Difference between 2 firescope images

[msb2ncsu]

This first one is just what looked like the "typical" firescope image you see on a diamond of good quality.

This is the one that I''ve never seen before. Such strong black in the center. I looked around ideal-scope.com and couldn''t quite find anything commenting on this. Is this diamond going to be lacking severely in brilliance or anything glaring like that?

It received a score of 0.5 on the HCA suggesting that it probably has a good appearance, but I just have never seen this type of a scope.

Any thoughts?

 

[valeria101]

I am afraid there is no consensus on whether there is such a thing as "too much" black on such a diagram and how much is too much. The ideal cut is meant to be... an idela balance between different optical effects that result in the visual impression of brilliance. Beyond this safe receipe of success, it remains up to you to judge what you preffer - neither of this stone appears lacking in light return.

You may find some explanation of this down this LINK. And some mention of the problem anywhere on PS where "contrast brilliance" has been discussed (LINK to PS thread). One of the Ideal Scope newsletters also mentions this and it is cited on that thread.

 

[oldminer]

The Firescope and the Ideal-Scope give your eye and brain easier images to process than just a photo of a colorless diamond. The dark areas and the red areas indicate certain elements of light behavior, but how that exactly translates into what you'd see with your own eyes and in normal daylight is not clear or defined by these images.

That is a weakness in the present systems. We can predict excellent light return from sample images, but we can't really tell the nuance differences in actual appearance between fairly similar images that have certain visible differences. We need complex devices to actually measure the light return, sparkle and intensity in order to make close comparisions from images and their numerical data. We don't have the data yet, but just images. This is a work in progress.

Right now you have the benefit of being able to know you have a super stone or one that is not quite up to par. Soon you will be able to objectively define the type of light behavior you like most and then find diamonds that meet your criteria. It won't make the job of selling diamonds any easier, but it will make defining what pleases you the most a lot easier.

 

[msb2ncsu]

Wow, I think I'm more confused now than I was before I asked. Ok, from what I can gather the black spots between the inner arrows will in fact look dark when looking at the ring from a foot away, directly overhead but beyond that they wil provide maximum reflection... sound right? Most of the references to black I can find refer only to the arrow points themselves or areas around the outer portion of the diamond. Everything I can tell seems to say that this diamond will in fact look great (and the base numbers are in line with what I like, F, VS2, 1.29), but the mass of black in the scope ust puts that seed of doubt in me.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 6/16/2004 12:55:23 PM msb2ncsu wrote:



Ok, from what I can gather the black spots between the inner arrows will in fact look dark when looking at the ring from a foot away, directly overhead but beyond that they wil provide maximum reflection... sound right?
[...] Everything I can tell seems to say that this diamond will in fact look great .

----------------

This sounds like the interim Pricescope consensus about the matter...

which David Atlas has already resumed in two enviable lines.

I would be amazed if you find that stone dissapointing

 

[msb2ncsu]

I guess its just the cynic in me expecting the worst.


NiceIce lists a diamond fitting nearly every prerequisiste for a dimond that I have. Then on the same day I get informed that I've been approved for a credit card with a $20,000 limit, 0% APR through next May, and 2% cash back bonus... coincidence?

 

[valeria101]

Love that debt

! ???