A Cut Above VS Expert Selection

[MissAva]

Could someone please point me towards a comparison of A Cut Above stones and the Expert Selection stones? Is the difference visible to the eye? I have tried searching for such a topic and was unable to locate it. When I went to the WhiteFlash web site this is what is says: Expert Selection
“Value For The Money
When Whiteflash launched, we started with A Cut Above super ideal cut Hearts and Arrows diamonds that remain the product that we are best known for and are proud of. However, we realize not all people want to purchase A Cut Above''s and prefer to save some money while still getting a well cut stone.
There are virtually hundreds of thousands of diamonds available to the internet shopper. However, no one can tell for sure whether a diamond, round or fancy, will look good based on the numbers from its certificate. Besides, many of the diamonds listed on the internet are virtual inventory that is not readily available.
Where does it leave our customers?
It was just a matter of logic for us to take the next step and expand our inventory with diamonds whose attributes have been individually evaluated by our expert team.
Our expert gemologists use two simple but crucial criteria when they buy diamonds for our inventory:
1. Value for the money: selected diamonds must be extremely competitively priced.
2. Best of the crop: diamonds must be the best looking in their category and are picked using the Ideal-Scope to ensure excellent light return due to minimum light leakage.
By following these criteria we guarantee that you will get the best looking diamond in its category for the price.
These diamonds are right here in house and most of them have Grading Report, IdealScope and Sarin information ready. Check them out!”
So what is the difference between Super Ideal and what they list in the ES selection as Ideal? If there are the best looking in their category how are they different from ACA stones? Thanks!

 

[belle]

since all aca stones must meet brian''s (the cutter) strict guidelines for being true hearts and arrows, my guess is that these stones just miss his published standards.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Hi Matatora.

There is an FAQ on the Whiteflash website that discusses "Products." More information is available there.

Here is a PS thread where this question was asked. If you have specific questions that you feel someone from WF can answer, feel free to PM, email or call us.

Best regards,

 

[strmrdr]

some of them are ACA''s that is some way missed the mark
They wont tell you why it missed the mark.
I could be polish/sym and the cut is ideal or it could be the hearts are a off or both.
In the first case they are a bargain and in the second a fair deal.

There are other diamonds that for what ever reason Brian thinks are a good deal, these will not always be near top makes like the ACA canidates.

Mara has stated she cant see the difference is person between the close to ACA ES and the ACA''s.
Im sure she will be along to comment further.

 

[appletini]

Mata: I think the difference will vary with each ES stone. When I chose my ES stone, I had the opportunity to view it next to several ACA and to my eye I could not tell a difference. The arrows and performance looked just as good to me on my ES and it did on the ACAs. Good Luck with your search. I was looking for specific criteria in size, color, clarity, etc. On each stone that looked appealing online, I entered the stats in the HCA. I think both catagories offer excellent choices. Good Luck finding the "one".

 

[MissAva]

Thanks John for that thread, I guess the whole Super Ideal vs Ideal wording just throws me. I like these two, but I am having a hard time determining which is "better".

 

[Shay37]

Date: 11/25/2005 12:58:22 PM
Author: Matatora
Thanks John for that thread, I guess the whole Super Ideal vs Ideal wording just throws me. I like these two, but I am having a hard time determining which is 'better'.

Good heavens. I would have to flip a coin. They both look yummy.

shay

ETA: Go for the cheaper one. I don't think you or anyone else will be able to tell.

 

[MissAva]

Date: 11/25/2005 1:02:55 PM
Author: Shay37

Date: 11/25/2005 12:58:22 PM
Author: Matatora
Thanks John for that thread, I guess the whole Super Ideal vs Ideal wording just throws me. I like these two, but I am having a hard time determining which is ''better''.

Good heavens. I would have to flip a coin. They both look yummy.

shay

ETA: Go for the cheaper one. I don''t think you or anyone else will be able to tell.

Well there is also a size difference at play here. My SO has been talking to them via email and we went to GOG on Tuesday. He is an engineer and very direct, so this whole ideal super ideal thing, plus GOG ideal H&A thing is irking him I think. I would have posted the GOG idealscope shot as well except it say GOG.com across the bottom. We have it narrowed down to three stones...and four settings. Bless his heart.

 

[MissAva]

So can anyone tell by looking at the IS images which is which?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/25/2005 11:59:37 AM
Author: strmrdr

It could be polish/sym and the cut is ideal or it could be the hearts are off or both.

Neither of these differences would show up in the ideal-scope. The slight differences in diamond performance at this level depend on your own perception and taste.

 

[Kaleigh]

I guessed through a pm to Matatora that the left is the ACA and the one on the right is the ES. She said I was right, but looking again, the one on the right looks more consistent. Besides the arrows what else gives it away, just going by the IS??

 

[MissAva]

So are the IS images helpful for ES vs ACA?
ETA: This was my response to Kaleigh "You are correct, but I was curois becuase of the arrows at the 12,2 and 6,8 match to me and then the 3,5 and 9,10 do but all 8 do not quite match. Where to me the ES looks more consistent to my eyes, but I am not 100% sure why. "

 

[aljdewey]

Matatora...like Mara, I''ve seen both ACA and ES in person......can''t tell the difference in person.

Oftentimes, there is no difference in "light" performance. By definition, ES stones are "value for the money". That means some of them will be good buys (although not necessarily stellar performers.

However, MOST of the ES stones are stones that *just* missed the ACA standard, and those are fantastic stones. ACAs are Hearts & Arrows diamonds, so if the pattern is slightly off, it doesn''t make it as an ACA. That doesn''t mean the light performance is impacted; just that the pattern doesn''t meet the standard. Most of the ES stones are these types of stones.

In person, you likely wouldn''t be able to see the difference. There were a few ES stones in the "taste-test" challenge we did at WF; we couldn''t pick them out. ALL were beautiful.

My e-ring stone is an ACA; Mara''s is an ES. I''m quite sure that you wouldn''t see a difference between them (other than the size).

 

[belle]

matatora, have you read the wf 'faq' section about their products? it is a detailed account of what makes a stone aca. there is also a section on es stones. as strm pointed out, it could be that the polish/symmetry were not graded ideal or the hearts may not have met brian's standards. in any case, these things can not be judged with an idealscope image. there is no way to tell between h&a aca & es stones by idealscope images. the idealscope is to determine light leakage only. it is not for discerning subtle differences between top make stones.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Happy day-after TG.

Two things here:

1. Seeing a diamond through an ideal-scope allows a broad indication of overall light return and optical symmetry but there is no way to differentiate between the diamonds above past determining that they are both at a top level of light return.

There is no less or more consistency in the image on the right. Nothing is wrong with any of the arrows. These are tiny objects, scant mm across, quickly photographed in order to demonstrate overall light return, not for splitting hairs. In any face-up photo getting the diamond level is the hardest part. The slightest tilt can skew the arrows slightly and highly magnified images exaggerate such tilt. Unless the photo was done specifically for blow-by-blow construction analysis you’ll often see slight tilt. These photos were made to demonstrate that the diamonds have a high level of light return.

Have you all seen ideal-scope images of average diamonds? We are somewhat spoiled here on PS. Here is a thread that will make good reading as far as deciphering different levels of IS images goes: Click me.

In short, the ACA and ES diamonds are photographed so you may compare their light return to other diamonds and verify that it is at the highest level when compared to cuts that are not as precise. I trust you can see the difference between the ones you posted and these images...

 

[MissAva]

I did read it, as did a few others, I have to say I really find the Ideal VS Super Ideal thing to be a poor choice of words.
I used the IS becuase in a previous thread JQ had to illustrate the diffrences.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Matatora, to your original question:

Date: 11/25/2005 10:44:31 AM
Author:Matatora

Could someone please point me towards a comparison of A Cut Above stones and the Expert Selection stones? Is the difference visible to the eye?

Hard to answer. Is the difference between E and F visible to the eye? Is the difference between VS2 and SI1 visible? It depends on the viewer, the specific diamonds and the lighting conditions. I can confirm what has been said here: For many clients the visible differences are negligible.

No one has claimed that ACA is a ‘more brilliant diamond.’ The claim of ACA is that it''s easy to buy.

People who want a true H&A diamond with a declared set of standards for optical symmetry that’s publicly acknowledged for consistency in performance can buy ACA with confidence. Not every client involves themselves with the PS learning curve about cut, etc. With ACA a customer needn’t go through all of the analysis because we''ve done it for you. The premium lies in the fact that, from rough to factory to final polish to the vault, every one goes through consistent, demanding, proven tests. Each is cut to proportions, major and minor, that we feel are the very best sets of measurements for visual balance. Each receives the American Gem Society’s Ideal grade in performance, proportions and finish. After that each must pass Brian’s inspection and analysis to earn the Whiteflash guarantee of top optical symmetry. Only after all of this will it be inscribed with the ACA logo. Much of the value-add in the brand is there. These are not things you will necessarily see when comparing top performing diamonds.

What you will see is the proven visual balance. ACA have proven great for rings, pendants, earrings, toe-rings, belly-button, etc. The appeal of ACA is in complete comfort in buying a diamond with assurances of the highest pedigree.

 

[belle]

Date: 11/25/2005 5:18:52 PM
Author: Matatora
I did read it, as did a few others, I have to say I really find the Ideal VS Super Ideal thing to be a poor choice of words.
I used the IS becuase in a previous thread JQ had to illustrate the diffrences.

lol...sorry, i guess the question may be redundant. i''m sure we''ve all read these things at least a couple of times!

ideal/superideal designation aside, there are many factors that can contribute to reasons any given stone was not designated aca. in reading the ''faq'' that i linked in my previous post, you can go through what it takes for a diamond to be called an aca. if just one of these criteria are not met, the stone will go into es. again, most of these things will not be seen in an is image. johnq may have used idealscope to illustrate the differences in scintilation between ''new line'' and ''classic'' aca, which can indeed be seen through an idealscope.

 

[Mara]

As others have already stated, the differences between many of the ES stones and ACA's will be non-existent to your naked, unpracticed, consumer eye. Could Brian see the difference between a justbarelymissedthemark ES and an ACA? Probably, because it's HIS baby and he knows what to look for. What I have heard is that the differences will be very minute and may even be in something like the arrows or the heart pattern, those precious patterns where a tiny tiny slight difference can knock it out of that supersuperideal running.

Terminology is just terminology. For me the ES stones that just missed the mark are still 'super-ideal' since they far surpass any type of 'ideal' you will see in a local retailer (not branded).

There are also posts on this topic, though search terms may be hard to find...anyhow bottom line is I would not hesitate to buy an ES that looks as great as that IS image you posted, two of my stones have been ES's, and I have bought 3 ACA's. To me they all pretty much look the same, cut very precisely and just beautiful.

Edited to add that not all of the ES stones will be 'almost ACA's'...but many of them are.

 

[noobie]

I don''t think you can tell the difference between almost ACA ESs and ACAs. I bought an ES that was stunning. Brian looked it and told me it pretty much an ACA except for polish. The IS picture was perfect and so was the stone.

However, I wouldn''t hesitate to buy an ACA if it fit size and specs. You really can''t go wrong with any of them (including the GOG stone)

 

[MiniMouse]

My non-technical little mind

views ACAs as ''mind perfect'' whereas ES are more ''eye perfect''.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/26/2005 5:36:09 AM
Author: MiniMouse
My non-technical little mind

views ACAs as ''mind perfect'' whereas ES are more ''eye perfect''.

in a lot of cases that is a very good description :}
except no diamond is truely perfect.
any diamonds cut is a comprimise and what may be perfect to/for one person may not be perfect to/for another.
I like the general idea :}

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/25/2005 12:58:22 PM
Author: Matatora


Thanks John for that thread, I guess the whole Super Ideal vs Ideal wording just throws me.

Don''t let it... Whichever is the ES between those two, that''s the ''bargain'' IMO.



I like these two, but I am having a hard time determining which is ''better''.

So do I...

Definitely liked the analogy with ''mind clean''. Perhaps some of the ES are just too good for ACA sake. Between the two, there must be some natural self selection between those who trust their ears (hearing names) or eyes.

My 0.2

 

[kenny]

John

If all other specs are exactly identical (not likely-but wok with me here) what is the price difference at , say, 1 carat?

Will an ACA be 10% more than a a ES?
20%?
30%?

 

[diamondlil]

Date: 11/25/2005 12:58:22 PM
Author: Matatora
Thanks John for that thread, I guess the whole Super Ideal vs Ideal wording just throws me. I like these two, but I am having a hard time determining which is ''better''.

Between those two images, they are both eye-pefect enough for me. Assuming all other specs are similar, I''d pick the bigger one.

Mat, I''m married to an engineer too so I understand the mathmatical gymnastics your SO is probably going through.

 

[MissAva]

Date: 11/26/2005 5:36:09 AM
Author: MiniMouse
My non-technical little mind

views ACAs as ''mind perfect'' whereas ES are more ''eye perfect''.

What a wonderful way to put that!

 

[MissAva]

Date: 11/26/2005 12:33:48 PM
Author: diamondlil

Date: 11/25/2005 12:58:22 PM
Author: Matatora
Thanks John for that thread, I guess the whole Super Ideal vs Ideal wording just throws me. I like these two, but I am having a hard time determining which is ''better''.

Between those two images, they are both eye-pefect enough for me. Assuming all other specs are similar, I''d pick the bigger one.

Mat, I''m married to an engineer too so I understand the mathmatical gymnastics your SO is probably going through.

He is such a cutie! And very uh...detail oriented. But I just got a phone call from him and he got it!

I am soo excited!!!


ETA He decided on the ES!

 

[Kaleigh]

Oh wow, how exciting!!! Great choice!!!

I am very happy for you Matatora!!!

 

[appletini]

Yea!!!

 

[Shay37]

CONGRATS!!!! I am so excited for you, Matatora.

shay