Two Princess Diamonds, with Ideal Scope Images

[brymerica]

OK, I have two diamonds to chose from, or I can be patient if folks don''t think these are good. They are both SI1 and apparently eye clean, I was originally looking for a VS2 but haven''t found any in the price range/cut I am looking for.


Princess

1.11, F, SI1, 5.75 x 5.68 x 3.92, Table 69, Depth 68.8, Girdle: Thick, Polish/Symmetry: ex/vg

1.14, F, SI1, 5.75 x 5.75 x 4.0, Table 70, depth 69.7, Girdle: medium to slightly thick, Polish/symmetry: ex/ex

Both of them at gemappraisers.com rate as a 1A


I''m attaching the Sarin reports for each, as well as the ideal scope images. Any thoughts are appreciated.

 

[brymerica]

Ideal scope, 1.11 diamond

 

[brymerica]

Ideal scope, 1.14 diamond

 

[brymerica]

Sarin report, 1.11 diamond

 

[brymerica]

Sarin report, 1.14 diamond

 

[brymerica]

1.11 diamond GIA report

 

[brymerica]

1.14 diamond GIA report

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Both are very nice IS images.
I would choose the second stone because I like to see the sharper contrast between leakage and strong pink, and I am always happy to see some dark spots.

but this is more intuitive than science.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 7/22/2004 6:13:53 AM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:



...but this is more intuitive than science.

----------------

Actually, if Ideal scope images and Brilliance scope scores for princess cuts are compared, it would be the little black spots that make all the difference - even despite a bit more light loss than either of these two stones show.

Did such a line up some time ago trying to compensate for the missing Iscope refference chart of princess cuts

for what a rather small sample and the Bscope itself can be worth.

 

[oldminer]

I second Garry advice that the 1.14ct is a little better probably to the eye. This is one of the best examples of using an Ideal Scope to know a series of diamonds are very brilliant and quite similar. We even know how to make selections with this tool, sometimes. Its getting better.

 

[LGail]

I'm curious to know what vendors offer idealscopes. I have been dealing with three vendors and all three of them say that they are not able to provide for their diamonds. Why is this?

 

[moremoremore]

Is the second one eye clean???? The inclusion is located smack in the middle of the whitest part of the stone...I can't tell .... it's too small...just make sure!

I like the second as well...but they are both nice!

 

[brymerica]

Here are the photos of the two diamonds, let me know what you think. It was restated that they are both eye clean, but you can see the inclusions on the photos.

Here is the 1.11 diamond.

Bryan

 

[brymerica]

Here is the 1.14 diamond.

Thanks for the input.

Bryan

 

[wanderlost]

I would have to say that the inclusions are hidden a bit better on the 1.11, but neither stone would really fit my idea of 'eye-clean' (but I'm really particular when it comes to these things....)

That being said..... they are very pretty

 

[researcher]

It's really a toss-up for me. From what I see on my computer it looks as though the first stone is leaking less light (has deeper colors and less white), but I like the scintillation (black) on the second stone. I personally prefer stones with a lot less white in the ideal scope image (see moremoremore's stone and mine), but these stones both have potential. What did the vendor say about the stones? I would trust them because they can compare them side by side.

 

[researcher]

BTW, I'm not an expert in diamonds like Gary or Dave! I just like princess cuts, and therefore know a fair amount about them

 

[researcher]

Here's the link to my stone and ideal scope image:

Princess

 

[researcher]

And here's the link to MMM's stone:

Perfect Princess

 

[researcher]

Just realized that hers is a LightScope image, but you get the idea....

 

[brymerica]

What does the black on the ideal scope image mean? I was reading that the white means light leakage, but I'm not sure what the black means. Also, can you grade the amount of sparkle by the shades of pink/red?

Bryan

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

----------------
On 7/23/2004 10:58:23 AM bryansauer wrote:

What does the black on the ideal scope image mean? I was reading that the white means light leakage, but I'm not sure what the black means. Also, can you grade the amount of sparkle by the shades of pink/red?

Bryan----------------

Read this explanation

You see the leakage provides most of the beneficial contrast in a princess cut.

 

[headlight]

Garry-
Why is leakage good in Princess cuts but not okay for RB? Does it not contribute to a RB's "contrast" as well?
Thank you.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Read those newsletters in and around the link I provided Head light, and you will see that leakage can be good in round diamonds too

 

[headlight]

I re-read them. Also, I think the light viewer is very helpful when working with loose stones, but I just can't get a "read" with the IS on a mounted ring.
Which leakage is "better" to have (the lesser of two evils): In the table or in the girdle?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Definitely better not to have too much leakage in the table - but Sergey has discovered that our minds perception of intensity is not linear. When you see what you think is 50% pink / white - the actual amount of leakage is probably around 25% - so do not be too harsh on the slightly pale table area - but be damning of pure white.

As to have those little bits of white around the girdle - some of you may know I debated this with Brian from Whiteflash - he says he likes the old style H&A's with this as much or more as the newline / tweaked minor facets / like 8* - that have little or no leakage in this position. It seems many people think the diamond with the additional bits of leakage at the girdle look more brilliant because of the additional contrast.

 

[researcher]

I find this notion of WANTING light leakage very interesting, because people keep telling me how amazing my stone is and that they have never seen such a good ideal scope image BECAUSE of the lack of leakage. My stone scored a triple VH on the BScope (whereas stones with more white seem to do worse), so I'm really confused. I have yet to see a princess stone in person I like as much as mine (and I am always on the lookout), so I can't imagine choosing one with more leakage. I understand the need to have some leakage, but isn't that taken care of with the tips and around the girdle? I just don't see someone being happier with a stone that leaks a lot of light in the middle than one that only leaks it in small doses. This is just coming as a shocker because I hadn't heard it before!

 

[researcher]

Bryansauer~
There was a debate on PS at one point about whether the black was head shadow or scintillation. Although I'm no expert, my take is the head shadow tells people how much scintillation the stone has and therefore take those black spots as a good sign

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Just for fun, I wonder if black pique inclusions could make princess cuts look bigger.

 

[researcher]

Why would they make the stone look bigger? Not sure I follow....