Help Evaluate AVR/OEC

[mandasand]

Hello,
I need help evaluating an OEC from GOG. It's their branded stone, AVR. I am attaching the picture of the stone from the website, the ASET and a picture Sarah took of me in a mounting (ignore the setting it's just for picture purposes).

If I get this stone, I am still within the size range I was hoping for and it actually comes in under budget. I am a little worried about it being SI2, K but I've been told it's eye clean and faces up white.
5.90mm x 5.87mm x 3.81mm
Table: 47.00%
Depth: 64.80%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Lab Report: AGS

Please let me know what you think.

 

[yennyfire]

Personally, I don't care for the "nailhead" around the cutlet, but that's just my opinion. I does seem to face up pretty white from the photo on Sarah's hand. Only you can decide if you like the stone or not. How much are they asking for it?

 

[ForteKitty]

I'm not fond of it either. The center looks flat.

 

[mandasand]

It's under $3k...

I thought that they were all supposed to be good performers? There is another one similar in size that is $500 more but a VS1 K. Here is an ASET and pic from the website. Waiting to hear back from Sarah about what she thinks.

 

[mandasand]

I also have these pics she sent of the SI2 K but they are kind of fuzzy.

 

[ForteKitty]

Maybe the first diamond wasn't facing straight when they were photographing it? The center facets seem to blob up in clumps and the crown facets do not look symmetrical. In the hand pic, you can see how the center facets clumped up in 4, 2, and 2. I don't think any of my oecs ever exhibited that behavior!

The second one looks more promising. Can you ask her to take pictures of them side by side?

 

[chrono]

That's a strange looking AVR. Actually, both are, only that it is more obvious in the first one.

 

[mandasand]

Thank you fortekitty. Yes, I am trying to get additional pics. And I agree with you...The center is clumping together and you can see the dot in the middle (nailhead).

I'm super frustrated because I don't know how I can make a decision with these fuzzy pics. I also think I just "assumed" all the AVRs would be excellent performers...that's why I'm paying more for their branded excellent cut stones.

 

[mandasand]

That's a strange looking AVR. Actually, both are, only that it is more obvious in the first one.

They all look the same to me...what am I missing?

 

[ForteKitty]

Thank you fortekitty. Yes, I am trying to get additional pics. And I agree with you...The center is clumping together and you can see the dot in the middle (nailhead).

I'm super frustrated because I don't know how I can make a decision with these fuzzy pics. I also think I just "assumed" all the AVRs would be excellent performers...that's why I'm paying more for their branded excellent cut stones.

I think the clumping of the center facets would be the nailhead. The dot in the middle is something else!

If this isn't "the one", keep looking! Fwiw, I don't think all branded cuts are the same. $3k is no small amount of money, so don't feel rushed into making a decision you might regret.

 

[ForteKitty]

That's a strange looking AVR. Actually, both are, only that it is more obvious in the first one.

They all look the same to me...what am I missing?

The second diamond's center facets are more defined. (though still not enough for me) If you look at the white triangular pieces (under table) in the second one, you can see it's much more defined than the first. Assuming the first one was photographed straight, the first one should "blob" more, especially on the left side. The first one's crown facets also looks off on the left side, which leads me to believe the diamond was photograhed crooked.

 

[chicam]

Yeah me too. What's different about these? They all look the same. It'll be a shame if such a branded cut with very high premium on them, all don't perform well.

 

[chrono]

ForteKitty explained it well - the center facet are not well defined enough, almost looking blobbish.

 

[mandasand]

I've also been looking at JBEG and I can get a larger size but I'll be spending upwards to $1k more for either EGL graded stone or non-graded stone (ranging from .86 to 1.03 ct). This one is the most affordable to $3500 and it's an intro price.
http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/Jewelry/Loose-Diamonds/87ct-Old-European-Cut-Diamond/26264363_cQG9jQ#!i=2188216987&k=t4CHH4H

I'm not sure how I feel about that one. I like the return policy and upgrade policy of GOG. We've been looking for a year now and it's really hard to find a good stone in our budget. I don't have $5k to spend on the stone but I'd like to be in the .80-.90 range. I have somewhat abandoned the idea of getting an AVC because I'd have to spend the majority of my budget on the stone that faces up no larger than 5.5mm, and I realize that may be too small for me.

 

[mandasand]

ForteKitty explained it well - the center facet are not well defined enough, almost looking blobbish.

I don't like blob.

 

[mandasand]

I found a video of the .80 VS2 K (the other diamond I'm considering).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g30sMTTMCI0&list=UUEV7slr-i-VduBBnfv9MxhA&index=2&feature=plcp

 

[ForteKitty]

Doesn't OWD have an upgrade policy? I'd look into them.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I don't have time to look up the certs, but are these graded AGS 0 or what? I think it is funny that people are judging them as low performing based on these photos. I'd be willing to bet money that these are certainly not low performing!!! I am speaking from very recent experience of seeing 3 AVR's and a total of 5 overall.

 

[chrono]

DS,
Nobody said these are low performers, only that they don't have the OEC look which many expect to see and love. The center pattern is not well defined and it shows in both the photos and ASET.

 

[ForteKitty]

AGS0 doesn't apply to european cuts...

She asked for an opinion, and we gave them. Based on those pictures, the center facets looks flat. If they were RBs, people here would demand more pictures. Why wouldn't the same scrutiny apply for AVRs?

I suggested that it might be due to bad photography, and encouraged her to get more pictures. Just because the ones you've seen are good, doesn't mean they all are.

 

[mandasand]

I don't have time to look up the certs, but are these graded AGS 0 or what? I think it is funny that people are judging them as low performing based on these photos. I'd be willing to bet money that these are certainly not low performing!!! I am speaking from very recent experience of seeing 3 AVR's and a total of 5 overall.

The VS2 K is AGS ideal/ideal and the SI2 K is AGS EX/EX.

When I watched the video of the .80 VS2 K with the .69 and .57 the stones seriously look exactly the same to me. I thought the AVRs were designed that way. Sarah said the original SI2 K I'm looking at is the cleaner one she's seen and faces up white because of the excellent cut grade. If I am struggling so much with this choice on a premium stone, how can I find a true antique? I'm a fairly smart person and can see the difference between a dud and a non-dud diamond, but this decision is really hard.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

AGS0 doesn't apply to european cuts...

She asked for an opinion, and we gave them. Based on those pictures, the center facets looks flat. If they were RBs, people here would demand more pictures. Why wouldn't the same scrutiny apply for AVRs?

I suggested that it might be due to bad photography, and encouraged her to get more pictures. Just because the ones you've seen are good, doesn't mean they all are.

Well, AVR's are cut to have ideal or close to ideal light performance, although it may only be AVC's that get the actual Ideal light performance grade. As red as the diamxray's are, I am certain they have excellent performance. All the information is right there on the GOG site, so I see no need for more pictures. She might like to see them in person to decide, but more pictures just aren't going to ever tell what the stones look like in person even though these are extremely well cut.

In addition, these AVR stones lean a little more toward transitional to me, and that does not make them less worthy that a stone that is cut more like an old OEC. And in fact, it likely will not have the leakage of many old stones.

I have no problem with people preferring old stones. There are plenty of diamonds to go around! I just don't agree with the comments on this thread regarding those stones having just seen several almost just like them.

Regarding those two stones, I think they'd make a fine pair and I would bet they look about identical in person. But I prefer the VS2 clarity (I only see a K VS2 and K SI2 so I assume the second one is the VS2. And it is $400 more than the other stone.)

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I don't have time to look up the certs, but are these graded AGS 0 or what? I think it is funny that people are judging them as low performing based on these photos. I'd be willing to bet money that these are certainly not low performing!!! I am speaking from very recent experience of seeing 3 AVR's and a total of 5 overall.

The VS2 K is AGS ideal/ideal and the SI2 K is AGS EX/EX.

When I watched the video of the .80 VS2 K with the .69 and .57 the stones seriously look exactly the same to me. I thought the AVRs were designed that way. Sarah said the original SI2 K I'm looking at is the cleaner one she's seen and faces up white because of the excellent cut grade. If I am struggling so much with this choice on a premium stone, how can I find a true antique? I'm a fairly smart person and can see the difference between a dud and a non-dud diamond, but this decision is really hard.

These are easy compared to old stones! It is a matter of whether you want an old stone even if it only has good or fair symmetry and good polish. I don't see many with excellent. There are gorgeous old stones for sure, but I decided I would be happier with an AVR...if I could find one with the specs (color, size, clarity) I want, and I haven't been able to do that yet! Others do not want an ideal cut old style cut. As I said, there are stones for everyone's taste, thankfully!

 

[ForteKitty]

DS, you seemed to have missed my point entirely. I was pointing out the differences between the two AVRs she posted. At no point did I bring up a true old cut during the comparison. Did I?

I said that the first one's picture and ASET looks off, compared to the second one. And based on what I saw in the listing picture and ASET, I expected some blobbiness, which I also saw in the hand pics. That's why I suggested that she get more pictures.

I was talking about these particular stones, not AVRs in general. I think the OP got my point. You can take it however you want. People on RT debate AGS0 MRBs all the time and it's totally acceptable. Why is it an issue with these cuts?

 

[Rhino]

Greetings,

For clarification AVR's are nowhere near nailheads. Far from it as ds, myself and hundreds who have seen them in person have seen and confirmed.

It is important to note that while photography is helpful to judge facet structure it is difficult to ultimately judge light performance and optics which is why we are careful to show ASET's and corresponding video to confirm that particular element of our exam. Sarah was asked to snap off some quick shots to show how it would look in a setting, not necessarily paying attention to how the diamond looked perse' but just the ring on her hand.

For edification here is a graphic I generated of an actual nailhead with flat looking facets under the table alongside of the actual model of the 0.80ct K SI2 AVR in the DiamCalc office lighting environment. This same difference would be obvious to any layman and is something that could also be captured in macro video under evenly lit environments.

As an FYI this AVR can be traded back for any diamond at any time including but not limited to other OEC's you see online or whatever you wanted.

Hope this helps and if you have any questions feel free to ask.

Kind regards,
Rhino

 

[ForteKitty]

In addition, these AVR stones lean a little more toward transitional to me, and that does not make them less worthy that a stone that is cut more like an old OEC. And in fact, it likely will not have the leakage of many old stones.

Are you mistaking me with someone else? Where did I ever say that?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

DS, you seemed to have missed my point entirely. I was pointing out the differences between the two AVRs she posted. At no point did I bring up a true old cut during the comparison. Did I?

I said that the first one's picture and ASET looks off, compared to the second one. And based on what I saw in the listing picture and ASET, I expected some blobbiness, which I also saw in the hand pics. That's why I suggested that she get more pictures.

I was talking about these particular stones, not AVRs in general. I think the OP got my point. You can take it however you want. People on RT debate AGS0 MRBs all the time and it's totally acceptable. Why is it an issue with these cuts?

No, you did not, but you mentioned OEC's not having ideal light performance and I had the impression you were comparing these two stones to the extensive number of old OEC's that you have seen. But since you have clarified that you were just comparing these two, I understand.

Again, having seen several AVR's, the nuances in 5.9mm stones that people are mentioning are not going to be apparent in real life.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I did not contact Jonathan but glad he came and could clarify what nailhead actually looks like.

 

[ForteKitty]

Haha, I never mentioned that OECs do not have ideal light performance. What I said was the facet clumping in the and pics... is something I have never seen in any of my oecs. (Because my oecs are well cut!)

And Jon, you have to admit that the ASET for stone #1 is pretty off. Can you blame people for thinking there is a nailhead where there is almost no definition under the table?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

AGS0 doesn't apply to european cuts...

She asked for an opinion, and we gave them. Based on those pictures, the center facets looks flat. If they were RBs, people here would demand more pictures. Why wouldn't the same scrutiny apply for AVRs?

I suggested that it might be due to bad photography, and encouraged her to get more pictures. Just because the ones you've seen are good, doesn't mean they all are.

The bolded part was the part that I apparently misunderstood. I wasn't sure why that was relevant to AVR's. I am sorry I misunderstood you.

I do agree that I'd choose the second stone, but I have no problem with the first one if it better fits someone's budget.

But regarding the first stone, a nailhead isn't going to show beautiful red center on the ASET! It would at best show green, I would think.