shape
carat
color
clarity

comparing 2 ideal scope images

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

GlacierHunter

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
12
I am comparing two round brilliant diamonds (not H&A) Ive found on the internet. They''re both 1.5 ct, I, SI1 and the same price. One has a better HCA score, while the other has a better ideal scope image. Not sure which is more important. I need a little help making the decision, as Im new to this game.

Heres the first, its a 1.54 ct. with an HCA score of 1.2-EX ex-ex-ex-vg. The image can be seen at http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=630776&file_name=3


Next is a 1.53 ct. with an HCA score of 1.7-EX ex-vg-vg-vg. The image can be seen at http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=629966&file_name=3


The second ideal scope image has a nice deep red color, and not as much leakage around the girdle. The first image also looks good, but I havent really looked at enough ideal scope images to really tell. Are both stones good choices? How much "better" of an ideal scope image is the second?

Thanks for the help,
Jeff
 

Stephan

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 13, 2003
Messages
2,917
Deep red is very nice on an idealscope, but some pink areas can be very good on a diamond.
I think I prefer the 1.54 because it's shallower than the other one.
 

valeria101

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2003
Messages
15,809
These seem to ahve been taken in different light conditions... so the one difference that seems substantial is the darkness of the arrow heads - this woudl mean they are less aparent on the stone with the "pink" picture. And I would not think that a few white specs around the girdle make allot of difference anywhere but on the Iscope pic. These being said, both stone look quite promissing, as much as one can tell from HCA scores and existing Iscope prints.

The right hand pic is darn close to picture perfect (the two white specs indicate a slightly smaller hart on the back behind the spot, I would think, but have no other consequence). I bet WF will answer your questions about what tells these stones apart in person...

These two diamonds are not pictured anywhere - would seeing them under notmal lighting, not the Iscope, make a difference ?
rolleyes.gif


W2p.JPG
 

pqcollectibles

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,441
The IS images look like they came from a Classic ACA (left) and a New Line ACA (right).
rolleyes.gif
 

GlacierHunter

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
12
Thanks for the opinions...

I asked WF to give me their opinion of how the stones compare in person. They have been very helpful. Hopefully I'll hear from them tonight.

As far as my preference, Im leaning towards the 1.54. It has a faceted girdle, which I prefer. Also a medium to sl thick girdle (1.6% to 2.0%), which is nice because Im paranoid about the stone ever chipping. The 1.53 has a thin girdle (0.8% to 1.3%), which Ive heard is a "safe" thickness also, but it still worries me.

The 1.53 has a "med blue" flouresence on its GIA report, which I think would be pretty cool, as long as it doesnt appear oily in sunlight. I dont think medium blue flouresence should cause this, right?
 

quaeritur

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
1,238
Beautiful stones, both of them. The medium blue fluorescence should not be any problem. If anything, it might help the I color look even whiter! That oily look from fluorescence only seems to happen in extremely rare cases. Personally, I just love fluor. Looks like a winner!
1.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top