ASET comparison

[ovaldiamonds]

Just out of curiosity, going by the ASET alone is there a large difference/preference between these two? I'm leaning towards one but just trying to better my knowledge of how to read ASETs for ovals

option 1:



option 2:

 

[tyty333]

The first ASET does look a little more lively compared to the second. Have you seen a comparison of the stones in a video side by side?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

different setups - top is better by a whisker - both not bad - way better than average

 

[diagem]

different setups - top is better by a whisker - both not bad - way better than average

In order to get a real idea of the diamond's optical potentials, Aset tilts will allow significantly more information which is certainly missing it the static faceup.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

In order to get a real idea of the diamond's optical potentials, Aset tilts will allow significantly more information which is certainly missing it the static faceup.

I use stereo Ideal-scope and ASET in DiamCalc

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

Excellent info from Garry here. And I agree, both are better than average by a fair margin!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Understanding ASET signatures in many fancy cut diamonds requires more experience than translating an ASET map of a round brilliant.

Rounds allow us to think a bit more simplistically - red light return very good, green light return good, white leakage bad.

Coming from that place it is easy to think both ovals might have a bit too much leakage and thus appear watery or lack some brilliance. But interestingly, certain types of leakage in certain facet arrangements like "crushed ice" can actually create positive contrast. Conversely, bright red areas can sometimes create light patterns that can be a little distracting in real life.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Understanding ASET signatures in many fancy cut diamonds requires more experience than translating an ASET map of a round brilliant.

Rounds allow us to think a bit more simplistically - red light return very good, green light return good, white leakage bad.

Coming from that place it is easy to think both ovals might have a bit too much leakage and thus appear watery or lack some brilliance. But interestingly, certain types of leakage in certain facet arrangements like "crushed ice" can actually create positive contrast. Conversely, bright red areas can sometimes create light patterns that can be a little distracting in real life.

Well said Brian. When there is a really bright center and a dull top and bottom the effect can be off putting and highlight the dull bits. So in oveals for example - I like to see the tips of the stones showing red and blue.

 

[AV_]

Digressing,

In order to get a real idea of the diamond's optical potentials, Aset tilts will allow significantly more information which is certainly missing it the static faceup.

This reminds triple portraits, or analytical cubism - possibly a one off exercise to understand a cut concept