Princess ideal scope image

[princesslover]

Hi everyone!

What do you think of this ideal scope image?

Hmmm...it''s hard to judge princess cuts. One the one hand it does not have the leakage many have in the 4 corners, but on the other, it also does not have a symmetrical light return pattern (Although symmetry rating from GIA is VG).

Any inputs?..

 

[belle]

agreed princess, i don''t mind dark spots, but i do like them to have a more uniform pattern.

 

[Rhino]

Better than average. I''ve seen better and I''ve also seen much worse.

 

[princesslover]

Yeah, I know what you''re saying...I actually just purchased this diamond, and from what I hear (from a source considered very honest in this business - which I will review on saturday when I see the stone in person..) it''s spectacular. Lots of brilliance and fire...

I just thought it was interesting...what do you choose? Darker red and more black spots - and they''re pretty spread out as well, so it should give good contrast - or more uniform pattern with leakage all over the place?! Tough..

Woder if "normal" people

can actually see that difference? It''s a 1B diamond, and should probably be better than what you can find in most stores in Canada...

 

[princesslover]

Date: 12/16/2004 4

9:22 PM
Author: Rhino
Better than average. I''ve seen better and I''ve also seen much worse.

Yeah, I initially checked out the diamonds on Whiteflash, and compared to those, even costing $2000 more for the same ct. weight and Premium cut as well, this is a sparkler! So it can''t be that bad...

Paid $4500 for this one - it''s a 1.16ct. GIA cert.

I also checked out yours, and they look beautiful!

I just felt really comfortable in my dealings with this company, so I went with them...And it was the best "bang for my buck"...

 

[princesslover]

Sorry, no offence at all to the Whiteflash people!!

I''m sure their diamonds are beautiful!

Hmm..think maybe we as internet shoppers expect our diamonds to be purrrrfect - this falls in the 1B category, like said before, and I''m not quite sure if the avarage person will see that the light reflection pattern is not more symmetrical!..

I have seen many signature diamonds on the net with LOTS of leakage in the 4 corners, and I''m not sure what''s better/worse? Feel free to bring on the opinions!!

You guys are ALL awsome! You made it much easier for me to get over my nerves and buy a diamond unseen on the net!

 

[researcher]

I may be wrong, but my guess is the stone was not straight or the light wasn''t hitting the stone evenly. Overall, I''d say this ideal scope image looks pretty good! My stone looks more uniform, but if you look at the picture of mine (search for "engaged at last") you''ll see that the stone is centered in the circle of light. Just a thought!

 

[Rhino]

The picture looks like it''s centered fine. The left side where there is a concentration of leakage is due to pavilion angle set 1, (the lower girdles or "V" facets). If you were to run a Sarin on that diamond on a machine that shows all the facet angles you''d see that that one angle is notably different than the other 3. Light return within a diamond (and its distribution) is dependant upon both proportions & symmetry.

 

[princesslover]

Date: 12/16/2004 5:47:31 PM
Author: Rhino
The picture looks like it''s centered fine. The left side where there is a concentration of leakage is due to pavilion angle set 1, (the lower girdles or ''V'' facets). If you were to run a Sarin on that diamond on a machine that shows all the facet angles you''d see that that one angle is notably different than the other 3. Light return within a diamond (and its distribution) is dependant upon both proportions & symmetry.

Rhino,
is this normal,or should I be worried?
It has a symmetry rating of VG and polish of EX - figured it would be well cut?..Could it be because of medium- thick girdle, meaning varying girdle thickness?

I also thought the stone is centred in the pic - it doesn''t matter that it''s on an angle...

 

[researcher]

Thanks for clearing that up, Rhino! The leakage just looked similar to how my stone looks when I don''t have it sitting perfectly in the light case for the ideal scope. I never would have guessed it would be a result of the pavilion set! I wish I knew as much as you!!!

 

[belle]

polish and symmetry do not determine a well cut stone. you can have stones with ex/ex and not be a great cut. table, depth, crown, pavillion, girdle etc. #''s need to be proportionate for a well cut stone.

long story short, don''t hinge your choice on polish/symmetry.

 

[princesslover]

Date: 12/16/2004 6:16:15 PM
Author: belle
polish and symmetry do not determine a well cut stone. you can have stones with ex/ex and not be a great cut. table, depth, crown, pavillion, girdle etc. #''s need to be proportionate for a well cut stone.

long story short, don''t hinge your choice on polish/symmetry.

Kinda knew that - but there seems to be more TLC going into a stone with EX/VG polish / symmetry...

 

[Rhino]

Here''s an interesting stone to learn from. We recently called in a slew of princess cuts (to consider purchasing for stock) and of course all we have is the very limited amount of info from the GIA Report for starters. This particular stone had around a 69 depth, 66 table, 11.6% crown height and a 52.7% pavilion depth. Here is a profile shot via the Sarin.

 

[Rhino]

Here''s the topside via the Sarin model. Looking pretty symmetrical from this view.

 

[Rhino]

Lastly ... here''s the pavilion. Note the deviations in the pavilion. It is due to the variances in the pavilion angles that cause extraneous leakage on one side of this princess cut (very much like the IS image from princesslover). That one angle is around 54 degrees while the other 3 are around the 60 degree zone. LS image to follow.

 

[Rhino]

Note the extra leakage on the left side. Now ya know why.

Now ... is this cause for concern? Is it reason to reject a stone? Not necessarily. It depends on how anal you are.

As I had said prior you could do much worse. At least within these 2 stones, they are *predominantly* returning more light than they are in leaking light.

 

[princesslover]

YIKES!!!!! This stone is a signature stone from one of the DT and Pricescope vendors...wouldn''t this be noticable just by looking at the stone?! ..

Does this mean the stone is no good, or will have a strange apparance or bad light return?!
Rhino, please help settle my nerves!!

The stone is already set, and so GIA cert is all I have to go by - the OGI numbers come with the diamond when I get it...

Is this normal in a princess, and if not, wouldn''t GIA have made some sort of comment on the big difference?

 

[Rhino]

Here''s a different stone. Note how much more symmetrical the pavilion is on this one.

 

[belle]

that confirms it, i''m anal.

 

[Rhino]

It''s resultant LightScope image. Note how evenly the light is being returned from within.

With stones like what you''re describing ... sometimes it is visible to the eye. It really depends on how bad the leakage is at that juncture. I''d really have to see it and how serious the effects of the leakage is in that area.

My advice to you would be this ... if when you look into the face of the diamond and you do see one quadrant within the stone looking more on the dull side ... you''ll need to determine if this is something that''s gonna bug ya or not. If it doesn''t keep it. If it is too noticeable then you may want to consider returning it. Bottom line is *you* and *your future wife* must be happy with it since this is the diamond that will be on her hand for the rest of her life.

Just because a diamond is part of some websites signature line is no guarantee of overall optical performance. There are some websites signatures that give no regard to optical symmetry (the category which this subject falls under) or light return or both. Some just guarantee a certain crown height .. some a certain combo of crown heigh/total depth etc. IMO it is the combination of BOTH superior optical symmetry and light return that constitute the rarest. It is those combo''s that would earn this Gman''s signature.

Peace,

 

[Rhino]

Date: 12/16/2004 6:16:15 PM
Author: belle
polish and symmetry do not determine a well cut stone. you can have stones with ex/ex and not be a great cut. table, depth, crown, pavillion, girdle etc. #'s need to be proportionate for a well cut stone.

long story short, don't hinge your choice on polish/symmetry.

I'd concur that Belle. I've seen ex/ex's with optical symmetry & light return that didn't float my boat. Although that last stone I just posted did happen to be an Ex/Ex.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 12/16/2004 7

5:50 PM
Author: belle
that confirms it, i''m anal.

Particularly for the anal.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/16/2004 7:26:55 PM
Author: Rhino

Date: 12/16/2004 7

5:50 PM

Author: belle

that confirms it, i''m anal.

Particularly for the anal.

That does kinda look like the north end of a south bound horse that has had a bad fly attack.

 

[belle]

Date: 12/16/2004 7:26:55 PM
Author: Rhino

Date: 12/16/2004 7

5:50 PM
Author: belle
that confirms it, i''m anal.

Particularly for the anal.

SOLD!!