Can someone help with an idealscope image?

[Rock Star]

Hi there. Was hoping someone more educated on looking at idealscope images could take a look and help me determine if I need to keep looking. Everything I''ve read on a Radiant was not to expect a perfect idealscope, but it looks like I''m looking a lot of light in this one. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Rock Star]

Here is the AST on it also.

 

[JulieN]

it's alright, possibly very nice. any opinion from WF? i would wish for the sides to have more red, though. seems like it's difficult to have a stone with robust performance under the table as well as at the edges.

Maybe compare to: http://www.whiteflash.com/xfactor/X-Factor-cut-diamond-43.htm

How big is your stone? Corners are a little on the small side. I think I like that.

 

[Rock Star]

Thanks Julie ... it''s a 1.11 stone. I''ve been really having trouble finding a good stone in the 1.25 to 1.35 range so I went a little smaller that I originally wanted. The dimensions are pretty good, but thought I might be losing a little light with a lower table. (64%) I was thinking the same on the sides, but I wanted to get some more opinions. WF basically indicated that it was a "pretty" radiant. Not a spectacular stone, but better than a lot of them. It looked okay under the ASET, but I was a little disappointed in the idealscope. The lost light on the sides is what I was concerned about. I like the small corners also.

 

[kcoursolle]

As far as radiants go, it looks fine. You might be able to find one with slightly more return on the edges, but this would probably be at the sacrifice of the great return you are getting under the table as julien mentioned. Overall, it looks nice.