Diamond Help Needed Please

[CrazyCat]

Thank you Texas Leaguer! I appreciate the follow up

 

[sledge]

We did re-image the stone today and confirmed that the original images are accurate. The stone has a very slight amount of 3D asymmetry. It was for this reason that it did not make A CUT ABOVE.

Thank you @Texas Leaguer. You and your team rock!

Having examined the stone closer, do you feel the asymmetry is anything that would be visible to the naked eye or otherwise concerning in any meaningful way?

My thoughts are that while it may not be a perfect ACA, the ES is no slouch and probably out performs the majority of virtual inventory stones AND it's been monetarily discounted for the imperfections. Plus, even though it may not be perfect I prefer to know the flaw I'm dealing with vs buying blind and having unknowns.

 

[sledge]

FYI @CrazyCat, that last AGS000 you posted with the shallow 33.5 crown is similar to the proportions of the BGD stone I bought my wife.

We get lots of compliments on the stone but having learned much more since the initial purchase I currently would NOT choose these proportions. Why? Because although the stone has great imaging, those images don't address the personality of the stone. Larger tables and shallow crowns favor a little more white light return. Your stone has a more shallow crown than my wifes by a little but a little steeper pavilion than hers. It is good the pavilion has an inverse relationship with the crown. However, if I were rebuying my wifes stone I'd be searching for a smaller table and steeper crown with complimentary pavilion so it favored more big bold rainbow flashes.

This isn't to say one way is better than the other, but rather what I prefer. You and yours may prefer something different. Also, as evidenced by the compliments we get on my wife's ring others probably don't notice or realize the difference as much as I do.

Funny enough prior to buying the BGD stone, I almost bought a WF PS stone as I described, although a little steeper than some like with a 36 crown and 40.6 pavilion with 16% crown height! Based on what I know now I'd choose the WF because of the personality of the proportions. But hindsight is 20/20 and when it comes time for an upgrade I have a better idea what I want, I mean she wants, lol.

 

[CrazyCat]

Thank you again Sledge! It's good to know that a similar proportioned diamond can look beautiful in the real world. I think I will go with it and hope my girlfriend prefers brilliance over fire. That is if our novice eyes will even be able to tell the difference The price for this stone seems really good too for an AGS000 with a nice looking aset map

 

[CrazyCat]

And thank you everyone again for your help with this, I truly greatly appreciate it!!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Thank you @Texas Leaguer. You and your team rock!

Having examined the stone closer, do you feel the asymmetry is anything that would be visible to the naked eye or otherwise concerning in any meaningful way?

My thoughts are that while it may not be a perfect ACA, the ES is no slouch and probably out performs the majority of virtual inventory stones AND it's been monetarily discounted for the imperfections. Plus, even though it may not be perfect I prefer to know the flaw I'm dealing with vs buying blind and having unknowns.

Certainly not anything that would be obvious. This is a good example of a "near miss" for A CUT ABOVE. Some asymmetries only manifest themselves clearly in static images. In this case, very slightly. When you consider the dynamic nature of diamond light performance and binocular vision, some technical issues are negligible in real life.

That said, it can be argued that even slight misalignment of corresponding facets will impact performance in subtle ways. Maybe not so much in what you get in overall performance, but rather in certain instances where you might not get a sparkle or spectral fan that you may otherwise have.