ASET/Ideal-Scope/Spec Evaluation for 1 Ct Round

[Azetab]

Hey All,

I wanted to get some more experienced eyes to look at the ASET/Ideal-Scope/specs and pics of a diamond I just found that seems to meet all my requirements and give me their input on whether it's a good diamond/good price/good value? I've been looking for a H&A superideal diamond D-F around 1 carat or larger (price cap is ~10k USD or so for the stone). My future fiancee prefers a diamond with the most scintillation, brilliance + fire. Are there anything in the ASET/Ideal-scope images that would be bad for scintillation?

One thing that I worry about is that the diamond is VS2, which I worry would decrease the scintillation of the diamond. Is this something that I need to worry about? Also, can someone take a look at the AGS report and let me know if the inclusions are in an area that is bad: http://www.agslab.com/pdf_sync_reports/104091315010-PGRH.PDF

Diamond Specs:
Size: 1.088 Carat
Price: $9979 USD
Price Per Carat: $9172 USD
Cut: Ideal (A Cut Above)
Color: E
Clarity: VS2
Depth %: 60.2%
Table %: 56.7%
Crown Angle: 34.0*
Pavilion Angle: 40.9*
Measurements: 6.66 x 6.75 x 4.03mm
HCA Score: 1
Fluorescence: None

Link to diamond: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3788917.htm

 

[gm89uk]

Looks very nice. VS2 wouldn't affect scintillation, most Si1s wouldn't and a lot of Si2s also wouldn't. Clarity is mainly regarding seeing inclusions, rather than affecting performance. Sometimes Si diamonds can appear cloudy if they are the primary inclusions.

Scintillation is a characteristic to do with cut, and cut alone.
Personally it wouldn't be my top choice ACA, it is slightly painted (which increases brightness and slightly reduces scintillation) although this effect is minimal. The crown is the lower end of the spectrum, geared for brightness rather than fire (this is also minimal comparison).

I'd choose from these diamond over this one if you want scintillation to be more maximised (and a cost saving):
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-584874.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3784269.htm

This diamond presents the best value for money, significantly bigger face up appearance and great stats:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2674676.htm

It's a G which is still very white.

 

[Azetab]

Looks very nice. VS2 wouldn't affect scintillation, most Si1s wouldn't and a lot of Si2s also wouldn't. Clarity is mainly regarding seeing inclusions, rather than affecting performance. Sometimes Si diamonds can appear cloudy if they are the primary inclusions.

Scintillation is a characteristic to do with cut, and cut alone.
Personally it wouldn't be my top choice ACA, it is slightly painted (which increases brightness and slightly reduces scintillation) although this effect is minimal. The crown is the lower end of the spectrum, geared for brightness rather than fire (this is also minimal comparison).

I'd choose from these diamond over this one if you want scintillation to be more maximised (and a cost saving):
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-584874.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3784269.htm

This diamond presents the best value for money, significantly bigger face up appearance and great stats:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2674676.htm

It's a G which is still very white.

Thanks for the suggestions and explanations, they are very helpful! What guide would you recommend to learn more about painted diamonds?

You seem to be saying G is ok, so would you prefer this diamond: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3817240.htm (cheaper, G color, bigger, same cut) over the previous one you linked: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-584874.htm in terms of value and maximizing scintillation.

For the diamond you recommended as the best value for money, is it better because the size is much bigger for the same price as the one I initially linked? I assume that the scintillation will be slightly worse because the cut isn't as good, but are you saying the increase in size more than makes up for the decrease in scintillation? Trying to get more clarity into your thinking behind what you consider the best value. Thanks for the help!

 

[bmfang]

Whiteflash's Premium Select range is nothing to be sneezed at. For me, that collection more than beats a large majority of diamonds that are listed on James Allen as their light performance is pretty damn fine.

The 1.26 G VS2 that gm linked to is a killer stone in terms of price vs performance vs carat size. The ASET for it is what one would expect to see for a stone cut to ideal proportions. The reason why that 1.26 wouldn't fall into ACA territory is because of the faint fluorescence that GIA has graded it as having. If I remember correctly, it is an ACA requirement that no/negligible fluorescence must be present in the stone. If you are willing to max out your budget, that 1.26 is the way to go.

 

[tyty333]

You pretty much cant go wrong with an ACA stone...they are highly vetted so each stone will be beautiful.
I agree with the others ...1.26 G/VS2 would be a good balance of value/size if that is what you are looking
for. G will be very white in a GIA/AGS graded super ideal cut stone. The one you picked is lovely too
though if you need to stick with high color for a reason.

 

[bmfang]

Thanks for the suggestions and explanations, they are very helpful! What guide would you recommend to learn more about painted diamonds?

You seem to be saying G is ok, so would you prefer this diamond: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3817240.htm (cheaper, G color, bigger, same cut) over the previous one you linked: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-584874.htm in terms of value and maximizing scintillation.

For the diamond you recommended as the best value for money, is it better because the size is much bigger for the same price as the one I initially linked? I assume that the scintillation will be slightly worse because the cut isn't as good, but are you saying the increase in size more than makes up for the decrease in scintillation? Trying to get more clarity into your thinking behind what you consider the best value. Thanks for the help!

Re: painting & digging, checkout this PS article
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/visible_effects_painting_digging_superideal_diamonds

The scintillation has everything to do with proportions. And the 1.26 G VS2 has very nice proportions (crown angle, pavilion angle, table and depth percentages). Clarity plays a minor role and that stone doesn't appear to have any inclusions that would impact on its light performance based off the inclusion plot. The bigger the stone, the more light it will return if it is cut well.

Ultimately comes down to whether or not you want an ACA which has similar proportions to this Premium Select stone (for a lower carat weight most likely in the colour range you are going for) and potentially whether you value a GIA grading or an AGS grading (with branding of the stone as an ACA) more.

 

[gm89uk]

Thanks for the suggestions and explanations, they are very helpful! What guide would you recommend to learn more about painted diamonds?

You seem to be saying G is ok, so would you prefer this diamond: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3817240.htm (cheaper, G color, bigger, same cut) over the previous one you linked: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-584874.htm in terms of value and maximizing scintillation.

For the diamond you recommended as the best value for money, is it better because the size is much bigger for the same price as the one I initially linked? I assume that the scintillation will be slightly worse because the cut isn't as good, but are you saying the increase in size more than makes up for the decrease in scintillation? Trying to get more clarity into your thinking behind what you consider the best value. Thanks for the help!

I wouldn't assume that scintillation will be slightly worse. Some stones will be discounted from ACA due to nuisances in maintaining brand consistency, rather than any effect in reduction of visual performance in real life. This premium select is discounted for two obvious reasons, a depth 62 (62.2, so slight reduction in spread. This does not affect visual performance. The reduction is spread is a non issue as it is still significantly bigger than the ACA stones. Secondly as bmfang noted, it has faint fluor. This also doesn't affect visual performance. People talk about noticing a difference between superideals and ideals, this would represent the very top of ideal and may have gotten superideal if it was slightly shallower and without fluor. The hearts look great to me. Those minor nuisances work to your advantage, as they rid the stone of the ACA brand, which means it demands less premium. At the same time you still get the excellent lifetime trade up policy.

It is best to ask whiteflash to compare these stones in person for you and they will comment on the perceived scintillation and answer you honestly. You can also enquire about why it didn't get an ACA branding (I'd imagine the above reasons would be mentioned).

 

[Azetab]

I wouldn't assume that scintillation will be slightly worse. Some stones will be discounted from ACA due to nuisances in maintaining brand consistency, rather than any effect in reduction of visual performance in real life. This premium select is discounted for two obvious reasons, a depth 62 (62.2, so slight reduction in spread. This does not affect visual performance. The reduction is spread is a non issue as it is still significantly bigger than the ACA stones. Secondly as bmfang noted, it has faint fluor. This also doesn't affect visual performance. People talk about noticing a difference between superideals and ideals, this would represent the very top of ideal and may have gotten superideal if it was slightly shallower and without fluor. The hearts look great to me. Those minor nuisances work to your advantage, as they rid the stone of the ACA brand, which means it demands less premium. At the same time you still get the excellent lifetime trade up policy.

It is best to ask whiteflash to compare these stones in person for you and they will comment on the perceived scintillation and answer you honestly. You can also enquire about why it didn't get an ACA branding (I'd imagine the above reasons would be mentioned).

Thanks for the explanation. Good to know that the depth and faint fluor will not affect visual performance. What do you think about this diamond compared to the 1.26 WF Premium Select?: http://www.b2cjewels.com/dd/7023884/1-20-carat-round-diamond-g-color-vs1-clarity

 

[gm89uk]

This is also a great diamond. It is not true hearts and arrows, although it is a very well cut diamond. You can see the clefs between the hearts and some twisting in the V's. This is also evident on the hearts and arrows in the AGS certificate where clefts are highlighted in red for clarity. This VS1 has some dark carbon inclusion but they are far too small to be resolved with human visual acuity, in my opinion, without a loup.

B2C provide excellent value for money. It is a top end ideal cut, but not a superideal. If you want specifically the best of the best cut, you need to purchase from a super ideal brand. Only you can decide if this level of cut is enough for you. Visually I highly doubt there would be much difference without a loup and a very well trained eye. Some people NEED to know that they have the best of the best.

Personally if it was my money, I would buy top end ideals after a lot of assessment) UNLESS the diamond in question was of high value and I needed to upgrade later.

If you ever want to upgrade, you need to pay a 20% restocking fee for B2C. In JA you need to pay double the price of the original stone. With WF you simply hand the old one in and get one of equal or higher value.

 

[bmfang]

I remember looking & commenting on this stone on another thread where that OP was comparing it against a Brian Gavin Signature H&A stone.

This B2C stone is well cut - a good solid ideal cut in my books with very good ASET and idealscope images. But if you were to upgrade this stone later, your 20% restock fee will be almost the equivalent to the extra you pay for the WF 1.26 that gm originally recommended to you.

Only you can tell whether or not you are willing to spend the extra cash for you on a WF stone or a stone from other PS recommended vendors.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Just a policy note about Whiteflash categories as the question has been asked here about why a diamond from our Premium Select category did not make A CUT ABOVE. We did make a change that not everyone is aware of.

We recently 're-purposed' our Premium Select category to house our growing in-stock inventory of GIA diamonds. Previously they were scattered throughout our Expert Selection category. In some cases our GIA diamonds might have light performance images comparable to stones in our ACA category, but the first criteria for ACA is a report from AGSL verifying that the diamond has passes through their full light performance assessment system and received a triple ideal grade. The purpose for our Premium Select category is to offer select, precision cut diamonds accompanied by light performance diagnostics, for those shopping primarily for GIA graded diamonds.

Our Expert Selection category is composed of AGS Ideals that for one or another technical reason did not make all the qualifications for A CUT ABOVE. Premium Select can be thought of similarly as "GIA ES" and should not be viewed as our "third best" category.

Hope that helps understanding our in-house vetting system.

 

[gm89uk]

In some cases our GIA diamonds might have light performance images comparable to stones in our ACA category, but the first criteria for ACA is a report from AGSL verifying that the diamond has passes through their full light performance assessment system and received a triple ideal grade.

Thanks Texas Leaguer. For clarification, if you were to have a GIA stone that could be a real candidate for ACA, I'd assume you would recertify the stone? I ask as is it then correct to assume premium selects also missed out on ACA for whatever reason? Or are you keeping your high performing GIA stones as PS to help grow your GIA inventory? I hope you don't mind me asking these questions.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

gm89UK,
Thanks for the questions. Regarding the first one, while it would seem logical that we would, there are logistical challenges to sending diamonds to both labs. Because we are so cut-centric, we feel an AGSL report is a better pedigree. However, GIA enjoys enormous trust in the market, and for good reason. Unfortunately, their cut grading system is too broad to distinguish well cut stones from ideal and super ideal. Our approach is to offer both. By providing the additional diagnostics, customers can have confidence that the GIA stones we offer are at the top of the GIA Excellent range, and are fully vetted and deliverable.

 

[Azetab]

Looks very nice. VS2 wouldn't affect scintillation, most Si1s wouldn't and a lot of Si2s also wouldn't. Clarity is mainly regarding seeing inclusions, rather than affecting performance. Sometimes Si diamonds can appear cloudy if they are the primary inclusions.

Scintillation is a characteristic to do with cut, and cut alone.
Personally it wouldn't be my top choice ACA, it is slightly painted (which increases brightness and slightly reduces scintillation) although this effect is minimal. The crown is the lower end of the spectrum, geared for brightness rather than fire (this is also minimal comparison).

I'd choose from these diamond over this one if you want scintillation to be more maximised (and a cost saving):
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-584874.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3784269.htm

This diamond presents the best value for money, significantly bigger face up appearance and great stats:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2674676.htm

It's a G which is still very white.

Hey gm89uk, haven't bought the diamond yet, but I just found this diamond also on WhiteFlash that has a similar carat weight to the one you linked me as the best value, and it also seems to have slightly better specs:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3765687.htm

What do you think about this diamond compared to the GIA one?