Please help me choose: 4 rb w/ pics,reports & IS

[N2D-986S]

I would like to start by saying Thank You to the PriceScope community for helping to educate someone who never put any interest at all into diamonds. You have now turned me into a diamond snob and so I have spent the last couple of months researching from past posts and the educational tools on this site as well I have been obsessed with this board and learning how to balance the 4cs. Never in my wildest dreams did I think I could actually enjoy this process. So here I go, I have clicked through hundreds of diamond reports and images and believe I have narrowed it down to four potential stones. The first two stones are my top choices and appear so close in my mind that I hope someone can point out which one is slightly better in the Ideal-Scope images and overall.

#1: Found this stone in the listings and requested an IS image and it came back as a perfect James Allen H&A pattern.

Carat weight: 2.05
Cut: Hearts & Arrows Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA

Depth: 61.1%
Table: 56.0%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavilion Angle: 40.8


Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 8.24*8.18*5.02

HCA Score: 1.2 (smack dab in the center of the AGS Ideal range)

Diamond #1 Image:

 

[N2D-986S]

#1 IS Image

 

[N2D-986S]

#1 GIA Report

 

[N2D-986S]

#2: Another diamond I found that after examination became a JA H&A

Carat weight: 2.07
Cut: Hearts & Arrows Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: GIA

Depth: 61.1%
Table: 57.0%
Crown Angle: 35
Pavilion Angle: 40.8


Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Faint
Measurements: 8.26*8.21*5.03

HCA Score: 1.6 (right on the AGS Ideal line)

Image:

 

[N2D-986S]

#2 Ideal Scope:

 

[N2D-986S]

#2 GIA Report

 

[N2D-986S]

#3: 99% of a JA H&A but not quite there:

Carat weight: 2.08
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: GIA

Depth: 61.5%
Table: 57.0%
Crown Angle: 35
Pavilion Angle: 40.8


Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Faint
Measurements: 8.22*8.18*5.04

HCA Score: 1.6 (Right on the AGA ideal line)

Image:

 

[N2D-986S]

#3 Ideal Scope:

 

[N2D-986S]

#3 GIA Report

 

[N2D-986S]

#4:

Carat weight: 2.02
Cut: Hearts & Arrows Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: GIA

Depth: 61.9%
Table: 56.0%
Crown Angle: 35
Pavilion Angle: 40.8


Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 8.08*8.12*5.01

HCA Score: 1.6 (Inside the AGS Ideal line)

Image:

 

[N2D-986S]

#4: Ideal Scope

 

[N2D-986S]

#4: GIA Report

 

[N2D-986S]

Bump....Can anyone give me their thoughts on which one looks best, specifically between #1 and #2? It would be appreciated.

 

[Lorelei]

They all look good, but I like the first diamond best.

 

[N2D-986S]

Thanks Lorelei. I really like the first one becaue it is VS1 and has a smaller black inclusion than #2 but the Ideal-Scope image does not appear to be as good but I could be reading it wrong. If you look between the arrows in the IS image for #1 you don''t see as many contrasting elements like you see in the IS of #2. I have attached an edited version of #1 to show the an example of the area''s that don''t seem to have as many contrasting elements as there are in #2s IS. Do you think this will impact the scintillation and Fire?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 11/28/2007 4:20:04 PM
Author: N2D-986S
Thanks Lorelei. I really like the first one becaue it is VS1 and has a smaller black inclusion than #2 but the Ideal-Scope image does not appear to be as good but I could be reading it wrong. If you look between the arrows in the IS image for #1 you don't see as many contrasting elements like you see in the IS of #2. I have attached an edited version of #1 to show the an example of the area's that don't seem to have as many contrasting elements as there are in #2s IS. Do you think this will impact the scintillation and Fire?

It looks like the second diamond may have been finished in a way to provide intentional leakage to add contrast to the diamond. This is showing on the IS as small white areas. Both are great diamonds and IS images, it is just a case of a slightly different finish with the cut. This may have the effect when viewing the diamonds that you may notice a difference is in the quality of scintillation in some lighting. The first IS diamond may show larger, firey coloured sparkles and the second sharper, snappy, more lively sparkles - however both should be gorgeous and the average viewer may or may not notice a difference in performance.

 

[gontama]

My preference: #2, #3, and #1. #2 as you say has clearer, larger and evenly patterned "blacK" (ASET blue) between arrow heads. It appears to have a better optical symmetry than #1. For the same reason, I would take #3 over #1, even if it does not meet JA''s H&A definition. It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to see any visual difference in person compared to "true" H&A. Not-so-strict seller can easily advertise it as H&A.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Buy them all and tuck them away in one or a few nice pieces!

BTW the H&A''s - is it important to you?
If so you might want to see H&A''s photo''s - the ideal-scope can point to them being H&A''s, but not proove it

 

[N2D-986S]

Gary, I wish I could buy them all but for now it is only one I am not so concerned with what one would call a true H&A but I do want optimal symentry, light performance and the arrows (I don''t really mind about the hearts, they don''t have to be perfect) that is why I decided to not pay a premium for a branded H&A.

I take it from your comment they are all good choices via the IS images but do you see any problems with #1 not having as clear of contrast as #2? Which would you choose? It appears that #2 has an IS image that is more in tune with some of the WhiteFlash stones I have seen. While I know the Whiteflash ACA is one of the stricktest H&As and the stones are not ACA I keep feeling that #2 has many of the same IS properties as the ACAs while #1 is just a bit off. But does having fewer contrast points mean it will be not quite as crisp of a performer like what Lorelei said the differences may be? Thanks for the advice!

 

[N2D-986S]

Gontama, thank you for your feedback on #2, it seems that it may just be up to an individuals seperate tastes, that is why I hate not being able to see both of them side by side. But other than the IS image and clarity between #2 & #1 the only other real difference is that #2 has some faint flouresence. So while #1 may have a less contrasting IS it does have the VS1 and no flouresence. Do you think the Flouro should be a concern at all? I don''t want it to glow in the blacklight and from what I have read faint flouro does not help with face up color at all so is it actually a negative?

 

[Lorelei]

Until Garry comes back, if you read up on this thread, it should explain about the intentional leakage versus the other IS image to give you further info. Although the thread is mainly about WF New Line and Classic Line, some of it still may be helpful in your case, see particularly John Q's posts.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/aca-stone-new-line-or-classic.36907/

This thread also may be helpful https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/girdle-treatments-cheated-girdles-tweaked-girdles-digging-painting.36102/

Also this https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/a-cut-above-new-line-vs-classic-line-a-review-of-the-2-cutting-styles.24185/

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

There is no way you can go wrong

 

[gontama]

Faint most likely has minimal effect on stone''s apperacne. It may show just a little under black light. But I do not think you would get bothered by that. It is very subtle. In normal light conditions, you probably do not see anything. Most, if not all, diamonds have certain level of fluorecence. AGS may say it is "negligible". I do not think you have to worry about it. But to be sure, you can ask the seller. And if it comes with some return period, you can examine too. This may be of some help: http://goodoldgold.com/Fluorescence/ I think these diamond are very nice. #2 and #3 in particular seem to be really nice to me. Good luck!

By the way, I like (stronger) fluorecence very much...