Post # 1
Okay, so here is the deal…
My husband and I decided it was time to upgrade my diamond. We just got the loose stone from James Allen and its not eye clean. But it literally has every single other trait I wanted, its a 2.01, color is low but doesnt bother me in the slightest, and its an excellent cut, excellent polish and symmetry, no fluorescence, and a medium girdle. If we send it back for something eye clean we go down to a 1.7 carat.
I don’t know if I can live with the inclusion but I absolutely love everything else about it. This is my forever stone so I need help, I’m just too indecisive on my own and I’m afraid of regretting either choice
Wwyd?! Could you live with a little personality in your ring?
Post # 2
I could not be happy with an inclusion like that right on the table. Stick to SI1 – they are often truly eye clean. Is 2cts a requirement for you? A 2ct 3X J Si1 is approximately 11-12k. Not sure of your price limit. A 2ct cut to very high light performance standards will be $15-16k.
Post # 3
I would go down in size to be eye clean, for sure.
Post # 4
Idk what inclusion you are referring to. It looks pretty clean to me.
Post # 5
I would prefer eye clean…if you are bothered by going down in size, look for a stone that specs out face up closer to a 2 carat…
Post # 6
Some people can just roll with the inclusion(s) and are fine with it. Are you one of those people? Probably when you show it to people they won’t notice since they won’t be examining it the way we are.
However, because of the prominence of the inclusion, if it were me I’d go to 1.7 carats. Whats the mm difference between the 1.7 and the 2?
Post # 7
I’m not super fluent in diamond terms, but my stone has an inclusion (a tiny speck of dirt-looking something) RIGHT below the table, smack-dab in the middle of the stone. WHEN I notice it, it bums me out for approximately a milli-second, but I would always rather have a “bigger” stone that looks amazing 99% of the time versus a smaller stone that I’d never see a fault in.
Post # 8
Enlarge the 1st photo. It’s black and plain as day.
Post # 9
Go down in size and get eye clean.
Post # 10
I think i see it, but idk that wouldnt bother me. But if it bothers OP then yes she should go down a little in size and get the eye clean diamond. Honestly theres not much difference between a 1.7 and a 2 ct
Post # 11
I wouldn’t be able to get past that inclusion smack dab in the middle..maybe if it were elsewhere. From your post, it sounds like it might continue to bother you. I would go down a little for a cleaner diamond.
Post # 12
If it bothers you now it is going to bother you more and more and more. Now that you see it, you will always see it, know what I mean? I don’t care if others can’t see it from a distance, I don’t wear my rings for others (or for their eyesight), I wear them for me.
I can live with personality in my stone, but a black carbon spot right under the table would bother me beyond that. For some it might not, and the chance was there it might not have bothered you, but it would bother me.
I would ABSOLUTELY go down a little in size to get eye clean. Stick with SI1 or above – if going through James Allen have THEM tell you if it is eye clean or not and at what distance, angle, etc. Keep the cut standards as priority, the colour where you are happy with (this is a, IIRC, a IGL K which is actually probably lower on GIA standards). A well cut 1.7ct stone is still going to be a great size.
Post # 13
99% of people looking at your ring will give it a cursory glance from 3 feet away and will never ever see that. I had to zoom in to see it. I’d go for the larger size knowing almost no one will ever notice. However, it goes on your hand. Will it be all you can see? Only you can know!
Post # 14
That’d bug me. Sure, someone else isn’t going to notice if they glance at your ring across the room. But IMO your ring’s audience is you, not those random people.
Post # 15
Maybe it’s just me….I see absolutley nothing wrong with it. Looks gorgous!
I enlarged the photos and still can’t find the inclusion lol