Feedback for 2.2ct round diamond's ASET images

[Hairy Winston]

Hi guys,

Sorry, my original thread was deleted because I didn't know that I shouldn't use personal storage links, so I'm re-posting with some of the thread information here.

I would really appreciate your feedback on this diamond's ASET images.

I'm looking at it from a light performance / brilliance, symmetry, fire, scintillation, and overall contrast balance perspective. Hopefully with your help I can figure out if this is satisfactory or if I could find another diamond that performs well in all these areas (for a comparable price)!

The diamond that I currently have access to has the following specs:

2.2ct
IF
G color
No fluorescence
GIA Triple Excellent





Based on some initial feedback I'll be posting some additional ASET images and hopefully videos when I can.

Thanks,
Hal

 

[OoohShiny]

That's a No from me.


What is your budget for the stone? (including import tax if necessary),
What are your colour/carat/clarity expectations/preferences?
Do you need/want IF for cultural reasons?
Are you open to fluorescence?

 

[bmfang]

Looks like a ring of death under the table to my eyes!

 

[Happygirl2017]

That's a No from me.


What is your budget for the stone? (including import tax if necessary),
What are your colour/carat/clarity expectations/preferences?
Do you need/want IF for cultural reasons?
Are you open to fluorescence?

Why is it a no? I'm curious!

 

[Happygirl2017]

Looks like a ring of death under the table to my eyes!

Is the HCA score "incorrect" in this case?

 

[Hairy Winston]

Thanks for the feedback thus far guys!

HCA score is 1.1 (you can double-check).

 

[Hairy Winston]

That's a No from me.


What is your budget for the stone? (including import tax if necessary),
What are your colour/carat/clarity expectations/preferences?
Do you need/want IF for cultural reasons?
Are you open to fluorescence?

Well, budget is around US$3x,xxx.

We want to avoid any significant inclusions within the table area where it's obvious or if there are really bad ones in general that hint at poor clarity (cloudiness), etc.

Minimum (where it makes sense numerically) desired specs (as of today ):

1.9 - 2.4 ct
G color
VVS2 (VVS1 or IF preferred)
No fluorescence (maybe open to very minor)
Ideal cut (what we're discussing and aiming for of course!)

Yes, you could say that some of these specs requirements are "cultural" .

Thanks!

 

[bmfang]

Maybe. Maybe not. It is however coming up on HCA as being a BIC candidate. I'm generally not a fan of 60-60 like diamonds (some are). I'm seeing bluish-reds in a circle under the table which I'm interpreting as additional contrast.

Would be more comfortable with the CA being around 33.5-34.

If however the OP likes the look of this stone, then more power to them.

 

[OoohShiny]

Why is it a no? I'm curious!

I didn't plug the numbers into the HCA tool but going from the ASET, it looked like it had some leakage issues under the table. I believe that one of the professionals on here has posted that what looks like leakage can just be due to using too bright a backlight, though, so I put my hands up and say that I may have been wrong.

I don't like the 13% crown height, though, as I understand that it may reduce 'fire', which is partly what I based my original post on.

Well, budget is around US$3x,xxx.

We want to avoid any significant inclusions within the table area where it's obvious or if there are really bad ones in general that hint at poor clarity (cloudiness), etc.

Minimum (where it makes sense numerically) desired specs (as of today ):

1.9 - 2.4 ct
G color
VVS2 (VVS1 or IF preferred)
No fluorescence (maybe open to very minor)
Ideal cut (what we're discussing and aiming for of course!)

Yes, you could say that some of these specs requirements are "cultural" .

Thanks!

Some potential options - some of which might challenge your desired specs but give them a look

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3782387.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3839970.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3738431.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3811456.htm
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/d...ls/1.990-e-vs1-round-diamond-ags-104094705057
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8903
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8629
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD7592
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8802
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8966

 

[gm89uk]

I cannot see any leakage, only some over obstruction and painting. It's a diamond geared for brightness that will look very bright from a distance and maybe a little dark on close viewing.

It is not the same as a traditional ideal cut and I'd expect it to be brighter but have less fire than a traditional ideal cut, but it's not a dud by any means. Worth considering if you've seen it and like it in many lighting conditions and the price is right.

It wouldn't be my choice but there are many that like this style diamond.

 

[Hairy Winston]

I didn't plug the numbers into the HCA tool but going from the ASET, it looked like it had some leakage issues under the table. I believe that one of the professionals on here has posted that what looks like leakage can just be due to using too bright a backlight, though, so I put my hands up and say that I may have been wrong.

I don't like the 13% crown height, though, as I understand that it may reduce 'fire', which is partly what I based my original post on.




Some potential options - some of which might challenge your desired specs but give them a look

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3782387.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3839970.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3738431.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3811456.htm
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/d...ls/1.990-e-vs1-round-diamond-ags-104094705057
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8903
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8629
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD7592
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8802
http://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8966

Thanks, will take a look in more detail shortly!

 

[Hairy Winston]

Hi guys,

Thanks again for helping assess this diamond.

I took some more pics but it looks pretty much the same. What are your thoughts?


Last one is an interesting one with flash on.
Regards,
Hal

 

[Hairy Winston]

I cannot see any leakage, only some over obstruction and painting. It's a diamond geared for brightness that will look very bright from a distance and maybe a little dark on close viewing.

It is not the same as a traditional ideal cut and I'd expect it to be brighter but have less fire than a traditional ideal cut, but it's not a dud by any means. Worth considering if you've seen it and like it in many lighting conditions and the price is right.

It wouldn't be my choice but there are many that like this style diamond.

Interesting, why is it brighter from a distance? Larger table?

We do want some nice fire though. I wish I had a super ideal to compare side by side.

 

[OoohShiny]

If you have access to a suitable amount of credit on card or overdraft (or have the cash, which is an alien concept to me ) you can order a SuperIdeal from one of the PS-recommended vendors and appraise it during the return period, including looking at it side-by-side with the stone above.

If you still prefer the one you have already found, you can return the SuperIdeal at small cost (shipping + insurance, probably - best to ask the SuperIdeal vendor what the arrangements are) and know that you have made a fully informed decision.

 

[gm89uk]

Interesting, why is it brighter from a distance? Larger table?

We do want some nice fire though. I wish I had a super ideal to compare side by side.

It's due the obstruction, the dark areas that you see in the ASET will be reflecting you when you look at it close by, so may appear dark (as you're blocking light source). This obstruction is less likely to happen when observing from a distance so you'll see bright reflections of surrounding ambience

Go compare next to Hearts on Fire, they are pretty much super ideal and easily accessible.

 

[flyingpig]

Are these photos taken by yourself, OP?? Are you making sure you are not holding the scope too close to the stone? The stone should not be tilted. And I think the backlight is too bright

 

[gm89uk]

I think if the scope was held further, the arrows would be washed out, but that would be a more accurate scope image.