1.80 vs. 1.87 ideal round

[ivany]

I've requested idealscopes of two stones: 1.87 H VS1 and a 1.80 H VVS2

Both are almost identical with respect to their price. Prior to taking a look at the idealscope images, what do the experts think?

Thank you!

 

[tyty333]

Without seeing an idealscope I like the 1.80 better. Looks like they are both AGS000? I dont think it matters which one
you pick!

I couldnt get the report up on one of them.

 

[pfunk]

Cut seems a little more chaotic on the 1.87 but it still looks to be a pretty stone. It also looks to be a stronger H color than the 1.80 which to me looks like a lower H color. That is impossible to tell from the video because it depends on exact same conditions from video to video which doesn't happen I am sure. But it would be one of my questions no doubt.

 

[RockyRacoon]

The 1.80ct would be the best choice, from these options.

The 1.87ct has the note 'Clarity based on clouds not shown.' Although unlikely to affect performance in a VS1 stone, it is still a note that can sometimes indicate performance issues.

Since clarity is important to you (reflected by your choice of two higher-clarity stones), opt for the 1.80ct.

Should be great!

 

[ivany]

Thanks for the replies!

I created a side by side comparison between the two stones. Looks like the 1.87 does have a more chaotic pattern. Does that mean that the 1.80 would be better in terms of light performance? or would the two side by side result in negligible differences?

Although I agree that the light conditions are not necessarily identical between the two, it looks like the 1.80 is a stronger H color, whereas the 1.87 looks like its closer to a G. Is this what everyone else is seeing?

My last question is how come the two stones have AGS certificates that are on different templates? Is this a reason for concern? Also looks like the 1.80's certificate breaks the cut grade down into three categories: light performance, polish, and symmetry. The 1.87 only shows a cut grade that is not broken down further.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Thanks for the replies!

I created a side by side comparison between the two stones. Looks like the 1.87 does have a more chaotic pattern. Does that mean that the 1.80 would be better in terms of light performance? or would the two side by side result in negligible differences?

Although I agree that the light conditions are not necessarily identical between the two, it looks like the 1.80 is a stronger H color, whereas the 1.87 looks like its closer to a G. Is this what everyone else is seeing?

My last question is how come the two stones have AGS certificates that are on different templates? Is this a reason for concern? Also looks like the 1.80's certificate breaks the cut grade down into three categories: light performance, polish, and symmetry. The 1.87 only shows a cut grade that is not broken down further.

AGSL has several different reports. These are both modern light performance based grading reports. If you look to the upper right of the DQD report you can see the light performance grade is 0 (Ideal). The platinum report has the added benefit of showing the ASET light map generated by the ray tracing process.

 

[ivany]

Texas Leaguer, thanks for explaining the differences between the two reports.

James Allen's staff were able to provide light performance images of the two stones. I've uploaded them here. It looks like the 1.80 has more distinct and symmetric pattern. When compared side by side, would they be noticeably different? I've got no way to tell because I can't compare them in person. What does everyone think?

 

[pfunk]

I think in general our eyes are drawn to the sharp contrast that crisp, well defined arrows create. So I think most people will find the look of the 1.80 a little more appealing. I do think I would specifically ask them about the color comparison though.

 

[emmebee]

I vote for the 1.80, from an IS perspective as well.

 

[Madison2]

I like the 1.80 diamond.

 

[ivany]

Thank you everyone! I've decided on the 1.80. Members of this forum have taught me that its not necessarily how big it is , its also about the light performance.

 

[Madison2]

I think you chose wisely

 

[teobdl]

You can't go wrong with either option. But if I were making the decision I'd choose the 1.80 for factors that, honestly, I don't know whether they'd make a noticeable difference: slightly fatter arrows, more symmetric looking images. In other words, it's more of the safe, prototypical AGS0 that is recommended.

Edit: just saw you chose the 1.80. Nice choice.