ACA Classic vs. New Line - The Best Way to Compare

[kenny]

You''re probably right.
I''m too technical.

I should just ask which they like better.
I''ll bet it''s a tie.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 5/25/2006 2:29:25 PM
Author: kenny

Hey guys help me formulate my questions:

It's hard for analytic people to keep it simple. I can relate.

Here is what I have learned:

For diamonds of similar class, category and size.


'Are there any that jump out at you?' (it can be more than one)
'Why?'

'Are there any that don’t jump out at you?' (it can be more than one)
'Why?'

When narrowed to 2 diamonds:

'Do you have a preference for one?'
'Why?'

(if no preference)

'If you’re forced to select one, which will it be?'
'Why?'

 

[cutes814]

Kenny, I think that is a great way to compare and shop for stones. I might just do that the next time....I''m very interested to see what my eyes will see. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Rhino]

Is it possible to see the 3d models on these? It is possible you have a stone that isn''t painted to the point where it''d be dinged. GIA does not mass grade all painting. Curious.

Peace,

 

[kenny]

Rhino I don't know about the 3D models, maybe John does.
But look at the IS photos in my first post; the New Line painted one is blood red.
The Classis has distinctive classic leakage.
I think they were two good candidates, and were the closest in size I could find with specs that I'd consider buying.

BTW I have new respect for AGS grading.
I've worked under microscopes for 25 years.
I am VERY good at finding details, I'm actually a little famous for this skill where I work, in a field not related to gemology though.

In my office I have a Zeiss Stemi SV 11, they are fine 60x German Stereo microscopes similar to this one:


According to the AGS report the .748 ct VVS1s has 3 pinpoints.
It took me forever to find one of them, I still can't find the other two.
I even tried backlight with a large bright flourescent source under the stone, and a halogen fiber optic ring light.
These are amazingly clean diamonds.

 

[Mara]

That IS image looks pretty darn painted to me.

The GIA dinged my stone, presumably for painting (though my girdle averages 'thin'), and the IS image is not as painted as Kenny's stone.

I personally find it a little hard to swallow that the GIA doesn't mass ding painted stones...just from everything else that has been said on here, it's the feeling I get.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 5/25/2006 4:59:58 PM
Author: Mara

That IS image looks pretty darn painted to me.

The GIA dinged my stone, presumably for painting (though my girdle averages ''thin''), and the IS image is not as painted as Kenny''s stone.

I personally find it a little hard to swallow that the GIA doesn''t mass ding painted stones...just from everything else that has been said on here, it''s the feeling I get.

Hee heee.......the backpedalling will now begin.

Kenny, I''d agree with what John suggested for questions......do you prefer one more than the other? And why?

If you suggest one may be bigger, brighter, etc., you''re putting the power of suggestion that one is SUPPOSED to look bigger or brighter, and that tends to influence the answers.

By simply asking "which of these two would you pick and why?", you''ll get pure information.

Honestly, my guess is that you''re gonna get answers like "gee....eenie, meenie, meiney, moe.". LMAO --- and that''s a GOOD problem to have, because either choice is a winner.

 

[kenny]

Boy this is fun, and surprising.

I'm learning it is all about lighting conditions!
changing the lighting drastically changes the look of a diamond.
Not only that, it changes which one that I prefer.
In some conditions I prefer the NL, in other conditions the Classic.

This is going to be tough and I'm giving myself the full 10 days to decide.
I wish they were closer in size.
The classic is .748, and NL is .713.
I can tell that is giving the classic an slight edge, which I'm trying to ignore.

Tomorrow I"m driving up to Los Angeles to buy an adaptor so I can use my bellows extension with my new digital SLR and macro lens.
This should give me enough magnification for some decent close ups.
Hopefully I'll get some pics up by Mon, Tues or so.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/25/2006 11:07:51 PM
Author: kenny
Boy this if fun, and surprising.


I''m learning it is all about lighting conditions!

changing the lighting drastically changes the look of a diamond.

Not only that it changes which one that I prefer.

In some conditions I prefer the NL, in other conditions the Classic.

This is going to be tough and I''m giving myself the full 10 days to decide.

I wish they were closer in size.

The classic is .748, and NL is .713.

I can tell that is giving the classic an slight edge, which I''m trying to ignore.


Tomorrow I''m driving up to Los Angeles to buy an adaptor so I can use my bellows extension with my new digital SLR and macro lens.

This should give me enough magnification for some decent close ups.

Hopefully I''ll get some pics up by Mon, Tues or so.

lighting lighting lighting lighting lighting

sound familar? :}
Glad your having fun with them.

 

[kenny]

Jelly wrote: "Kenny, I can''t wait to hear what you think.  What happens if you get them mixed up? hehe"

They have their AGS report number laser etched on their girdles.
I can read this with the microscope at work and can just barely make it out with my best loupe.

If worse came to worse I could go to a jeweler and have them weigh them since one is heavier.

 

[Mara]

here's another note on lighting...

i like looking at stones i will own in familiar lighting. for example, i wasn't really able to get the full effect of my new stone until i got it home and was able to see it in all the same lighting situations that my old stone lived in. that is really when i was able to fully appreciate the stone's personality. in the environment in which it lives the most. and i also had the best basis of comparison in that lighting since i remembered how my other stones looked there as well.

have fun kenny ! please do post tons of pictures!

 

[kenny]

Mara it is funny you used the word personality.
I showed both stones to Jose tonight, the gift is for him.
He immediately had a gut feeling towards one and when I asked him why he said it just had more feeling. People are weird!

But then we brought them in to different lighting and I'd mix them up and asked which he liked better and it probably came out about 50/50.

I'm starting to suspect that even after we pick one for this purchase the next diamond purchase will not automatically be the same line.
I'll probably get one of each again and go through this all over again.
It is so close, yet they really do have a different look when you start paying close attention.

 

[partgypsy]

That sounds like one fun experiment!
I got a teeny tiney aca diamond set in a pendant (14 point), and looking at it with the hearts and arrows viewer could tell it was a classic line. I love this little diamond and was thinking if I got another ACA trying to find another classic. In my mind I was thinking classic may have lightly lower total brightness/brillance but more contrast, which I prefer. However, this is without seeing a new line. It makes me curious if I could even tell a difference.
Please keep us posted!

 

[Rhino]

Date: 5/25/2006 4:51:06 PM
Author: kenny
Rhino I don't know about the 3D models, maybe John does.
But look at the IS photos in my first post; the New Line painted one is blood red.
The Classis has distinctive classic leakage.
I think they were two good candidates, and were the closest in size I could find with specs that I'd consider buying.

BTW I have new respect for AGS grading.
I've worked under microscopes for 25 years.
I am VERY good at finding details, I'm actually a little famous for this skill where I work, in a field not related to gemology though.

In my office I have a Zeiss Stemi SV 11, they are fine 60x German Stereo microscopes similar to this one:


According to the AGS report the .748 ct VVS1s has 3 pinpoints.
It took me forever to find one of them, I still can't find the other two.
I even tried backlight with a large bright flourescent source under the stone, and a halogen fiber optic ring light.
These are amazingly clean diamonds.

Thanks for the info Ken. It's fun looking at these under the microscopes eh? I have 2 Leica's that go up to 64x w/trinocular heads and a 63x stereo to play with.

The IS images while helpful does not indicate the amount of painting however. The Sarin 3d files will though.

As far as questions, the key is to simply ask for the information you are looking to attain from your viewers. If you simply ask which do you prefer people may pick for reasons of size, etc. without giving thought to the optical properties. Everyone has different reasons. If you are interested in learning what people consider brighter, then simply ask ... "Which of these 2 diamonds appears brighter to you?" Keep it simple and have fun with it. Asking in that manner does not make people biased whatsoever but will and should give their honest answer about what it is they see.

All the best Ken.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 5/26/2006 6:27:55 PM
Author: Rhino

If you simply ask which do you prefer people may pick for reasons of size, etc. without giving thought to the optical properties. Everyone has different reasons. If you are interested in learning what people consider brighter, then simply ask ... 'Which of these 2 diamonds appears brighter to you?' Keep it simple and have fun with it. Asking in that manner does not make people biased whatsoever but will and should give their honest answer about what it is they see.

This explains a lot, and may explain the assertion that so many layman readily see what many experts have a hard time distinguishing.

If the question is asked "which is brighter", responders are influenced to expect that one IS brighter. It's what's known as a leading question.

I believe that asking "do you have a preference between these two stones, and and if you do, WHY" eliminates any influence, but still lets you gauge if something (such as size) is the deciding issue instead of "is it brighter", etc.

 

[belle]

Date: 5/26/2006 6:27:55 PM
Author: Rhino

As far as questions, the key is to simply ask for the information you are looking to attain from your viewers.

now we know how you obtained your test results!

Date: 5/26/2006 6:27:55 PM
Author: Rhino

simply ask ... 'Which of these 2 diamonds appears brighter to you?' Keep it simple and have fun with it. Asking in that manner does not make people biased whatsoever but will and should give their honest answer about what it is they see.

unfortunately, a leading question such as this influences people and suggests that there is one stone that IS brighter, which might not be the case. honest answers are not obtained with suggested validation.


eta: okay i see that alj already addressed this while i was composing my response.

 

[jasontb]

Date: 5/26/2006 7:23:46 PM
Author: belle

Date: 5/26/2006 6:27:55 PM
Author: Rhino

As far as questions, the key is to simply ask for the information you are looking to attain from your viewers.

now we know how you obtained your test results!

Date: 5/26/2006 6:27:55 PM
Author: Rhino

simply ask ... ''Which of these 2 diamonds appears brighter to you?'' Keep it simple and have fun with it. Asking in that manner does not make people biased whatsoever but will and should give their honest answer about what it is they see.

unfortunately, a leading question such as this influences people and suggests that there is one stone that IS brighter, which might not be the case. honest answers are not obtained with suggested validation.


eta: okay i see that alj already addressed this while i was composing my response.

So how about you phrase the question as: ''Does one stone appear brighter than the other? If so, which one?'' That is not misleading at all. There is nothing wrong with quantifying the qualities to be examined.

I work with metals, mostly aluminum, in my job. If somebody asked me, ''Do you prefer AL 7050 or AL 6061'' or ''Which is better, AL 7050 or AL 6061'' I would respond ''that is a stupid question - what do you mean by ''better''? Which do I prefer based on which criteria?''

In MOST cases you need to clearly state the criteria to be used to make an evaluation. Otherwise the evaluation means very little. Now I realize it''s different here because we are talking about beauty. But it certainly NOT misleading to ask if one is brighter. Even if brightness is not a component in our undefined term ''beauty''. AND even if you ask the somewhat misleading question ''Which stone IS brighter'' while in fact they are the same brightness, the results would show that they are the same brightness because an equal number of people would choose each.

Quit picking on Jon for no reason.

 

[belle]

Date: 5/26/2006 7:39:02 PM
Author: jasontb

Quit picking on Jon for no reason.

i''m telling my mommy on you!

 

[dhog]

Date: 5/26/2006 7:53:31 PM
Author: belle

Date: 5/26/2006 7:39:02 PM

Author: jasontb


Quit picking on Jon for no reason.

i''m telling my mommy on you!

before you tell your mommy can you tell me
whitch stone is brighter so that my daughter
can wear them at her wedding tommorrow. PLEASE???

she will be in the shade under a oak tree

 

[kenny]

People have brought up very good points, thank you.

I think I have inadvertantly wandered onto an unwanted path.
I understand there are vendors here who have made important business decisions regarding what I am comparing.
It is clear I have put myself on the spot, so to speak.
I am not in the industry.
I'm just a careful buyer trying to make the most informed decision I can.

I would still like to show the stones around at work next week but I see now that someone taking the poll can influence the outcome.
Not just in what is asked or how it is asked, but in what lighting conditions the viewer sees the stones.
Since I'm posting this I have a responsibility to be neutral and fair.

I think it is important to not plant suggestions or selectively direct attention to what may make one choice look better or worse when asking questions.
If, and I mean IF, one claimed-good-quality of non-painted stones is that they look X and one claimed-bad-quality of them is they look Y I think it would be irresponsible to direct the attention of the viewer to quality X or Y.
If I had some financial stake in this I'd love to direct attention to X or Y.
For instance if one had more colorful fire when viewed under point-light conditions it would be wrong to show them only in Flourescent light, which produces flashes of colorful fire in NO diamond.

It seems most neutral to just ask, "Which of these two would you select?" .

Also I am certain I could skew this thing by conducting the survey under one particular lighting condition.
I have already stated that in certain lighting I prefer one, in other lighting the other.

I think perhaps I should back off on the survey, or on reporting the answers.
I don't want the responsibility of hurting or helping businesses as a result of my poorly constructed survey.

 

[Kaleigh]

No Kenny, please continue this. I am very interested. I picked an ACA which is the new line for my halo pendant. I haven''t gotten it but from the pics it is an amazing stone. I think what you are doing is great for all of us PS consumers. As one consumer to another, no one is expecting this to be a highly scientific poll or experiment. Just one person sharing their thoughts on a matter which quite frankly still has me a little confused. Please continue.....

 

[aljdewey]

Kenny, that's really sweet, but your only real obligation is to yourself. No matter how fair or impartial you will try to be, the only real objective is to determine YOUR preference between these two stones.

I applaud your awareness of the influence it can have, but PS is a place for consumers to get the straight dope from other consumers. If you like one more than the other, that's fine to say. If I were looking at them with you, and I preferred the one you didn't, that would be ok to say too. One size doesn't fit all....not in food choice, not in haircut choice, and not in diamond choice.

The good news is.....either way you select, you're going to have a winner. Congrats!

 

[belle]

Date: 5/26/2006 8:06:36 PM
Author: dhog

Date: 5/26/2006 7:53:31 PM
Author: belle

Date: 5/26/2006 7:39:02 PM

Author: jasontb


Quit picking on Jon for no reason.

i''m telling my mommy on you!

before you tell your mommy can you tell me
whitch stone is brighter so that my daughter
can wear them at her wedding tommorrow. PLEASE???

she will be in the shade under a oak tree

your daughter is getting married tomorrow?
congratulations!

that is so exciting.
i wish you all the very best!

hopefully your daughter has two piercings in each ear

 

[belle]

Date: 5/26/2006 8:09:46 PM
Author: kenny
I think perhaps I should back off on the survey, or on reporting the answers.
I don''t want the responsibility of hurting or helping businesses as a result of my poorly constructed survey.

kenny, i totally understand. the timing has made this a tough spot to be in. i hope you will still share your experience as an overall process though, since it has the potential to put many first time internet buyers at ease. if anything, i understand that you have discovered that it is difficult to see any substantial differences in precision cuts, even though the idealscope images may suggest otherwise. that in itself is important for people to recognize.

i''m REALLY hoping you will share some fantastic loose diamond pics with us!

 

[dhog]

Date: 5/26/2006 8:22:00 PM
Author: belle

Date: 5/26/2006 8:06:36 PM

Author: dhog

Date: 5/26/2006 7:53:31 PM

Author: belle

Date: 5/26/2006 7:39:02 PM


Author: jasontb



Quit picking on Jon for no reason.

i''m telling my mommy on you!

before you tell your mommy can you tell me

whitch stone is brighter so that my daughter

can wear them at her wedding tommorrow. PLEASE???


she will be in the shade under a oak tree

your daughter is getting married tomorrow?

congratulations!

that is so exciting.

i wish you all the very best!


hopefully your daughter has two piercings in each ear

no she only has 1 hole in each ear
my wife has 3 holes in 1 ear and 1 in the other
she likes to be different.yes she is getting married
tommorrow.

Kenny as a proud owner of several ACA''S I know
how you feel.

you need to continue to do what you set out to do
and to do it the way you want it done.after having
my ACA''S for 5 months now I still can''t figure them out
so all I do is add them to the collection and buy more,rather
than send them back.they are all beautiful to my eyes and to
my wifes eyes and it would cost me my life if I even tryed
to do something with any of them.My wife wears them proudly
and is excited every time she is complimented on their
beauty. this includes several local jewelers also.

kenny have fun with your tests Tom

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Aww, Tom, what a great guy you are! I hope my husband will aspire to be the owner of many ACA''s (or other equivalent H&A''s) so I can wear them!! I remember your beautiful photos of your wife''s e-ring stone.

What size are the earrings?

Congratulations on your daughter''s wedding!

 

[dhog]

Date: 5/26/2006 9:19:03 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006



What size are the earrings?


Congratulations on your daughter''s wedding!

2 on the left are .50 carat each in w prong
1 is .31 carat in 3 prong martini
1 is .23 carat in 3 prong martini
on 1 ear she wears .50,.31, .23
when we go wine tasting or out to dinner
she looks like a christmas tree.they are
all I in color and the photo was taken with
daylight coming through the window with the
earrings setting on top of her hickory dresser.

 

[kenny]

The Classic ACA is on the left.
New Line ACA is on the right.
It is very difficult to center one stone so the arrows are aligned correctly.
It is near impossible to center two.
I'll try to do better with the future shots.

These were taken outside in full shade.
The stones were side by side as you see them, this is not two pics spliced together.

The arrow distortion you see my fault, not the fault of the stones.
I’ll be workin to get better pics but thought I’d put these up.



The shot of 5 is the whole menagerie.
Left is a .442 H SI1 AGS Ideal 0 cut
Classic ACA .748 I VVS1 AGS Ideal 0 cut
New Line ACA .713 I VVS1 AGSIdeal 0 cut
Light-carat Solasfera F VS1 GIA in Gelin Abaci Tension Setting in Platinum
Christian Bauer .24 Emerald Cut F VS no-report in brushed Platinum

http://photobucket.com

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Terrific closeup pictures, Kenny!

I''ll have to say, in those pictures, I can tell NO difference in the stones.

 

[Lynn B]

OOOOH OOOOH OOOOOOH!!!

GREAT photos, Kenny! What wonderful EYE CANDY!!!

I can''t tell a difference between the two ACAs either... but maybe after more photos???! Please keep ''em coming!!!!