Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Help dissecting ASET Images for Antique Cuts

A

antiquehunter2788

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Messages
10
Hey guys and gals! Been all over this website absorbing information for the last month - it's been so helpful! I'm pretty much set on an antique cushion. Because there seems to be a limited quantity of these available I've been reviewing options from GOG, VC, and BE, assuming they are all created equal, to find the right mix of size, color, clarity within my budget. However, the ASET images look a lot different, specifically the BE images vs GOG and VC. A lot more blue! Is blue bad!? I've read posts about understanding ASET, but it's not quite connecting. Can I get the communities opinion? Thanks!

BE 2.5 I ASET.jpg
BE 2.5 I
Screen Shot 2017-10-13 at 10.06.11 AM.png

VC 2.2 I
Screen Shot 2017-10-13 at 10.07.45 AM.png
GOG 2.6 L
 
:wavey:Hi Antiquehunter! Not an expert, but as a fellow cushion lover I am happy to share my thoughts and some of what I have learned in my search.

The antique cushion cuts sold by GOG and VC are branded cuts, specifically calculated/cut for great light performance. Both usually carry a pretty hefty premium, hence the L for the AVC. I am surprised that you were able to find 2 branded stones within the same price range as the BE stone.

It is also important to note that cushions can very greatly in dimensions within a given carat range. So even though they are all close in carat weight there may be very noticeable differences in size of face-up.

On to the ASETs - I like the middle stone the best. I prefer the proportions (slightly elongated) and the ASET is more appealing to me - personal preference .

As for the blue- blue or black are lighting from above in the 75-90 degree area. It is representative of contrast - think of the arrows you see an a MRB. I am not sure what to make of so much blue, it looks like the stone may be slightly tilted forward also accounting for the asymmetrical outline - maybe? I am interested to see what some of the experts say when they chime in.

Best of luck with your search and be sure to come back and share the finished ring.
 
The VC or the GOG would be my choice. I dont mind lower colors so if the "L" is a lot larger(LxW) than that might* be my choice.
If you are not use to lower colors than the 2.2 I might be the right choice. I think both of these stones will be beautiful but you have
to decide whether the color/size trade off is worth it to you.

I would have to see the BE stone in a video to see how it lights up under the table. With that much blue I would think that its not promising.
 
Thanks for the feedback! I've requested a video from BE to see what's going on there.
The balance between size and color has been my achilles heel. To be honest, I'm a sucker for the size and the stone will be in an all rose gold setting. I've seen stones H-K and honestly, in my mind, the difference is negligible. But with so many people (outside of pricescope) whispering, K!? you cant go k!? its caused much hesitation and angst.
 
I’d go for the I with VC. Sorry. Did you even ask?
 
In the real world outside a reflector scope all 3 of those would impress you face up. Side by side you might have a favorite but you would not be thinking gee this one is a dog.
 
Karl - Why do you think that there is so much blue? Do you think that the stone is not sitting completely straight for the ASET? I noticed that the top length and bottom length seemed different and assumed maybe the stone was tilted slightly, but it could just be an asymmetrical stone, possibly an actual old cut.
 
I'm team VC/GOG. HOWEVER, I'd be interested to see how BE performs, and how much light you actually may "lose"...I love the patterning, and the floral Cut center. It looks as though the spread would be amazing...and the facets seem even across the stone...very symmetrical by design. The question is...why so much blue in the ASET? I'm fascinated by it...so I'm hoping you can post more visual aids about this particular stone...
 
Octo2005 said:
Karl - Why do you think that there is so much blue? Do you think that the stone is not sitting completely straight for the ASET? I noticed that the top length and bottom length seemed different and assumed maybe the stone was tilted slightly, but it could just be an asymmetrical stone, possibly an actual old cut.
Click to expand...
stone is slightly tilted.
mains are right at the blue/red crossover point which is a great place to be for huge bright flashes.
All red are hopefully cut just to the other side of the line. If they are cut to far over it they will not flash well. Same for being cut to far the other way.
Branded cuts will be designed just to the red side for better looking ASET images and to make sure they don't have obstruction issues.
They are very dependent on placement of the scope a fraction of a mm will flip them.
In the real world obstruction is not a blue disk but much more variable which is a whole nuther story.
I hope that makes sense.
 
Thanks so much everyone! I'm hoping to have some more detail/video come Monday and will update accordingly!
 
well it looks like that 2.5 I from BE is no longer available. Instead they have a 2.58 F. Most of the stuff on BE website has the same blue going on - so I'll assume that this is similar. We are officially slightly past the top of my budget with this - but it is an F, so I understand. Again, it comes down to how much more I want to spend for better color, F vs K. I wont be able to get an ASET unless I make a deposit as its currently in a setting. VC Video is of the same ASET as above - I do think its a bit too small however. GOG is of the following ASET, different than the first.

K AVC.PNG

Videos of BE:

Video of VC

Video of GOG

Also, no ASET or Idealscope on this - but found LaurenB in NYC. 3.02 carat, SI2, J. Kind of feel like the inclusions are a bit too obvious on this stone. You can see it on the bottom of the table of the stone. But curious as to the communities perspective on its light performance relative to the more wll known vendors.

Thanks everyone!
 
I never thought I would be considering an F at this size,but it's not too far past my budget. Just got ASET and idealscope. Definitely not as perfect as the AVC but seems like a good performer? This is the BE 2.58 F Vs1. What do we think!?


2.58B.jpg 2.58BB.jpg

2.58A.jpg 2.58AA.jpg
 
OP is there a way to see the stones in person? In terms of cut, I like the AVC the best, but I also love the LaurenB J stone. The size of the 3.02 cushion will allow the larger facets to create broader flashes of light. This is a really nice effect. I don’t think this SI2’s inclusions are noticeable at all except in extreme close up, but others may encourage you to select a “cleaner” stone.
 
Regarding the BE stone, I kept seeing one large center facet that didn't seem to light up. It could totally just be the angle, but in the ASET I see that facet not reflecting light. That would be a hard no for me. I think (I may be wrong) the AVC is my friend's custom cut that she decided not to keep. That is just a stunning stone. I love the stone. It is amazing. And the pastels are ridiculous. I also really liked Victor's stone too. Looked really bright, lively and no dead spots, although the video does kinda suck. I didn't think it looked small. Lauren's stone would be a no for me. In that big of a stone, I just don't want an SI2. That's just me.

Good luck!
 
LLJsmom said:
Regarding the BE stone, I kept seeing one large center facet that didn't seem to light up. It could totally just be the angle, but in the ASET I see that facet not reflecting light. That would be a hard no for me. I think (I may be wrong) the AVC is my friend's custom cut that she decided not to keep. That is just a stunning stone. I love the stone. It is amazing. And the pastels are ridiculous. I also really liked Victor's stone too. Looked really bright, lively and no dead spots, although the video does kinda suck. I didn't think it looked small. Lauren's stone would be a no for me. In that big of a stone, I just don't want an SI2. That's just me.

Good luck!
Click to expand...
Interesting she didn't keep it... Wanted something different or the color start to bother her?

I'll be seeing the BE stone soon so I'll get a good look at it and see what the deal is. Are you referencing the center facet to the left in the first BE video?
 
antiquehunter2788 said:
Interesting she didn't keep it... Wanted something different or the color start to bother her?

I'll be seeing the BE stone soon so I'll get a good look at it and see what the deal is. Are you referencing the center facet to the left in the first BE video?
Click to expand...
If that is her stone, she wanted something smaller. Whichever one was not lighting up. Don’t remember which side.
 
I like the AVC, and you know it is cut for best light performance :)

The 2.58 from BE seems to have leakage on two of the centre facets? Is it me or does it look a bit like you can see the shank through the facets in the video??
 
LLJsmom said:
Regarding the BE stone, I kept seeing one large center facet that didn't seem to light up. It could totally just be the angle, but in the ASET I see that facet not reflecting light. That would be a hard no for me. I think (I may be wrong) the AVC is my friend's custom cut that she decided not to keep. That is just a stunning stone. I love the stone. It is amazing. And the pastels are ridiculous. I also really liked Victor's stone too. Looked really bright, lively and no dead spots, although the video does kinda suck. I didn't think it looked small. Lauren's stone would be a no for me. In that big of a stone, I just don't want an SI2. That's just me.

Good luck!
Click to expand...
Deep into the blue zone in ASET, reflecting the camera lens and slow flashing in the video.
I would notice it immediately in person but some may not.
 
The 2.58 is not as well cut as the 2.51 was, while not likely to be ugly it is a little outclassed by the others.
 
Thanks for the feedback folks! I saw the BE stone this morning, and while it was beautiful, it didn't really speak to me. Was missing that chunky look I'm after. I saw the AVC K again and as @LLJsmom mentioned, it's beautiful. Cut very well, pastels blowing up all over the place.

However, I visited Adam at OWD and he showed me a 3.01 K VS2 that I think I'm in love with. So unique and different!! So much character! I'm between OWD and AVC - and I believe leaning OWD.

 
I like the look of this stone more than the BE stone. It does definitely look chunky. The center pattern is more flowery than Maltese cross. Got the “glow” of an old cut.
 
Long flight back west from NYC and pretty much decided to go with the old stone. But then a wrinkle! See below. Very similar but the pattern is more flowery I think. At this point I feel it's a matter of preference no? Stats are 3.08k vs2.

IMG-20171019-WA0020.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG-20171019-WA0020.jpg
    IMG-20171019-WA0020.jpg
    70.6 KB · Views: 3
I prefer the fatter facets of the OWD stone. The table on the OWD stone looks smaller to me and thus a bit chunkier. The lower stone kinda looks a wee-bit more tranny if you can use that to describe a cushion. Not my preference. It outline is more round and the OWD is more cushiony. If you want a round stone, I would go all the way and find a truer round OEC, not this elongated version of an OEC. Also video doesn’t show me much about it’s light reflection. If it were me and I had to go on that video alone, definitely OWD cushion. The shape is divine.
 
+1 on the 3.01K VS2 from OWD
It's a lovely stone; I've seen it in person :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top