Asschers

[Bridge]

Need some assistance in comparing 2 diamonds. I''ve been told Asschers look smaller than other diamonds. One of the diamonds is larger but different color and clarity. Here goes:

1) Carat: 1.23
Color: I
Clarity: VS1
Cut: Ideal
Depth: 64.5
Table: 58
Symmetry: Excellent
Polish: Very Good
Girdle: Meduium
Culet: Small
Flour: None
Meas. 6.23 x 6.22 x 4.01

2) Carat: .95
Color: E
Clarity: VS1
Cut: Ideal
Depth 64.8
Table: 59
Symmetry: Very Good
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Medium to Thick
Culet: Medium
Flour: None
Meas. 5.60 x 5.59 x 3.62

Any help would be appreciated. Trying to buy diamond soon in range of 5,000 - 7,000.

 

[Asschman]

You''ve come to the right place for diamond-related questions Anne. Others more senior than me will chime in I am sure, but I would like to offer some initial thoughts (I am contemplating an asscher e-ring myself).

Because of its shape and the way it is cut, the asschers tend to show color more readily than a round brilliant or similar stone. If you aren''t particularly color-sensitive, or don''t mind having a warmer color diamond, than this would be a good way to maximize size for price. The depth and table percentages of the stones you list seem pretty decent, but with asschers, the real story is in seeing them in indirect light--you want the deep, endless pool effect with pronounced bowties (an X pattern in the middle of the stone) Check out some of the previous asscher threads in the archives for photos.

I am little concerned with the presence of a culet, though, in both stones. While the first stone has a small one, the second stone has a medium culet. I am not sure what effect this will have on the stone''s appearance, but generally most asschers I have seen do not have a culet. Others should be able to explain whether this is a bad thing or not.

Best of luck.

Asschman

 

[valeria101]

Date: 2/2/2005 10:32:51 AM
Author: Asschman
Others should be able to explain whether this is a bad thing or not.

Old cuts have large culets... what GIA calls "medium" is about as large as a dot. It could well be a good thing if the cutter used this to optimize pavilion angles or something.

The "small" will probably be invisible completely.

It would be great to obtain photos, ideal Scope or ..something before calling any of the two in for a closer look. If anything, it would not be the culet size to make the cut between a nice and a not-so-nice pic. Brilliance would make a stryking difference, and there is no way to guess it from the numbers at hand. At least I can't...

It could well be that these two are real charmers from the little information that is available, I think. Hopefully the small table also mean there is a high crown, impressive fire and prominent "steps" showing. Neither is too deep, so size is good for their weight.

The numbers do not show the exact shape: either could be more "square" like emerald cuts or closer to an octagon as some would expect from an Asscher cut, and the branded Royal Asscher is.

Just my 0.2, of course

Now, the two would be visibly different in size... There are a few steps between E and I ? No other choice ? And what happend with VS2 ?