Advice on this Asscher stone please

[dazedland]

Cert: GIA
Shape: Asscher
Measurements: 6.51x6.30x4.08 mm
Weight: 1.45 carat
Depth: 64.8%
Table: 69%
Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick
Cutlet: None
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Clarity Grade: VS1
Color Grade: H
Fluorescence: Faint

Can someone perform a Diamond''s for Dummie''s on this information, give me a vague or complex idea/explanation of how you think it will look (sparkle, if it will appear bigger or smaller than the carat weight, proportion, etc.) I have done a lot of research, but am not scientifically inclined and I don''t get the information because there is so much terminology, so if someone could explain to me in a way that I can understand I would be very appreciative! Thanks!

 

[belle]

the best piece of advice i have for picking an asscher.....it must be seen!

seriously, there are so many styles of ''asscher'' or step emerald cuts, it would be impossible to make any decision based on numbers alone.
would you be able to get a pic?

 

[Kaleigh]

I agree with belle. Asschers must be seen, can''t go by the numbers alone.

 

[AChiOAlumna]

I also agree with Belle and kaleigh...numbers on step-cut diamonds are only good as a guideline. Ultimately, you have to trust your eyes to determine the "look" of the diamond. You might want to start by going in and looking at Asscher cut diamonds just to get an idea of what you do/don''t want...then you can use the numbers to be a "guide."

 

[dazedland]

I don't have a picture yet, I bought the diamond today through a site I found on Pricescope and they sent me the GIA Cert info. so that's all I have right now and just wanted to try to get some input without a photo. Guideline or instinct info would be also appreciated. Thanks!

 

[belle]

congrats on your purchase!

i hope you will post a photo of the stone once you receive it!!

 

[strmrdr]

My first take on the numbers is that its a dog but without photos cant say for sure.

 

[dazedland]

"My first take on the numbers is that its a dog but without photos cant say for sure."

Any specific reasons?

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Congratulations!!!
Of course I agree with everoyone who says you got to see at least a good digital photo to get an idea of desirability.
One thing we can deduce:
The cutter must have been going for a good cut, or made a mistake- because it's pretty easy to save .05 when you're cutting this type of stone- thereby entereing the "carat and a half" price realm. Likely the former, not the latter.

strmrdr is probably talking about the large table- and in many cases, strmrdr is correct.
But- it might be a stunning diamond with a reflective facet below the girdle to give the appearance of a small, traditional asscher table.
The stone below is such an example.
The diamond had a table size of 68 and depth of 68.6- to my eye the table looked 60 or smaller! Even in person.

So the diamond could be very nice.

 

[dazedland]

Thanks David, I'll be sure to post a picture when I get it. I should have the picture tomorrow.

 

[strmrdr]

Measurements: 6.51x6.30x4.08 mm - off square
Table: 69% - too big
Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick - large variation that isnt common in well cut asschers.
Polish: Good <-- low
Symmetry: Good <-- low

Even with all that it might be nice enough.
The numbers just tell 20% of the story.

I just saw that you allready bought it.
I missed that the first time.
Doesnt change my opinion but you might get lucky on it. Congrates.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Hey everybody!

A few points that I think are VERY important.
1)GOOD- on either polish or symmetry is IN NO WAY a knock on any diamond.
It''s hard to argue that it''s ...preferable to buy EX/EX- but trying to buy fancy shape diamonds that way is simply not real life.
The reason it''s preferable have VG/VG, or EX/EX have more to do a certificate than a diamond.

Therefore, one should never "dis" a diamond simply becasue the polish and symmetry are "merely " good.

2) Girdle- Thin- Slightly Thick is absolutely NO PROBLEM- many well cut Asscher Stones do not have exactly the same thickm=ness of girdle on every edge.
Since the girdle turns corners, as opposed to a round- this variation os NO PROBLEM at all.

3) The off square factor is simply not visible with the difference on the 1.45. Plus, it might actually make for a nicer ring becasue side stones can be oriented better.


I don''t mean at all to put you down strmrdr- but I think dazedland probably made a sound decision. I''m sure he got a money back guarantee- and bought from a reputable vendor.
I''ll be shipping the diamond in the morning. NO- I''M KIDDING he did not buy it from us.

I love to discuss the difference that we see in diamonds- but this guy just spent a lot of bucks, no need to make him loose sleep pver things that would not neccesarily bother someone who does this for a living.

 

[dazedland]

Thank you for replying with that information, I was definitley getting a little worried, but you''re right it has a one year money back guarantee and I have seen a lot of positive feedback on this site about the dealer. I will post the photo and more information when I get it tomorrow and would love to have additional feedback. I have seen some settings on this site and on the Web that I know she would like and I will attach the photos of them tomorrow to see what you think. We live in New York City and would like to purchase the setting in person, in your profile it says that you are located in NY, do you do settings?

 

[dazedland]

OK, I am going to post the settings now, 2 are from this site, I hope that''s ok, I''m new to Pricescope...
How do you think the halo would look without diamonds on the band? And does anyone have an idea of how much these settings would cost (platinum)?

 

[dazedland]

Another setting

 

[dazedland]

Setting 3

 

[strmrdr]

I like the first and third setting for that size asscher.
The second would be better with a 1ct.

Dont lose sleep over it, it could very well be just fine looking.
If it isnt then you can work with the vendor on finding another. There are a lot of diamonds out there.
Like I said numbers just tell a very small part of the story.
How it looks tells the whole story.

 

[AChiOAlumna]

I like the 3rd setting, but I''m a sucker for baguettes!!!

 

[Mara]

"1) GOOD- on either polish or symmetry is IN NO WAY a knock on any diamond.

It's hard to argue that it's ...preferable to buy EX/EX- but trying to buy fancy shape diamonds that way is simply not real life. The reason it's preferable have VG/VG, or EX/EX have more to do a certificate than a diamond.

Therefore, one should never "dis" a diamond simply becasue the polish and symmetry are "merely " good."

____________

David, you are the champion of underdog stones, or those with what many would consider undesirable numbers or pedigrees. Many times you make a good point!

In this instance, I disagree that you cannot knock a diamond for having GD/GD polish and symmetry.

Symmetry in a round is crucial for most who are seeking an excellent cut. Symmetry is crucial in something like an asscher where that perfect step pattern is key, how can a GD symmetry asscher have that excellent pattern? Seems like the great symmetrical pattern and GD symmetry are at odds with each other?

re: Polish, experts have chimed in on here in the past to note that that you may not notice the Polish difference between a VG and an EX/ID polish but that you *will* most likely see a difference between a GD polish and an EX/ID polish. For me that's enough resason to not consider seriously an 'okay' or GD polish in any stone.

This is just my take on it, but I disagree that a GD/GD rating is acceptable for all diamonds. Maybe for some who are searching, but there are enough diamonds out there that I personally would prefer to keep higher standards and would continue to look until all my requirements were met. In my opinion there is no reason for anyone to 'settle' for something that is not what they originally wanted and something that could affect how the stone looks in terms of beauty.

My two cents.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 6/9/2005 2:17:05 AM
Author: Mara



____________


This is just my take on it, but I disagree that a GD/GD rating is acceptable for all diamonds. Maybe for some who are searching, but there are enough diamonds out there that I personally would prefer to keep higher standards and would continue to look until all my requirements were met. In my opinion there is no reason for anyone to 'settle' for something that is not what they originally wanted and something that could affect how the stone looks in terms of beauty.

My two cents.

i agree with Mara,how often do we see a stone with ......fair or poor pol/sym grade? there for GD/GD is the lowest grade we see every day.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

HI Mara,
Thanks!
I meant to say " It''s hard to argue AGAINST buying EX/EX.
Of course I still use my experience and say that as a part of the "equation of desirability" I place far less focus on trying to find better than Good/Good.
I look at the shape, brilliance, depth, and overall appearance.
I''d love to hear experts say that they can find eye visible polish imperfections in a stone with "good" polish.I don''t find this to be the case.

I don''t recall seeing more than one stone with a polish rating of less than Good.
Modern diamond cutting is simply too good for that.

In the case of symmetry- Many times the one facet which caused GIA to downgrade off VG is extremely hard to find with a loupe- forget about seeing it with your eye.
You''re not going to see culet visibly off in "good" symmetry- or ANY obvious symmetry defect- in stones rated "good" symmetry.

Remember too, that we carry mostly fancy shaped diamonds- where there are far less choices- and where a stone''s personality is far more...individual than in a round.
So if one finds that shape, the sparkle, the profile and corners- they find the Asscher they love, and it''s "only" good/good- do not let that be a deterent.

Have no fear, Underdog is here.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 6/9/2005 2:17:05 AM
Author: Mara

how can a GD symmetry asscher have that excellent pattern?

Hm... GIA gives a "symmetry" grade but does not define a grade for pattern. What is "pattern" than ? I am not sure that the finish grades on the lab report have much if anything to do with the pattern. Would that be "optical symmetry" ? If so... than GIA does not grade it.

On the other side, this lab considers that finish grades only have a minor part to play in the diamonds'' looks (mentioned in their cut study).

H&A target some degree of precission well beyond visual. There are no Asscher brands pretending to form standardized patterns of reflections.

It isn''t too clear why this is such a senzitive question. H&A does not need "excellent" symmetry grade. EightStar cared to explain why ... Same for light return and "excellent" polish. The observation that some diamonds are more "transparent" than others is part of diamond history, but does not refer to polish. The same FAQ article explaining the relation between polish and symmetry grades by Eight Star reffers to this.

Now, I did have to dig deep for a relatively straight explanation. It probably is unconfortable for a seller to explain why his diamonds are "superideal" when some unrelated standard of quality (GIA''s finish grades) does not award them top grade. So... they do not. Even on the 8* site, the relevant bit is tucked away under FAQ, not in the mainstream tutorial.

MSU notes give a very, very detailed explanation - so detailed that it may not have had it the casual reader in mind. The conclusion is clear enough:

" symmetry classification has some drawbacks: it analyzes neither the influence of these distortions on the appearance and optical properties of a diamond, nor the reasons leading to such"

Oh well... please forgive my obsession, Mara.

 

[dazedland]

Just a note, but we weren''t aiming for the "Hope Diamond"

We just want something that will be pretty to the eye of someone that only knows what the 4 Cs stand for vaugley. We are on a budget and I think it was a good deal from the little that I know about diamonds. I just got the idealscope though and I don''t know what to look for, any tips?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 6/9/2005 7:18:00 AM
Author: dazedland
Just a note, but we weren''t aiming for the ''Hope Diamond''

We just want something that will be pretty to the eye of someone that only knows what the 4 Cs stand for vaugley. We are on a budget and I think it was a good deal from the little that I know about diamonds. I just got the idealscope though and I don''t know what to look for, any tips?

post it here and we can comment.
An actual photo will show more detail with an asscher than an idealscope image.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 6/9/2005 7:18:00 AM
Author: dazedland

I just got the idealscope though and I don''t know what to look for, any tips?

#1. It will be allot harder to take pictures through it than actually use the thing. Imprecise ones do not help, so there is no reason to waste a huge amout of time to make some just for posting here.

#2. There is a little refference chart for step cut diamonds on ideal-scope.com (link to chart). You must have seen it...

This represents the makers'' (Garry''s ?) opinion of what constitute great EC optics... and who am I to disagree. Actually, I can''t find any reason to disagree.

IMO, the Ideal Scope is not so much a mainstream "grading" tool because it does not spit out a grade (= ranking, classification, numbers...). Instead it explains where light goes out of the diamond (straight up from the black facets, mostlt upwards towards the viewer from the reds and to waste from the whites). This leaves some detail to the imagination - how much black is too much, how to obtain the best view throught the scope, how to adjut lighting - but most is intuitive. Not unlike seeing diamonds is anyway. The color code of the ''scope makes it easier to talk about what one sees (IMO, again) compared to overused ("brightness", "brilliance") and vague ("quality") words.

As far as I can tell, there is allot worse than the worst example (rightmost) on that refference chart, and such worse examples are by no means rare.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 6/9/2005 7:18:00 AM
Author: dazedland

Just a note, but we weren''t aiming for the ''Hope Diamond''

We just want something that will be pretty to the eye of someone that only knows what the 4 Cs stand for vaugley.

Sorry for the "theory" ... there is quite a bit of technical talk on Pricescope - makes a nice hobby.

How much of it is of interest to make an informed purchase is up to you - there is no "reading list". Your question "what will be pretty for a casual observer" drew all that ink

and it is mostly about grading the cut of "normal" diamonds. The Hope never had this problem - to prove it is "ideal". Somehow everyone knew it off the bat.

Oh well... just my 0.2.

 

[dazedland]

Date: 6/9/2005 9:09:19 AM
Author: valeria101

Date: 6/9/2005 7:18:00 AM
Author: dazedland

Just a note, but we weren''t aiming for the ''Hope Diamond''

We just want something that will be pretty to the eye of someone that only knows what the 4 Cs stand for vaugley.

Sorry for the ''theory'' ... there is quite a bit of technical talk on Pricescope - makes a nice hobby.

How much of it is of interest to make an informed purchase is up to you - there is no ''reading list''. Your question ''what will be pretty for a casual observer'' drew all that ink

and it is mostly about grading the cut of ''normal'' diamonds. The Hope never had this problem - to prove it is ''ideal''. Somehow everyone knew it off the bat.

Oh well... just my 0.2.

So do you think that this will be a pretty diamond to the casual observer?
I know there''s a lot of tech talk on here, it''s really interesting, and I tried to use some of it when choosing the diamond, but I am not scientifically inclined so some was easier to follow than others.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 6/9/2005 9:43:49 AM
Author: dazedland

So do you think that this will be a pretty diamond to the casual observer?

No idea, really. GIA lab reports were not made to represent diamonds "sight unseen" - so they do not give enough detail to go with.

 

[Blue824]

Date: 6/9/2005 9:43:49 AM
Author: dazedland

Date: 6/9/2005 9:09:19 AM
Author: valeria101

Date: 6/9/2005 7:18:00 AM
Author: dazedland

Just a note, but we weren''t aiming for the ''Hope Diamond''

We just want something that will be pretty to the eye of someone that only knows what the 4 Cs stand for vaugley.

Sorry for the ''theory'' ... there is quite a bit of technical talk on Pricescope - makes a nice hobby.

How much of it is of interest to make an informed purchase is up to you - there is no ''reading list''. Your question ''what will be pretty for a casual observer'' drew all that ink

and it is mostly about grading the cut of ''normal'' diamonds. The Hope never had this problem - to prove it is ''ideal''. Somehow everyone knew it off the bat.

Oh well... just my 0.2.

So do you think that this will be a pretty diamond to the casual observer?
I know there''s a lot of tech talk on here, it''s really interesting, and I tried to use some of it when choosing the diamond, but I am not scientifically inclined so some was easier to follow than others.

I think the bottom line is...you''ll just have to see it when you get it! I love asschers, but when I look at pictures there are some I''m more drawn to than others. If you love it when you see it, great! If you feel like there is something missing and that you can do better, send it back! Just my 2 cents & good luck with your stone.

Ooh, and my favorite was setting #3.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

I just got the idealscope though and I don''t know what to look for, any tips?

Look for: Another way to judge an Asscher that has some basis in reality
Tips? Don''t eat yellow snow...hehehehe

Sorry- but I find that using a tool which returns no meaningful result to be...like eating yellow snow ( not that I have experience in yellow snow!)

how can a GD symmetry asscher have that excellent pattern?

AnA handled this question pretty well-
My question- what exactly is the difference between an Excellent pattern, and a Good one?
Of course the answer is- GIA does NOT grade on the basis of a pattern per se.
Symmetrical means that both sides of the diamond look like each other.
If one star facet is a different shape than the corresponding star facet on the other side, you have a symmetry downgraded to "Good" yet, the tiny difference between facets is next to impossible to find- even WITH a 10X loupe.
That would render a stone with EX symmetry virtually identical to one with "Good"