|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » FireScope image?
|
|
 |
FireScope image? |
 |
| P: 2/28/2002 2:23:12 PM | |
VampireX02 Rough Rock Total Posts: 25 Last Post: 3/22/2002 Member Since: 2/26/2002 |
Every once in a while, I see a FireScope image on here...at least that's why I think it is. It's the red and black image of a stone showing light-leakage. Is there anyone who has a program out there that can plot a virtual image based on the stone's characteristics? If so, any chance I can get one done for this stone, or can someone point me in the direction of a software I can get to show visual representation of light return or leakage? Thanks. Cert: AGS Cut: Ideal (0) - Polish, Symmetry, Proportions: Ideal (0) Color: H (2.0) Clarity: SI1 (5) Carat Weight: 1.214 Fluorescence: Inert Measurements: 6.85-6.90x4.26mm Table: 54% Crown Angle: 34.9 Crown Height: 15.9% Pavilion Angle: 40.9 Pavilion Depth: 43.1% Culet: None Total Depth: 62.0% |
| Posted: 2/28/2002 2:23:12 PM | |
|
There are 4 replies to this message. There are 4 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 2/28/2002 2:47:22 PM | |
Pricescope Administrator Total Posts: 8,265 Last Post: 1/5/2008 Member Since: 1/1/2000 |
Here you are, VampireX02 :) This simulation by Diamond Calculator version 1.x is discontinued. Version 2 will be available soon. You can see some partial leakage under the table because of slightly deep pavilion and just a tiny bit steep crown.  I used 78% lower facets and 42% star facets. Pricescope |
| Posted: 2/28/2002 2:47:22 PM | |
| P: 2/28/2002 3:17:53 PM | |
|
VampireX02 Rough Rock Total Posts: 25 Last Post: 3/22/2002 Member Since: 2/26/2002 |
Can I get opinions on this image? Is it bad to have that much leakage? I see the bright white and greys...should I be concerned about it...or does this still look very good? Does that amount of leakage make a huge difference? I'm sorry if I've asked about this stone so much. I'm just really trying to make sure I got the right stone. This rates as 1.6 Excellent - TIC on the HCA. |
| Posted: 2/28/2002 3:17:53 PM | |
| P: 2/28/2002 3:31:12 PM | |
|
Pricescope Administrator Total Posts: 8,265 Last Post: 1/5/2008 Member Since: 1/1/2000 |
It is excelent stone VampireX02. The leakage is not as terrible. H If you'll look at the notes on HCA page, it says "A score below 2 (Excellent) means you have eliminated known poor performers (more than 95% of all diamonds). Your own personal preference may be for a diamond with an HCA score of 1.5 more rather than one with a lower score of say 0.5.". The stone is just a bit steep/deep. It cause some partial leakage and less spread. Both are penalized by HCA. So if you like the stone and the price is right - enjoy it. Pricescope |
| Posted: 2/28/2002 3:31:12 PM | |
| P: 3/6/2002 9:47:03 PM | |
|
VampireX02 Rough Rock Total Posts: 25 Last Post: 3/22/2002 Member Since: 2/26/2002 |
Leonid, I love my stone now that it's set...so I'm no longer looking to "decide" about my diamond. But for other readers and my now growing interest in gems, I was just curious if you could post another image of the same basic stone, just modified so that the angles and percentages are "perfect" with no light leakage. Comparing the image to the idealscope images in the tutorial section is a little difficult since this one is computer generated. I was curious to see how the computer generated the "ideal" diamond so we could compare that to the real photo in the tutorial. Since a lot of the computer generated image looks so much more "defined"....it might give us more of an idea of the difference between the two. |
| Posted: 3/6/2002 9:47:03 PM | |
 Previous Page
|
Next Page 
|
Contact Us | Back Home | Privacy Statement | Forum Agreement | Forum Policies | |
| Ideal BB Version: 0.1.5.4.beta1 | Message forum software powered by the Ideal BB |
| |
Pricescope -
Knowledge -
Diamond Prices -
Tools -
Resources -
About
© 2000-2009 Pricescope. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Disclaimer
forum archives
