Asscher Help: Calling Strmrdr and others

[JulieN]

Looks like you're off to a good start.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/31/2007 5:37:50 PM
Author: antiqueasscher
Thanks Storm. I do like the stone and it''s a consideration and very likely pick, but I do think I am going to have #3 called in still. For such a large purchase I don''t mind a few extra dollars to make sure there isn''t another stone I may like a bit better. So, hopefully I''ll have some more pics to post Tue or Wed next week and who knows maybe a diamond purchased by the end of the week.

Man that thought is exciting but gives me butterflies just thinking about it.

thats kewl
Id like nothing better than for you to have a bunch of kicken stones to pick from :}

 

[antiqueasscher]

Ok, here''s another one that a jeweler just got in and sent to me

1.23ct
H
VS2
Depth: 70.2%
Table: 52.6%

That''s all I got so far plus the pictures I''ll post, let me know your thoughts. Especially compared to the prior 1.23 with pics I posted earlier.

 

[antiqueasscher]

pic

 

[antiqueasscher]

sarin

 

[strmrdr]

whats the actual table size sarin isnt the same as what you posted?

either way its faults are the opposite of the other, it has some issues in the center which in my opinion is more critical.
This one is a little brighter but the other has better patterns and need the right table size for this one.

looking again its also on the verge of unsquare.

 

[antiqueasscher]

Ok, here''s the idealscope and sarin for #3. The jewelers camera broke and with it being the middle of holy week (for multiple faiths) they will not be able to get me a standard/magnified image until next week. Please let me know your thoughts based on the image available, especially compared to the #8 image I posted before.

 

[antiqueasscher]

sarin

 

[antiqueasscher]

Here''s #8 again just to reference back to for comparison

#8
1.23
Color: H
Clarity: VVS2
Depth: 67.3%
Table: 56%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Medium
Measurements: 6.04*6.00*4.04
Ratio: 1.01
- My Comment: Medium Fluorescence? H, depends on pictures.

 

[strmrdr]

#3 is the winner of the IS contest so far but really need a reg pic or aset to make sure.
My gut says that #3 is going to be the winner and kicken.

 

[antiqueasscher]

You know better than I do Storm, but is there anything wrong with the 2 dark marks on the inner points of the 2 windmills on the left side? or is this nothing?

As far as other pics, I'll get a magnified image of #3 on Mon. or Tue next week, but because so many jewelers are off because of holy week I am not at risk of having someone else request the diamonds before then.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/3/2007 6:08:23 PM
Author: antiqueasscher
You know better than I do Storm, but is there anything wrong with the 2 dark marks on the inner points of the 2 windmills on the left side? or is this nothing?

As far as other pics, I''ll get a magnified image of #3 on Mon. or Tue next week, but because so many jewelers are off because of holy week I am not at risk of having someone else request the diamonds before then.

too small to see and will blend in anyway.

 

[strmrdr]

His IS setup isnt as refined as some of the other vendors making them hard to read but gives the general idea, an image looking like that under for example WF IS setup would be a dog. In this case its the setup and not the stone the regular pics will confirm it so thats why they are needed.

 

[antiqueasscher]

Alright I have a pressing problem. #3 the 1.29ct was called in to the jeweler who provided me w/ the IS image, but has the broken magnified camera that won't be up and running until Mon. They just called me and told me the jeweler who owns the stone has called, has a buyer and wants the diamonds returned. My jeweler called me with a last chance, if I buy the stone now it's mine(w/ a 30 day no questions asked return policy). If I pass on it, the stone is gone. Based on the IS image is #3 'kicken' enough to buy and is the return policy enough insurance to cover just in case? I think the price $6,830 is very good as well. What should I do??? Quickly please

Also, if I'm going to have the same company set the stone in a ring, should I still have them send me the stone and have it individually appraised and viewed or let them keep it, send me magnified images when they are ready and then go from there? Thanks again.

 

[antiqueasscher]

Ok, I just talked to a woman in the lab in NY who had both of the stones in her possession and was viewing them as I talked to her. She said the 1.29, the only mark (VS1) is on the girdle, towards the outside and would be covered by a prong, it even took her a few minutes to find this as she couldn''t track it down. She said when she got the 1.23 in she thought it was an amazing stone and would''ve recommended it (and still does), but that when she got the 1.29 in she was even more amazed. On a personal scale she''d give the 1.29 a 10 and the 1.23 a 8.5 (with 10 being the highest). She said the 1.23 is just a bit darker in the center and the 1.29 has some extra brightness coming from the center instead. She said I couldn''t go wrong with either stone, but if the 1.29 is w/in my price range she''d go with that.

Even though I feel a bit rushed, I''m comforted in knowing that the 1.23 is the jewelers in house diamond and it''s the 1.29 that I could potentially lose and they are calling me about. They said they called me to warn me because I have lost 2 other stones to other buyers and they didn''t want to see it happen again. If I felt they were trying to scam me or rush me into a decision it would be for their diamond, not one that another seller owns and is requesting back.

Sorry for the rant, but I''m trying to get more info out there to hear people''s responses. Quickly though please.

 

[widget]

Hi AA...since I'm a strict "eyeball" person, I've stayed out of this thread so far.

I'd say GO FOR IT (1.29)...but obviously only if you can return it with a full refund (minus shipping) if you or your appraiser finds something wrong.

I'd definitely want to see the stone myself before committing to it and having it mounted.

widget

 

[strmrdr]

At this point id go for the 1.29 take a look at it within the return period.
The vendors in person comparison agrees with what im seeing on the IS but compared to the crud out there id put them at 9.8 and 10.
The VS1 inclusion is no issue at all.

 

[antiqueasscher]

Well, that''s what I did. The ring ships out tomorrow, now I just need to find a good appraiser in St. Louis. Any recommendations?

 

[strmrdr]

I don''t know of one in St. Louis.
You might start another thread titled: apraiser needed in ST. Louis and see if the experts can recommend someone.

 

[antiqueasscher]

Well, as you may read on another topic, my appraisal session went well. The appraiser, Therese Kienstra, found the asscher to be stunning, loved the facets and said I had found a great diamond. I should also mention that she was surprised and happy with my knowledge of the stone and having requested and viewed an Idealscope of my diamond, this praise goes out to this entire forum. Thanks Pricescope.

So, I'm keeping the 1.29ct and am now in talks with James Allen about a semi-custom ring. I found a ring on another site, but wanted a few minor changes, which JA is willing to do at a reasonable cost.

I'm going to have a ring similar to the Bella: http://www.knoxjewelers.biz/index.htm?crn=203&rn=303&action=show_detail

with the filigree brought down a bit further (to around a 9:00 and 3:00 point rather than the 10 and 2 range the Bella has).

I'm also going to have them do the miligraining seen on this ring http://www.knoxjewelers.biz/index.htm?crn=213&rn=969&action=show_detail
rather than what is seen on the Bella.

As for the prongs, I was planning to keep the rounded prongs that you can see on the Bella. I know many on here prefer the claw prongs on an asscher, but I personally don't like the talon like look they have and prefer something more subtle.

I'd love to have peoples opinions as this process continues for me and want to thank everyone for their help so far.

 

[JulieN]

yay. setting is nice. people prefer the claw look for asschers because it's the Harry Winston look. Winston + emeralds=totally classic.

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 4/10/2007 7:28:23 PM
Author: antiqueasscher
Well, as you may read on another topic, my appraisal session went well. The appraiser, Therese Kienstra, found the asscher to be stunning, loved the facets and said I had found a great diamond. I should also mention that she was surprised and happy with my knowledge of the stone and having requested and viewed an Idealscope of my diamond, this praise goes out to this entire forum. Thanks Pricescope.

So, I''m keeping the 1.29ct and am now in talks with James Allen about a semi-custom ring. I found a ring on another site, but wanted a few minor changes, which JA is willing to do at a reasonable cost.

I''m going to have a ring similar to the Bella: http://www.knoxjewelers.biz/index.htm?crn=203&rn=303&action=show_detail

with the filigree brought down a bit further (to around a 9:00 and 3:00 point rather than the 10 and 2 range the Bella has).

I''m also going to have them do the miligraining seen on this ring http://www.knoxjewelers.biz/index.htm?crn=213&rn=969&action=show_detail
rather than what is seen on the Bella.

As for the prongs, I was planning to keep the rounded prongs that you can see on the Bella. I know many on here prefer the claw prongs on an asscher, but I personally don''t like the talon like look they have and prefer something more subtle.

I''d love to have peoples opinions as this process continues for me and want to thank everyone for their help so far.

I love those setting ideas, your ring is going to be gorgeous!!!