Asscher Eye Test

[neolith]

Hi Asscher lovers,

I''ve assembled full images on 4 asschers for your expert opinions.

I tried to include only the essential information to eliminate any bias on size, color, or clarity. Images have been scaled to similar size. Vendor watermarks were a bit of a pain to remove, so please try to ignore them, as I know we have our favorites here.

So, here we go, in no particular order:
I.
Depth: 67.9%
Table: 64.3%
Crown height: 14.1%
Girdle: very thick
Length-Width Ratio:1.03

II.
Depth: 69.0%
Table: 57.2%
Crown height: 15.1%
Girdle: thick
Length-Width Ratio:
1.04


III.
Depth: 69.13%
Table: 69.9%
Crown height: 13.2%
Girdle: med-thick
Length-Width Ratio: 1.01

IV.
Depth: 61.96%
Table: 62.65%
Crown height: 13.1%
Girdle: medium
Length-Width Ratio: 1.004

Let me know if I''ve left out anything critical, and I''ll post more info after the first round of opinions.

 

[Moh 10]

In order of preference:

3
2
4
1

1 has those wonky windmills that don't have the straight edges that I like.

4 lacks contrasting steps in the middle.
Contrast brings out that unique assher pattern.

 

[strmrdr]

4 then 2

4 should have really nice spread.

 

[JoeNewbie11]

In order, top to bottom:

3
4
1
2

 

[strmrdr]

Have Jon do a video 4 vs 3 and any other he has similar and you will see why I like 4 better :}

 

[purrfectpear]

3, 2, 4, 1 but that is based more on personal preferences of overall shape and windmill shape, than anything else

 

[LaurenThePartier]

3 for the shape and windmills, 4 for the ASET, 2 again for the shape and windmills.

 

[Ellen]

Looking at the actual pics, I like 3 best. But looking at ASET''s, I like 4. I agree with strm''s suggestion to have them compared in a video.

 

[Rhea]

Disclaimer, I know nothing about asschers and decided to look for fun.

4, then 3, then 2, least favorite is 1.

 

[Deelight]

Knowing bugger all about asschers I would pick 4 , that one looks yummy to me

 

[neolith]

Hi everyone,

Thanks very much for *all* of your input -- expert or not.

Seems like everyone was unimpressed by 1, which matches my disappointment after paying to have it brought in for photos.

3 seemed to capture a lot of attention. Think it must be the contrasts that it shows -- it''s the zebra of the bunch. Actually, 3 and 4 are already in a couple of the GOG videos together. Guess I''m not seeing what you are, Storm, as I thought 3 showed off a bit more sparkle and fire, but it was close.

I was looking closer at the helium scans on 3, though, and it shows the girdle non-existent on one corner and an extra facet on the pavillion step closest to the girdle (4th step?). Is this something to be concerned about or the sign of a bad cut? Or is the cutter just trying to cut the bruises off a bad apple? This kind of tickles my symmetry bone in the wrong way, but I''m trying to remain subjective and go for the best looker.

Adding one candidate to the list as the proportions seemed interesting. This one has all it''s weight in the vertical, with a tall crown and deep pavillion.

V.
Depth: 74.8%
Table: 62.9%
Crown height: 17.6%
Girdle: Very thick
Length-Width Ratio: 1.014

 

[Liane]

I like 4, but I''m a RB/OEC girl and don''t know much of anything about asschers.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/18/2009 8:35:25 AM
Author: neolith



V.

Depth: 74.8%

Table: 62.9%

Crown height: 17.6%

Girdle: Very thick

Length-Width Ratio: 1.014

Would need a large discount for me to consider it 17.6% isn''t a high enough crown to make up for the depth.
22% and we would be talking kewl.

 

[neolith]

Date: 5/18/2009 11:44:09 AM
Author: strmrdr
Would need a large discount for me to consider it 17.6% isn''t a high enough crown to make up for the depth.
22% and we would be talking kewl.

Hi Storm,
Do you mean the crown height is not high enough for it to perform well, or it''s just lacking in value? I think I''m willing to pay more for beauty than size.

All,
I don''t think 2 got a fair shake -- the lighting in the photo made it seem kind of washed out. Here''s another photo at a slight tilt.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/18/2009 12:50:14 PM
Author: neolith

Hi Storm,

Do you mean the crown height is not high enough for it to perform well, or it''s just lacking in value? I think I''m willing to pay more for beauty than size.

lacking in value.
You can get equal or better beauty at a more reasonable depth.
If it had the right crown height then it would be a whole different ball game because it would bring to the table some features that make it worth it.

 

[DiamondFlame]

Sorry but I would hesitate to pick on the basis of these images alone. They don't tell the full story. To judge their personality, I would need to look at videos at least.

 

[neolith]

On 5, is the blurriness in the center squares just because it''s out of focus due to the depth of field of the camera, or is it bad optics in the diamond?

Storm, I went back and did a close rewatch of the videos showing 3 and 4. I take back what I said, and now know what you mean.

1 is out, 3 is almost out. Unfortunately for me, the clock is ticken -- any of these close to kicken?

 

[neolith]

Date: 5/18/2009 1:13:12 PM
Author: DiamondFlame
Sorry but I would hesitate to pick on the basis of these images alone. They don''t tell the full story. I would need to look at videos at least.

Yes! We are, afterall, in the YouTube era. Unfortunately, not everyone is as rockin'' as GOG -- seems a lot of the business is still stuck in the stone age.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/18/2009 1:15:02 PM
Author: neolith

1 is out, 3 is almost out. Unfortunately for me, the clock is ticken -- any of these close to kicken?

4 is, 2 might be

 

[musey]

Just based on the pictures, I like 3 the best

 

[Steel]

Hi Neolith,

I LOVED your avatar.
do....do...do....do.do.do....doooo...do...do..dooo.dododooodo.....do.do.do. dooo.doooo.doo.doo....dooo.dooo....doooo (In case you don''t recognise it, that is the A-Team by doo-doo''s

)

I only liked 2.





Karl - I really respect your eye for asschers and hope you will be still posting when I get around to buyin''

 

[kcoursolle]

Based on the pics I like number 2, but I''m not an asscher expert around here...

 

[Ellen]

Have Jon compare 2 and 4, and pick the best one. He''s in the best position to tell you which is performing the best.

 

[AprilBaby]

I am late and I know nothing about asschers, but I like #3.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/18/2009 6:42:27 PM
Author: Ellen
Have Jon compare 2 and 4, and pick the best one. He''s in the best position to tell you which is performing the best.

2 is at WF 4 is at gog

 

[bright&shiny]

4 - no question in my mind. If it''s the stone I think it is, it has an awesome video!

 

[stone-cold11]

Vote for #4 too.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 5/18/2009 5:32:33 PM
Author: Steel
Hi Neolith,

I LOVED your avatar.
do....do...do....do.do.do....doooo...do...do..dooo.dododooodo.....do.do.do. dooo.doooo.doo.doo....dooo.dooo....doooo (In case you don''t recognise it, that is the A-Team by doo-doo''s

)

I only liked 2.







Karl - I really respect your eye for asschers and hope you will be still posting when I get around to buyin''

THANK YOU Steel honey, that was driving me mad with the av, George Peppard right?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/18/2009 11:06:16 PM
Author: strmrdr

2 is at WF 4 is at gog

Ah, ok. Then I vote 4.

 

[neolith]

Date: 5/19/2009 6:33:40 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 5/18/2009 11:06:16 PM

Author: strmrdr


2 is at WF 4 is at gog

Ah, ok. Then I vote 4.

Ah, I knew it. See? There *is* vendor bias. Next time I''ll have to take the time to photoshop out the watermarks

Thanks for all your input, though, this has been interesting and helpful.