Difference in idealscopes of same diamon ???

[hifihua428]

(1) Can anyone can give me some sugguestions on whether the difference on these images of the same diamond provided by two different vendors are within the normal range? (tell me that these images are taken from the same diamond).

The reason I asked is that the two idealscope images provided by two differnt vendor look slightly different. I am aware that the idealscope and ASET of the vendor B maybe computer generated (is this from sarin scan? Is it accurate?). (2)Does the idealscope provided by vendor A look like actual photograph ideascope of the diamond.

(3) Lastly, what is your opionion on the performance/beauty of this diamond after seeing all the provided images and infos.

All of these images should all be reflecting the same diamond. The first 2 images (front view and idealscope)are provided by vendor A. The rest of images are provided by Vendor B. The diamond is located at diamond cutting centre/supplier.

2 Images below are from vendor A.



All other images below are from vendor B.

 

[flyingpig]

The new IS is the actual image.
The diamond looks good. I saw the stone at JA's site.
If you believe the price right and high color/clarity is your thing, GO FOR IT. Nothing wrong with light performance.

 

[hifihua428]

Here is the diamond info:
(Round Brilliant) E Internally Flawless 3EX
Additional comments on the GIA cert: Surface graining not shown, minor details of polish are not shown.
Measurements: 6.82-6.85 x 4.20mm
Table: 56%
Crown angle: 35%
Pavillion angle: 40.6%
Depth: 61.4%
Medium faceted 3.5%
HCA Score: 0.9


Comments: Surface geaining not shown. Minor Polish details not shown.

 

[hifihua428]

Thank you flyingpig for your reassurance. Do you reckon the last faceup image provided by vendor B is just a bad photograph? From that perticular photo it looks hazzy and the arrow heads are no longer showing, only arrow shaft showing.

 

[flyingpig]

Thank you flyingpig for your reassurance. Do you reckon the last faceup image provided by vendor B is just a bad photograph? From that perticular photo it looks hazzy and the arrow heads are no longer showing, only arrow shaft showing.

Yeap. The diamond is tiled and it is out of focus. Remember, it is a magnified closed up photo of a diamond that is only 4.20mm deep. The depth of field extremely shallow. You don't see any hazyness in other photos. In fact, the diamond looks very sharp and well defined.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The ASET and Ideal-scope images from vendor B are from DiamCalc and a 3D scan of the diamond.
But all the images are clearly of the same stone

 

[gm89uk]

Thank you flyingpig for your reassurance. Do you reckon the last faceup image provided by vendor B is just a bad photograph? From that perticular photo it looks hazzy and the arrow heads are no longer showing, only arrow shaft showing.

The arrow heads are showing they are just not as obstructed by the camera lens due to the tilt and as such are not a deep black like you're used to. Lovely diamond

 

[Stephan]

Before reading Garry, I thought this image pictured another stone, the star facets look more elongated and/or the table looks smaller. but I guess it's an optical illusion.

 

[hifihua428]

I asked vendor B send request to supplier for additional magnified photo of the same diamond as the photo they initally supplied looked like a screenshot of the diamond spinning video.

I specifically asked the supplier to take photos of table up and shows arrows contrast.

These are the photos they send me.

Before reading Garry, I thought this image pictured another stone, the star facets look more elongated and/or the table looks smaller. but I guess it's an optical illusion.

 

[hifihua428]

The arrow heads are showing they are just not as obstructed by the camera lens due to the tilt and as such are not a deep black like you're used to. Lovely diamond

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I am still learning a lot!

 

[hifihua428]

The ASET and Ideal-scope images from vendor B are from DiamCalc and a 3D scan of the diamond.
But all the images are clearly of the same stone

Thank you Garry for your sharing wisdom. Can the Idealscopes and Aset images derived from 3D scans and Diam Calc be used to judge diamonda performance? How accurate is it as oppose to actual images? 95% accurate?

 

[hifihua428]

Yeap. The diamond is tiled and it is out of focus. Remember, it is a magnified closed up photo of a diamond that is only 4.20mm deep. The depth of field extremely shallow. You don't see any hazyness in other photos. In fact, the diamond looks very sharp and well defined.

I thought its bad photograph as well, but my knowledge in diamond and photography is just too little to comfirm. On the other hand, I am surpirsed that they chose grey colour background as it make it difficult to tell if the diamond is transparent or milky/hazzy. Hmmm...

 

[gm89uk]

I'm not sure you could get any more reassurance that this is a high performing diamond. The clarity is >99% greater than what anyone would buy, the video looks great, the reflector images look great, the refund policy is great (although I understand you are abroad), the gemologist could answer any questions about surface training for you. Even SI2 stones which are actually diffusely cloudy (milky) do not portray well in videos or photographs.

There are many threads on actual ASETs Vs real ASETs, general consensus is they're pretty good but scanning errors do occur and a real image is preferable, but lots of good information can be relayed from a scanned image. Although you do have a real idealscope image which looks perfect. You have more than enough information to tell you this diamond will be a very highly performing diamond.

 

[ac117]

I agree with gm89uk...think you're over-analyzing. This is definitely an amazing stone. If you want 1000% peace of mind, you could pay more and go with a super ideal from WF, CBI, BGD, etc.