Ideal-Scope Interpretation (isolated faded area)

[carlos_n]

Looking for any kind soul that would put this very confused man out of his ideal scope misery

The diamond I found is a GIA, 1.7ct, J, VS1, EX, EX, EX, No Fluorescent.

In paper it seems to be really good, including a HCA of 1.4 (See image and parameters attached)

However the ideal-scope image shows a bit of fade on two of the arrows and I can't tell wether that significantly compromises the brilliance, fire and scintillation of the diamond.

In your opinion is this stone worth $12,500, and more importantly, would it perform well?

Thank you very very much to you and all the community for being so unbelievably helpful!

-Carlos

 

[carlos_n]

In case it helps, here is the graphic with the clarity imperfections

Thanks again!

 

[Rhino]

depth of reds account for intensity of light return. Technologies such as the BrillianceScope pick this up as well however in the one area above would likely be difficult to see with human vision

 

[carlos_n]

depth of reds account for intensity of light return. Technologies such as the BrillianceScope pick this up as well however in the one area above would likely be difficult to see with human vision

Hi Rhino, thanks for your input.

If I understand correctly, you are saying that the difference is negligible to the human eye, therefore is still good?

If I may, I get gist of how to read the IS (red black etc) but can't find much on the web as to what the faded arrows are - particularly when they are visible by eye on the zoomed photograph. Any ideas?

 

[farrahlyn]

just throwing these out there for comparison. these are AGS000 so all ideal parameters and light performance.

$12,050
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-j-color-vs1-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-2541824

$12,250
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-j-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-1006249 I just wonder if this is eye clean

$12,000
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-j-color-vs1-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-2653920

 

[flyingpig]

I think rhino is talking about the light leakage under the table at 130 between two arrow shafts.

Regarding regarding the faded arrows, my guess is that it has to do with obstruction. In the IS, the degree is light obstruction is 30, created by the black part of the IS scope.. In the magnified photo, it seems bigger than 30, created by the camera. Simply put, in the magnified photo, the diamond may be exposed to more black (camera body) than in the IS. Therefore, you see more black and sharp arrows. This is not unusual with diamonds with a 40.8/35 ish combo

Other explanation is an improper setup for photography or the IS image and the photo not belonging to the same diamond. Neithet is the case IMHO.

 

[Rhino]

If I understand correctly, you are saying that the difference is negligible to the human eye, therefore is still good?

Yep. It doesn't represent the rarest IS results but is still good.

If I may, I get gist of how to read the IS (red black etc) but can't find much on the web as to what the faded arrows are - particularly when they are visible by eye on the zoomed photograph. Any ideas?

I believe i know precisely. The pic, based on the culet looks pretty centered and the variations you're seeing in the arrows in particular would be due to variances in the pavilion main angles. The pavilion mains that have red bleeding into them are likely over the 41 degree threshold while the black ones under 41. I've personally optically designed diamonds to purposely have the red on those mains instead of black so i speak with a tad of experience and have witnessed these variations before. Hope that helps.