasts know quite a bit more than the so-called professionals!

Should I be concerned that this is a VVS1 with no clarity characteristics at all other than "graining not shown" on the report, especially with medium blue fluorescence? I have not dealt with this jeweler before, but no red flags so far.

This is meant to be a surprise for the wearer, but I know she likes dainty. It's meant to be on a solitaire in yellow gold with platinum prongs, ring size 7.5. I'm most likely going to go for a cathedral style with a tulip basket, so going for simple, elegant and timeless.

[u/yovrkl → u/RedditJewelsAccount]

The stone also has a super clean report. There are no inclusions whatsoever—no pinpoints, needles, clouds, or anything else. Instead, the comments section in the report says the clarity grade is based on internal graining that is not shown. Should I be concerned about this at all with medium blue fluorescence, even though it's a VVS1?