Could use some diamond stud earings advice

[Ellen]

Date: 11/22/2006 5:35:51 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 11/22/2006 4:33:03 PM
Author: Ellen

John (and belle) say the differece is so subtle, people need coaxing to see the difference. I wonder then, why bother, if they are THAT close.

But then, kenny gets opinions from people (and I would assume doesn''t say which is which) and reports that results were tied, and no mention of anyone saying they couldn''t tell the difference. Plus, kenny could notice they behaved differently in different lighting, which again tells me, there IS a more noticable difference.

I''d hazard a guess that no one said ''I cannot tell the difference'' for two reasons......

#1 - because they were told up front that there was a difference in cut, so they think they are supposed to see a difference....and
#2 - because they were asked to pick one. Uunless the choices presented were a) I prefer the one on the left, b) I prefer the one on the right, or c) I like them both equally, they likely wouldn''t say ''I can''t tell the difference.''

Further, Kenny simply said ''which one do you like more'', and they selected one. Once. And in his case, one was bigger, so you couldn''t mix them up and have someone pick more than once....they would be able to see which was bigger.

It''s much different when you sit with 5-6 stones (a mix of classic and new line) that are all the same size, and you are asked to pick them in order of preference. And then mix up the stones and repeat that exercise....and do it 3-4 times. I''ve done that at Whiteflash twice now, as has Mara, and I can assure you that we''d be hard-pressed to consistently pick out one style from the other.

Alj, thanks. I came to the same two conclusions after kenny''s second post.

As for the last part of your post, it just begs my question MORE.

lol



John, when you can!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 11/22/2006 5:43:38 PM
Author: Ellen
Alj, thanks. I came to the same two conclusions after kenny''s second post.

As for the last part of your post, it just begs my question MORE.

lol

Ellen, the best I can think to offer as to "why do it" is this:

For the same reason that some people buy VVS stones over VS stones.........
For the same reason that some people buy a D instead of an E.........
For the same reason that some people prefer a 1.50 stone more than a 1.49 stone...........

Because it satisfies the MIND. Buying a diamond is a blend of what your eye sees and what your mind sees. Some folks want the *mental* piece as well as the visual.

There is not a visual difference between a 1.49 diamond and a 1.50 diamond of similar cut. So why does someone choose to pay the premium for the 1.50? Because it satisfies their MIND.

Same with new line vs. classic.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 11/22/2006 6:00:32 PM
Author: aljdewey


Same with new line vs. classic.

 

[Kim N]

Alj, I think I''ve read in past posts that you said classic seemed livelier, and I remember your example of the concert with the camera flashes versus the lighthouse. Besides the size and quantity of flashes, what would you say about the color/fire in both? I''ve heard that new line is slightly more colorful while classic has slightly more scintillation--would you say this was true when you looked at both of them side by side in those experiments?

 

[kenny]

BTW, both ACAs that I had for a week were the same color and clarity.

The New Line was 0.71 ct. or 5.83 - 5.85 mm wide
The Classic was 0.74 ct. or 5.88 - 5.91 mm wide

Their sizes were so close to my eye that I could not keep track of them by size.
So I put little white tags on the bottom of each clip ring.
One one tag I wrote A, on the other B.

After a week I did get to know them well enough that I could correctly guess which was which without looking at the tag.
But I guess someone may argue that I was able to make out that 0.05 mm difference.
I don't think so though.
I believe that I got to recognize their slightly different character.

But they had to be side by side to tell the difference.

If I were to buy a pair of earrings I would give no consideration to mixing or matching ACA types.
(Unless someone were to wear them both on the same ear lobe - Yes some people do this.)

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/22/2006 4:33:03 PM
Author: Ellen

John (and belle) say the differece is so subtle, people need coaxing to see the difference. I wonder then, why bother, if they are THAT close.

For those who celebrate, I hope everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving yesterday!

Ellen - Thanks for being patient. I took time to put together some background and technical discussion for perspective. These observations are based on our experiences.

Background

Imagine a world without Ideal-scope.

Brian Gavin developed ‘A Cut Above’ over a decade ago. He used his eyes to judge beauty and a H&A viewer to judge precision. He introduced what we call “ACA Classic” in the late 1990s.

In 2000, as cyberspace flourished, the Ideal-scope was introduced by this chap named Holloway. It revolutionized the internet market: A diamond’s natural light return could now be demonstrated with a photo. ‘A Cut Above’ and other premium diamonds enjoyed the credibility this innovation brought. Whiteflash and other sellers adopted it and it has since become a widely-accepted internet standard.

After 2000, as ideal-scope gained momentum, enthusiasts voiced praise for the all-red reflector image pioneered by Eightstar. There was consumer demand for this look, so Brian developed New Line: He incorporated that method of brillianteering with rough best suited to it while maintaining ACAs overall parameters with both. Brian’s priority has always been appeal to the naked eye and precise cutting, so the differences were kept minimal.

Having said that, we all know Pricescopers love to get detailed, so here is ACA info that may help with your technical questions - and might answer why there is no single answer.


ACA Classic and New Line

Will I see a difference? 1: Maybe. It depends on the diamonds

Going back to ideal-scope images: Something rarely mentioned here (I hope this will be remembered) is that “Classic” and “New Line” are not absolute values. Each diamond falls somewhere on a sliding scale. Any two Classic or New Line diamonds may be close or far away from each other in terms of ACP, or average crown painting.

For techno-heads, this article explains ACP (pages 2-3).

ACA Classic avg about 0.5 ACP.
ACA New Line avg about 3.75 ACP.
We consider diamonds in in the middle overlapping styles.

Examples

In our experience - all else being equal - only Herculean eyes in certain lighting will note any difference between 0.5 and 1.5 ACP - or even 1.5 and 3.3 ACP. There’s a better chance someone will differentiate between 0.5 ACP and 4.0 ACP, but the ability to see a difference still relies on lighting. When a difference between Classic and New Line is noted it’s fewer but larger colored flashes in scintillation as ACP increases.

For the record, the diamonds Kenny bought and compared were 1.0 ACP (Classic) and 4.0 ACP (New Line).

Will I see a difference? 2: Maybe. It depends on the person

Everyone is different. Some people can tell D from E in color. Some can see inclusions in VS+ diamonds. Most can’t. But like color and clarity perception, sensitivity to slight differences in cut also varies among people (also dependent on lighting). One’s ability to make distinctions may improve with time and study - this happens among pros - so the best way to maximize your own ability to see slight distinctions is to spend time cuddling with many different real diamonds in real life… Volunteers?

Will I see a difference? 3: Maybe. It depends on the lighting

Ok. I think everyone understands this?

Coach: “Gentlemen, this is a football.”
Player: “Hey coach, could you slow it down a bit?”

So... If “Maybe” then why bother?

Ellen asked "...why bother - if they are THAT close?"

It's a good question. In fact we don’t. Our diamonds are not identified as New Line, Classic or in-between on their description page.

So why do we offer comment? Because of consumer interest. Our observations on this forum and the technical articles on our site are composed because some enthusiasts hunger for “nano-spec” distinctions. We hear and obey. In fact, labs differentiate between invisible differences like VVS1 & VVS2 and barely distinguishable grades like D-E. No problem. We dedicate significant time to ACA Hearts & Arrows craftsmanship, which is “nano-spec," so it's only fair to respond to questions about these ACP differences as well... With regard to ACA we simply want to keep it ‘real.’

There are many situations where the differences won’t be notable because the diamonds are closely matched, because of human vision, because of lighting, etc.

Nevertheless, there are situations where the differences are observable and we respect this. For some people it may simply be a matter of ‘mind clean,’ and we respect that too.

I hope this is helpful.

 

[Ellen]

John, thank you so much for taking the time to give that detailed post. I really appreciate it.

And I hope I didn''t come across as being a pain in the rumplestiltskin, I can just be a very Curious George(tte) sometimes.

I read through some old threads on the two styles, and with your post, have come to this conclusion. Most people would not see the difference, but those with hawk eyes just might. I think it would only be an issue for those relatively few people, when pairing up diamonds. Would that be fair to say?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/25/2006 9:00:48 AM
Author: Ellen
John, thank you so much for taking the time to give that detailed post. I really appreciate it.

And I hope I didn't come across as being a pain in the rumplestiltskin, I can just be a very Curious George(tte) sometimes.

I read through some old threads on the two styles, and with your post, have come to this conclusion. Most people would not see the difference, but those with hawk eyes just might. I think it would only be an issue for those relatively few people, when pairing up diamonds. Would that be fair to say?

Yes. And no. I promise I’m not being difficult!

Even with ‘hawk eyes’ it depends on the specific diamonds...

Take a Classic ACP 0.5 versus New Line 4.0 (all else equal).
Your statement is quite fair if the lighting is conducive.

But... take a Classic ACP 1.5 versus New Line 2.5.
Even hawk eyes will be hard pressed to see a difference; I’d wager against it every time.

No one here sees nuance as well as Brian does but even for the king of the hawks it’s always going to depend on the specific diamonds being compared (read that as difference in ACP) and the lighting. Does that make sense?

Kenny reported that he could correctly ID the differences between ACP 1.0 and ACP 4.0 in a week’s time, side by side. That correlates with our experiences over the years involving perceptive and hawkish people.

 

[cutes814]

i love both lines, but i did notice a difference between my cousin''s ACA new line and my ACA classic during the 10 day viewing period. Hers seem to have more bold flashes of color, while the classic had more movement and scint. either way, both stones are gorgeous.

some people prefer one to the other. but i don''t think it''s a HUGE difference. i prefered the classic line at times and then at times i like the new line better. it''s good to have choices. owning one of each is even better...hee, hopefully i can get there someday.

 

[cutes814]

oh i totally forgot to congratulate you UDM! great choice, i would''ve went with the same. now what kind of setting are you placing them in? the martinis?

you asked earlier about the backing. personally, i like the push backs that have the tension. i''m not a fan of screwbacks because it''s so hard to take on and off and they seem to poke me more behind the ear.

 

[Ellen]

John, thanks. I''m just gonna bookmark this thread, and if a discussion ever comes up, I''ll just throw this at them.