ASET vs. IS ???

[salmon]

Can some experts using layman terms help me a bit. I have a few questions:

1. If given the perference, should one use a ASET or IS when trying to determine better light return, contrast, and etc.? I read a post by Gary and he uses both. IS weeds out the dogs and the ASET helps you narrow down the stones even more.

2. For fancy shapes like Princess Cut, How does one interpret colors on the ASET and IS? Personally it seems easy on rounds. You see the red, green, and blue and understand what they mean. I have no PROBLEM WITH ROUNDS. I HAVE A HELL OF A TIME USING an ASET ON PRINCESS CUTS. You see more green and blue than red, but the stone still may classify as Ideal. But would never classify as a ideal round. Help! Its confusing to me because I''m looking at rounds and Princess cuts, and they seem to have different color interpretations when using the ASET. this also applies to the IS.

3. Could someone (Gary/ Roc Doc/GOG) please post ASET images of a AGS 0 or Ideal Princess vs. a dog, so I can have a guide, as I sort through these stones. The same comparison using rounds would be nice too, if you have the time. I''m sure the pricescope community would love the "light show". Thank you in advance.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I will be working on ASET tutorial on Ideal-scope as soon as poss
But it will take some time

Date: 5/13/2006 1:17:04 AM
Author:salmon
Can some experts using layman terms help me a bit. I have a few questions:

1. If given the perference, should one use a ASET or IS when trying to determine better light return, contrast, and etc.? I read a post by Gary and he uses both. IS weeds out the dogs and the ASET helps you narrow down the stones even more.

2. For fancy shapes like Princess Cut, How does one interpret colors on the ASET and IS? Personally it seems easy on rounds. You see the red, green, and blue and understand what they mean. I have no PROBLEM WITH ROUNDS. I HAVE A HELL OF A TIME USING an ASET ON PRINCESS CUTS. You see more green and blue than red, but the stone still may classify as Ideal. But would never classify as a ideal round. Help! Its confusing to me because I''m looking at rounds and Princess cuts, and they seem to have different color interpretations when using the ASET. this also applies to the IS.
It is one of the big AGS problems - to call a diamond that has at best about 90% of the performance of a well cut round an ideal cut princess is bad Karma. We think it would be fair to rate every stone compared to a standard say a Tokkowsky round - and that should be done for say the same weight as well as a say 1ct standard. eg the best .30ct princess under performs a .30ct round - but a 5ct princess can start to rival a 5ct round. but that is not going to fix your immediate problem Salmon - although you can do some of this in GemAdviser already where the standard is the 1ct Tolkowsky round.
3. Could someone (Gary/ Roc Doc/GOG) please post ASET images of a AGS 0 or Ideal Princess vs. a dog, so I can have a guide, as I sort through these stones. The same comparison using rounds would be nice too, if you have the time. I''m sure the pricescope community would love the ''light show''. Thank you in advance.

this image is a rough mock up for a completely different purpose - but it might help you.

Also I am not entirely sure that I like to block the light from below yet - it is a good thing to do if you think there is such a thing as an ideal fancy shape - but I like to see the leakage and know if it is next to the blue - blue and leakage side by side can result in a large enough dark zone to make a stone unattractive.

 

[JulieN]

Garry, could you describe princess that looks like it could be good by IS but rejected by ASET?

 

[salmon]

Gary you''re awesome, my thoughts exactly. There has to be a standard or what''s the purpose of grading, if it''s comes down to subjective color analysis (light return). The aforementioned comment is in regards to light performance only, not clarity, cut, or carat. I love your scientific way of thinking Gary. Eagerly waiting for your tutorial. Thanks.

 

[salmon]

Gary you''re awesome, my thoughts exactly. There has to be a standard or what''s the purpose of grading, if it''s comes down to subjective color analysis (light return). The aforementioned comment is in regards to light performance only, not clarity, cut, or carat. I love your scientific way of thinking Gary. Eagerly waiting for your tutorial. Thanks.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thanks thanks Salomon Salmon

This picture shows my skills with my new version of Adobe after years using the student version

I would like (not love) the ideal-scope image but reject the ASET image.
The stone has too much green- and almost too much blue - both these colors are often adjacent to the leakage - which is why i prefer to be able to see the leakage.
I also rotate the stone about 15 degrees each way from side to side (holding stone from sides) - and if it is a border line call - from diagonal to diagonal (holding stone from points) - and I am looking out for big triangular leakage zones - yucky

 

[JulieN]

Thanks, Garry! Looking at the two images, it doesn't seem like blue ASET directly corresponds to black IS? (I thought it did.)

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

the blue covers 30 degrees from the azimuth - the black ideal-scope covers about 25 degrees - but there are some strange little anomallies there also???

 

[oldminer]

ImaGem''s Verigem device, though far from a pocket sized tool or so inexpensive as ASET or IS, uses the same "standards" of measure to compare rounds, princess and marquise diamonds. The numbers representing "Excellent" for brilliance, sparkle and intensity differ with these three shapes as performance changes with cut, but if one wished to compare a round with a princess for some reason, it would be no problem to do so. The ImaGem point of view is that comparison of different shapes does not mean as much to consumers as comparison of like shapes when making a buying decision. Most consumers pick a shape first and then go on with looking for the best stone for their budget.

Comparison of one shape to another is a valid concern, but by the time one settles on the shape they want to purchase, the real issue is getting a good diamond of a single shape.

 

[salmon]

Well said David,

I guess I''m in a pickle. I''m looking at both because my future wife loves the Tiffany Lucida and the Tiffany''s Round Brillants. I want to get the maxium light return, scintillation, and fire. most people feel a brillant round is the hands down winner. But after looking at some Tiffany''s Luicda cuts, i''m not sure anymore. Those damn things sparkle like crazy. So my compromise is trying to find a princess cut or square modified brillant with those firey, optimal light return, and great scintillation qualities. I''ve gone back and forth on purchasing from Tiffany''s (Price premium)BUT I REALLY WANT TO GIVE THE PRICESCOPE VENDORS A CHANCE TO FIND ME A WINNING PRINCESS BEFORE I PULL THE TRIGGER ON THE TIFFANY''S LUCIDA. Pricesope is a dangerous monster. Sometimes the more you learn the more confused you get. Which explains why I''m going back forth between round brillants and Princess/ modified square brillants cuts. I really feel a certain loyalty to the pricescope community, I''ve learned so much here and feel it would be a disloyalty to purchase elsewhere. I just want to find a Princess or something close that blows the socks off the Lucida. I haven''t found it yet, but I''m still searching. Thanks for all the info Pricescopers!!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Salmon Lucida is not special - the lighting in Tiffany stores is special.
Tsake your ASET or Ideal-scope with you - and any diamond (cleaned) that you can get your hands on - and then compare it in the Tiffany lighting.

 

[salmon]

Thanks Gary,

Well, let me ask you this: In your professional opinion, what type of stone should I go for that could replace the Lucida in shape and beauty. I''m sure you''ve seen many more than I have. maximum fire, brillance, and optimal light return are the most important factor for me.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

There are a number of recently designed proprietary square stones that some of the vendors around here offer. I do not do product placements - but others will help you out I am sure.

If you like Lucida - then you might find a princess will have too small a flash.
The non shattered glassy radiants will have something of the look of a Lucida - but very well cut old miners and old europeans might be worth a look too.

And have you seen asschers in person?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/13/2006 7:28:52 AM
Author: salmon
Thanks Gary,


Well, let me ask you this: In your professional opinion, what type of stone should I go for that could replace the Lucida in shape and beauty. I''m sure you''ve seen many more than I have. maximum fire, brillance, and optimal light return are the most important factor for me.

square h&a will be closest to a round performance in a square out of whats available right now.


http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/Shape/Square/


An asscher has an awesome look all its own.

 

[salmon]

Gary,

I''ve never seen an Asscher up close. I hear they show color and clarity more than rounds and etc. I was afraid to consider asschers because I hear they''re so difficult to judege and I''m a newbie. Thanks for the advice.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Lucida will throw color worse than an asscher
Stay above G in 1ct stones and F and above in +2ct sizes and the asschers will be fine

 

[salmon]

Cool Gary,

I assume VS2 in clarity will suffice??

 

[JulieN]

salmon, may I say you don''t buy a Lucida for it''s performance, but for the "look" of a step-cut that''s not glassy (emerald, asscher, sorry, don''t know how to describe that) and for the high crown that makes it look older.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/13/2006 9:29:57 AM
Author: salmon
Cool Gary,

I assume VS2 in clarity will suffice??

Or a nice SI1

 

[RockDoc]

Got a new computer today, and would love to post some of the previous ASET photos as well as the PGS results, but will probably take me a few days to recover those files and re-install all the programs.

But I will

Rockdoc