Opinions on these Idealscopes

[wonka27]

Hi guys...little bit of help here. These are potentials for stud and pendant project. What do you think of these three idealscope images.

.31 H SI1
Depth 61.3%
Table 54%
Girdle 0.7-1.6
Culet PT
Crown Angle 35.100
Pavilion Angle 40.600

 

[wonka27]

Second

.323 I SI1
Depth 61.2%
Table 57%
Girdle 0.9-1.4
Culet PT
Crown Angle 34.400
Pavilion Angle 40.900

 

[wonka27]

Third

.330 I SI2
Depth 62.5%
Table 54%
Girdle 0.9-2.0
Culet PT
Crown Angle 34.100
Pavilion Angle 41.000

 

[strmrdr]

all 3 look awesome to me :}

 

[wonka27]

Thanks strmrdr

Anyone else want to give it a crack who is familiar on what these things predict?

 

[Diamondsbybree]

I like all three, but number one is WOW looking~! But then it could be that the picture is larger...

 

[noobie]

wonka are you anywhere near NY. All of them look great. It would interesting if you see them and tell us what you think since they all have different crwon pavillion angle combinations

 

[oldminer]

Looks like #1 is best, #3 is second and #2 is third, but this is more guesswork than anything factual. Probably they all will look great provided the photos have not been doctored or touched up to improve them. While I figure that an image like #1 can't be a poor stone, I am not so certain that one can use the I-S to discern nuance differences in light behavior by interpreting the image. It may be a more complex situation that I have simply never looked into. When we see agreat I-S image, we have never been dissapointed in the look of the diamond, so that's a great benefit of this tool.

 

[wonka27]

Thank you all for your replies and opinions. I do appreciate it a great deal!

 

[quaeritur]

I like #1 best. Least leakage - just an awesome IS image.

 

[quaeritur]

Oops, yeah, what oldminer said.

 

[MelanieC]

Hi,
I agree- I like #1. I looked at a lot of these stones when I was picking my stud a few weeks ago.