opinions on idealscope and sarin...

[cryckman]

Here it is...

what do you all think!

 

[valeria101]

Princess cut ?

 

[cryckman]

yes... I''m trying to attach the ideal scope image, but it won''t let me!

 

[uclaure]

i''m by no means an expert, but there might be an issue with the girdle thickness. the sarin states that the avg is 1.8, not bad at all, but......examining the min and max we see that there''s a great variance...0 to 2.8%. this might be a typo, but if not, i would definately pass on any stone that that has even a section of the girdle that is almost paper thin. my .02.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/23/2004 7:57:48 PM
Author: uclaure
the sarin states that the avg is 1.8, not bad at all, but......examining the min and max we see that there's a great variance...0 to 2.8%

Yeah... these tables. It must be typo since those numbers do not add up. The mid between min and max is 1.8 and max is 2.6... then min is 1, noy 0% And that's not too bad. Since Iscope picture is there, than this stone should be in the seller's stock - so they could do the reality check for you.

You may want to rename the Iscope picture (say, to an odd XXcTRS.jpg). Make it GIF or JPG format...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Give the file a very unusual name - not one that has been used before

 

[cryckman]

I posted the idealscope under a new topic called idealscope.