Below is my pre GIA estimate of the diamond

WEIGHT: 2.53ct
SHAPE: Round Brilliant
COLOR: N
CLARITY: VS2
MEASUREMENTS: 8.58 - 8.60 x 5.42 mm
TOTAL DEPTH: 63.2%
TABLE SIZE: 56 (est)%
FLUORESCENCE: STRONG BLUE

Here's the GIA report


I was more generous and called it VS2, GIA called it Si1.
I estimated a 56% table, GIA got 58%.

IN fairness, it's an amazingly difficult stone to pin down.

For example- these two photos- one taken in fairly bright lighting the other in dim.




I love the cut....

Looking at the diamond from behind, it's easy to see why GIA called it U-V.
It's a yellow diamond!

Hey, David!
I'm with you on the cut; I prefer less than 60% table.  But don't beat yourself up on the color; you were probably distracted when Cori told you that I called about my wire transfer or those hundred-thousand other things you have on your mind.  Gee Whiz, afterall, you've got three computer monitors on your desk simultaneously running, and you answer the phone,too.
Were you so distracted with all the interuptions that perhaps you didn't actually grade this stone, but recorded the color of the last one that you handled?
Give yourself a break, Big Guy.  We all think you're the best!

Besides, it's after 10PM; you should be home with your wife. 

oh she's a beaut though!   it just goes to show you how white those rb's face up doesn't it? 

good question! i have wondered this as well...

The new GIA reports for colorless and near colorless round brilliant diamonds have precise measurements similar to what a "Sarin" machine does.
The "Star Length" refers to the star facet, and it's Length in relation to the diamond.

Yes- fluorescence really makes it difficult to gauge the color!

I don't know, I look at the report and I think:  There is so MUCH to consider.  I'd want to study a whole PILE of stones and their respective reports before I could even begin to figure out the significance of each spec, the good, the bad, and which qualities or combination of qualities I prefer in a diamond...

I've seen how blue fluorescence make a white diamond look bluish or hazy in certain lighting (not UV).  What impact does strong yellow fluorescence have on deeply colored stone such as a yellow or a yellow-brown?  What impact does strong blue have on a yellow or yellow-brownish stone?  Will strong fluor make all diamonds look hazy?  Is strong fluorescence bad in every case?
 
  Mikla

It would be interesting to see what this diamond looks like photographed under different lighting conditions.  I don't really see the strong yellow in the posted photographs; it looks more like a caramel color to me.  Still, they are calling it a brownish greenish yellow.  What are your thoughts on this stone's cut? Does the cut have anything to do with the way the strong yellow fluorescence presents itself? How the color might change in different lighting conditions?  Would the yellow come out more?



Mikla

Good points, OMC.

OK, I'll take a swing at it:
Mikla, remember, "caramel" isn't a recognized color, it is just a subjective term used to describe a light yellowish brown color.  Basically, if a color isn't on a color wheel it isn't going to be used by GIA or a legit business to describe a diamond. Also, remember, these photos must indicate all diamond qualities... color as well as shape, clarity and cut.  Sometimes accuracy for one, leads to photographic innaccuracy for another.  *SIGH*

So, let's get back to what we see in the photo at hand. According to GIA, this is a yellow stone with brown and green modifiers and strong yellow fluorescence. Now, look at the photo.  The photo shows a great RANGE of tone (lightness and darkness), but the yellow hue is EVERYWHERE.  I see a bright greenish yellow in the horizontal band in the top "V" of the stone, for example. For many people, this band color would just look "yellow."  But, if you were to mix that color with pure pigment, as in paint, it would take a certain amount of green to achieve it (well, actually blue and pure yellow, because blue and yellow make green, but, we won't go there... AGHHHH!). But, the point is, it is not PURE yellow, it has a "modifier." Also, I see brownish yellow (that looks orangy) in the vertical bands on the left side of the photo, and darker, warmer brown (what is very dark yellow with a modifier of brown - brown?) toward the center. Here and there, most notably on a thin horizontal band about halfway down the bottom triangle, there are darker brownish greenish yellow areas. See them?  But, notice, the YELLOW is everywhere. The brown and green are secondary to the yellow. And, the strong yellow fluorescence probably strengthens the overall yellow-ness.

In GIA lingo, the color is "brownish greenish YELLOW," the tone is "FANCY DEEP."  To some extent, it is the fancy deep that you are interpreting as brown because after it reaches "full saturation," the darker a pure yellow gets, the murkier it appears, just as if you go in the other direction away from total saturation, the more washed out, or pale yellow becomes. Each saturation point for each diamond color is different, but on the GIA scale, pure saturation for yellow is reached at about "fancy intense." Since this stone is graded two shades darker than that, the yellow hue is not as vivid anymore. Couple that with the overall brown secondary hue... voila, you have a diamond that, to you, looks like "caramel." But, to GIA, the main color is "yellow."

Also note, if you compare this photo to the other two that David has supplied, this is the DARKEST of the three. 

NOW, knowing what GIA has said, looking at this photo and comparing it to the oher two photos, my guess would be that in daylight, this stone will appear on the lighter, but not lightest, end of the scale indicated by the photo.  Obviously, in darker light, it will appear darker.  So, for me, in "layman's terms" I'd guess that in person, this looks more like a rich "honey" color rather than "caramel."  And, because I'm a persnickity pain, I'd probably call it greenish-honey.  But, I'm only guessing, and I could be TOTALLY off! (David can flog me now).

If you are seriously interested in this diamond, perhaps David can take a handshot for you? Just remember, the color may be more acurate in terms of how it will look against skin, but, without light reflecting through it, the skin photo will look muddier than the stone willl be in person, or when it is set to let the light pass through the stone. 

OK, I'm too long-winded.  I know it. You may flog me too... 

Was the honey locally grown?