strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
An asscher that breaks the rules and is still great.
- Thread starter strmrdr
- Start date
- Status
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Sarin,
Notice that by the numbers its a little off square, shallow and the table is on the large side.
But it still works :}
The numbers will get you close usualy but a great vendor is vital.
If I was calling in stones Id have passed this one up by the numbers because a lot of them cut this way dont work.
ignore this picture and go to the next one.
Notice that by the numbers its a little off square, shallow and the table is on the large side.
But it still works :}
The numbers will get you close usualy but a great vendor is vital.
If I was calling in stones Id have passed this one up by the numbers because a lot of them cut this way dont work.
ignore this picture and go to the next one.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Bscope and link
http://www.goodoldgold.com/1_29ct_h_vvs1_asscher.htm
lots and lots of fire :}
Nice :}
http://www.goodoldgold.com/1_29ct_h_vvs1_asscher.htm
lots and lots of fire :}
Nice :}
Kaleigh
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 29,571
icelady
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2003
- Messages
- 1,030
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Hey Storm
I don''t say this to be negative, but I find it strange that you''ve noticed copyright on images and reports that are copyrighted by others and claim pay for publication rights.
I''m sure Jonathan doesn''t object to you publishing the images, but perhaps it is better to note the bottom of any such posting that it is used and reprinted with permission I( providing it is).
Rockdoc
I don''t say this to be negative, but I find it strange that you''ve noticed copyright on images and reports that are copyrighted by others and claim pay for publication rights.
I''m sure Jonathan doesn''t object to you publishing the images, but perhaps it is better to note the bottom of any such posting that it is used and reprinted with permission I( providing it is).
Rockdoc
Mara
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2002
- Messages
- 31,003
i've noticed that i seemingly tend to prefer thinner windmills on the asschers...for whatever reason i feel like the fatter ones take away from what i prefer to look at, the step pattern. so this stone would be right up my alley! it would make a fabulous pendant! good find...i am so going to come harass you when i start looking YEARS down the road for my asscher.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Actually, what attracted my attention was that Strm seems to be flogging Good Old Gold relentlessly on this forum as of late.
You have provided a font of wisdom on asschers Strm, but I find the latest turn of events to be rather odd, kind of skirting the edge between impartial observer and cheerleader.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
When it comes to asschers whoever has some great ones at good prices gets my attention.
GOG has been getting some real nice ones in recently and putting them up.
I cant win when it comes to this issue.
I make no secret of it that GOG is one of my favorite vendors but so is whiteflash, diamondexpert, winkjones and others.
BUT:
Its the diamond and nothing more that prompted this post.
If one of the other vendors mentioned had this diamond Id still be commenting on it.
I thought it was interesting and thought some others would be also.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2000
- Messages
- 6,738
Great thread. We get lots of questions from folks on "best cut for Asscher" and this does address some of them nicely.
My take on this diamond is that it is a very pretty stone, cut a bit like an Asscher, but far from the Asscher cut model. It is shallow, not deep. This is a plus in objective terms, but means it is not cut like an Asscher cut. It is a two-edged sword.
The corners are not as large as a true Asscher. You may prefer this, but it is different than the standard model.
This is a great modern interpretation, evolutionary approach to Asscher cut. It may even succeed better at the job. I just think one should not delude themselves in calling this an Asscher cut. It is off the standard although a lovely diamond in its own right. SOmeone should brand this cut style. It is a winner.
My take on this diamond is that it is a very pretty stone, cut a bit like an Asscher, but far from the Asscher cut model. It is shallow, not deep. This is a plus in objective terms, but means it is not cut like an Asscher cut. It is a two-edged sword.
The corners are not as large as a true Asscher. You may prefer this, but it is different than the standard model.
This is a great modern interpretation, evolutionary approach to Asscher cut. It may even succeed better at the job. I just think one should not delude themselves in calling this an Asscher cut. It is off the standard although a lovely diamond in its own right. SOmeone should brand this cut style. It is a winner.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Date: 4/6/2005 25:33 PM
Author: oldminer
Great thread. We get lots of questions from folks on ''best cut for Asscher'' and this does address some of them nicely.
My take on this diamond is that it is a very pretty stone, cut a bit like an Asscher, but far from the Asscher cut model. It is shallow, not deep. This is a plus in objective terms, but means it is not cut like an Asscher cut. It is a two-edged sword.
The corners are not as large as a true Asscher. You may prefer this, but it is different than the standard model.
This is a great modern interpretation, evolutionary approach to Asscher cut. It may even succeed better at the job. I just think one should not delude themselves in calling this an Asscher cut. It is off the standard although a lovely diamond in its own right. SOmeone should brand this cut style. It is a winner.
Interesting comment.
This one should be more properly called a S.E. (square emerald) rather than an asscher I agree.
But it is more of an asscher than 95%+ of the diamonds sold as asschers today are.
I go back and forth between wanting to reserve the term asscher for the "classic" cut ones or using the more modern usage.
After discusing it with some vendors I came to the conclusion that it would not be a winnable battle to harp on the issue.
The name asscher sells.
By any name this diamond rocks and has the proper asscher patterns if not the outline.
Hest88
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,357
I dunno, Strm. I love Jonathan, and the light return on this stone is pretty nice, but it''s really not what I''d call an asscher look at all. It''s just a square emerald. Not that there''s anything wrong with that, but just as a square radiant isn''t a princess, a square emerald isn''t an asscher.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
I dont disagree with you but look around at what is being called an asscher in the trade and this one is closer than most.
If I thought I could win the battle of names id consider taking it on but its unwinnable.
Not to pick on whiteflash but look at this one and tell me which is the better diamond called asscher...
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=GIA-13156813#
I have an "asscher" or square emerald cut that has a large table and a depth of only 64.5%. The stone is very pretty, has a really nice windmill, an obvious step pattern and the ''clipped" corners. I actually like the square emeralds b/c emerald cut has always been my favorite but I like a more "square" stone. I like to call my stone a MODERN asscher....I guess this term is most accurate
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2003
- Messages
- 15,808
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,836
I have no evidence to see that this is a nice stone.
(And none to say it is not nice)
I had already mentioned on antoher thread that the use of back lighting by both the Bscope and the method of photography mean both are not good guides with very leaky stones. The more leaky - the worse/better the effect (worse for buyers, beter for vendors)
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ideal-scope-image-of-princess-on-black-background.27328/ this thread has an explanation.
(And none to say it is not nice)
I had already mentioned on antoher thread that the use of back lighting by both the Bscope and the method of photography mean both are not good guides with very leaky stones. The more leaky - the worse/better the effect (worse for buyers, beter for vendors)
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ideal-scope-image-of-princess-on-black-background.27328/ this thread has an explanation.
royalasschergirl
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
- Messages
- 112
I don''t know what the ''official'' rules are in regards to what should or should not be called an Asscher, but my boyfriend and I picked out and have purchased a Royal Asscher after much research and lots of waiting for the right one. What i''ve been told by Fabrikant and the vendor we bought from (Mednikow) is that the only thing that should be called an Asscher is either an original Asscher from the 1920''s time period or the recently patented Royal Asscher. But speaking to a point made above, the term is used all the time for square emeralds, octagonal step cuts, whatever the case may be, because as someone stated earlier, that name sells -- whether it is authentic or not, its used all the time. That''s got to be frustrating for them to have people gaining from their name, but that''s what you get when you create something so beautiful, i guess!
Hest88
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,357
No it''s not! It looks nothing like an asscher, Strm.
And if anyone should be technically precise, it should be us. That''s like saying that everyone uses the term "ideal" to mean whatever they want, so we should just do the same. Or that everyone calls a square brilliant cut a princess, should we shouldn''t care anymore how true that is.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Date: 4/7/2005 30:12 PM
Author: Hest88
No it's not! It looks nothing like an asscher, Strm.
And if anyone should be technically precise, it should be us. That's like saying that everyone uses the term 'ideal' to mean whatever they want, so we should just do the same. Or that everyone calls a square brilliant cut a princess, should we shouldn't care anymore how true that is.
Like it or not the lightly clipped cornered SE's are lumped in with the asschers.
As long as the patterns are proper I have no problem with it.
I like the lightly clipped corners better anyway.
I could post dozens of pictures of what is sold as asschers that follow the visual pattern this one does.
Thats not going to change.
I dont have a problem hanging the term modern asscher on them.
Hest88
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,357
Again, I don't think just because everyone out there calls anything they want an asscher means that we, an educational forum, should be doing the same.
In my mind there are only 3 types of asschers:
1) Antique asschers produced earlier in the 20th century
2) Royal Asschers
3) Modern asschers - non-branded square emeralds that try to look as much like the RA as possible without violating the trademark.
I can handle a larger table and less depth, but if it's not trying to be octagonal, it's not any sort of asscher in my book---no matter how it's marketed.
And the patterns are *not* proper with this stone. It's completely square, without a hint of the octagonal windmill effect, unless you want to call that "X" in the middle that all square emeralds would have just by function of being square, a windmill.
In my mind there are only 3 types of asschers:
1) Antique asschers produced earlier in the 20th century
2) Royal Asschers
3) Modern asschers - non-branded square emeralds that try to look as much like the RA as possible without violating the trademark.
I can handle a larger table and less depth, but if it's not trying to be octagonal, it's not any sort of asscher in my book---no matter how it's marketed.
Hest- i saw your ring on the other forum...it is beautiful!!! I too have a .87 "asscher" square emerald cut, modern asscher...whatever stone in an antique repro setting. Your asscher is similiar to mine...and you called it an asscher....everyone calls their asschers that even when none of them really are....old asschers have a small table and are deep....
Royal asscher, MODERN asscher, square emerald, antique asscher...W-H-A-T-E-V-E-R you call it.....it can be a gorgeous stone. Hest your stone is beautiful....my stone is beautiful ( large table, 64.5 depth)....Different strokes for different folks, everyone has a preference, I actually like the more "emerald cut" appearance of my stone...others may not. Who cares what the stone is called if it is nice looking and you are happy with it. Do we all forget what the diamond actually stands for anyways....LOVE, not square cut love or royal love, or love with windmills and steps and love lacking patterns...just pure simple Love!
Hest88
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,357
I see what you mean, and you''re technically right, but I think it''s more of a square with clipped corners. If the sides aren''t close enough to the same length to visually mimic a stop sign I don''t really think of it as octagonal. I guess what I''m looking for is something *visually* octagonal as opposed to literally one, if that makes any sense.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Date: 4/7/2005 4:46:35 PM
Author: Hest88
I see what you mean, and you''re technically right, but I think it''s more of a square with clipped corners. If the sides aren''t close enough to the same length to visually mimic a stop sign I don''t really think of it as octagonal. I guess what I''m looking for is something *visually* octagonal as opposed to literally one, if that makes any sense.
Makes perfect sence.
I went thru the same process on it and as iv poorly been trying to say Iv talked it out with people in the trade and its not going to change.
To harp on it too much is going to cause more confusion than good overall.
Thats my conclusion anyway.
- Status
How to Buy the Best $25,000 Engagement Ring: A Smart Shopper’s Guide
How to Buy the Best $25,000 Engagement Ring: A Smart Shopper’s Guide - 02/24
300x240.png)