Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Help Evaluate AVR/OEC

ForteKitty|1352838502|3305621 said:
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. :bigsmile: Can you blame people for thinking there is a nailhead where there is almost no definition under the table?
Click to expand...

Hi forte :wavey:

In fairness AVR's have not yet officially received the AGS designation for "Ideal" light performance like the AVC's have which is why I don't officially use that term for them yet. I have tweaked every facet set as much as humanly possible and submitted it to AGS but it's not the quickest process unfortunately.

My methodology in inventing them however is identical to the AVC's which are the worlds first ever ideal vintage cushions so I expect no less than that designation for the AVR's as well.

I understand what you're saying regarding the ASET of the first one but if you were to actually compare hundreds of OEC's (and examine their optics and ASET's) you're perspective may be slightly different becaues while the ASET makes it easy to point out slight nuances, in reality those 2 look very very similar within the realm of the OEC facet structure. ;)) If mandasand would like a comparison of the 2 side by side in a video we are more than happy to oblige. Our job here is to help you guys and gals make the most stress free decisions possible when it comes to these things.

Kindest regards,
Rhino
 
OMG - I feel like a rock star has responded to my post! Thank you "Rhino" for your perspective. Between the .80 VS2 K and the .81 SI2 K, is one better over the other? Sarah said the SI2 is eye clean and faces up white.

I am actually still so in shock I have to re-read the posts!
 
mandasand|1352841278|3305659 said:
OMG - I feel like a rock star has responded to my post! Thank you "Rhino" for your perspective. Between the .80 VS2 K and the .81 SI2 K, is one better over the other? Sarah said the SI2 is eye clean and faces up white.

I am actually still so in shock I have to re-read the posts!
Click to expand...

LOL ... not a rock star yet although I do play acoustic (an old Beatles fan here)! :bigsmile:

Both are awesome really and both face up beautifully. In brief though, what would make me lean towards either one ... The savings on the SI2 is what would cause me to lean that way but then you have folks who prefer higher clarity regardless of how eye clean an SI2 is so if you ultimately prefer the higher clarity then I'd lean towards that VS2. Aesthetically there isn't what I would consider an earth shattering difference between the 2. If there is anything I can do to help you decide between the 2 mandasand we are here to serve you.

Kindest regards,
Rhino
 
I have to clarify something. I emailed Sarah inquiring about the .81 SI2 K and she provided feedback and offered to take some pictures in a setting for me. I never inquired about settings, only the stone. She asked what kind of setting I liked just for representation purposes. From the pictures, the only thing I can really say is that it doesn't appear to have a yellow tint (my biggest worry) and I have to trust that she says it is eye clean, since the photos were not meant to be a close-up shot.

I can keep searching and searching for months and months. But, if the AVRs all have similar qualities, I just have to love the cut and make sure my budget and size match up. I wish more than anything I could see the stone in person first, but alas I have the BF making the final decision and having it set so he can surprise me.

I am a very visual person, so any amount of pictures, videos, etc. is helpful for me.
 
mandasand, I am going to tell you that you cannot judge color in pictures. Jonathan has the best picture of color that I have ever seen in the 4 C's section of his site. K color is going to be relatively bright in a well cut stone, but it is going to have a more ivory/creamy appearance than say a G or H color which will face up whiter. If you have whiter stones in your setting, then I think you will notice the color. Some people love that in old cuts and some do not. Color is very, very personal. I think K color will do better in an antique setting, personally. Is there no way you can order one of these stones and then send it back to let your bf finish the ring? That way you could be sure if you like K color or if not, bump up to I-J.
 
diamondseeker2006|1352843095|3305682 said:
mandasand, I am going to tell you that you cannot judge color in pictures. Jonathan has the best picture of color that I have ever seen in the 4 C's section of his site. K color is going to be relatively bright in a well cut stone, but it is going to have a more ivory/creamy appearance than say a G or H color which will face up whiter. If you have whiter stones in your setting, then I think you will notice the color. Some people love that in old cuts and some do not. Color is very, very personal. I think K color will do better in an antique setting, personally. Is there no way you can order one of these stones and then send it back to let your bf finish the ring? That way you could be sure if you like K color or if not, bump up to I-J.
Click to expand...

GOG will be sending me more info. I was told it does have a tint (it is a K afterall), but that it faces up white. I know if I want a higher color, I'll have to be OK with getting a smaller stone. It's something I've gone back and forth with.

Honestly, the chance I'll get to see the stone with my own eyes unset is unlikely. I'll have to think of an offer my BF can't refuse...he's a tough nut to crack!
 
I do understand that. The thing is, he will have to understand that if you don't get to see it or a similar one before getting your e-ring, then there is the possibility that you might want to switch out the stone AFTER the proposal. That is much more complicated and it sort of is anti-climatic to have to send an e-ring back to replace the stone. You could always order the K you plan NOT to buy just to see the color in an AVR and then not have seen your actual diamond!
 
Are you open to also considering an old cut OEC at all? Some of them can also be great performers. If you are you might consider checking with JBEG or Old World Diamonds. You might also get more bang for your buck too. Just an idea in case you want to compare them side by side.
 
OOH OOH! I can't help at all with the cut jargon, but I can say that eye clean SI2's are my FAVORITE clarity over eye clean I's :naughty: :naughty:

I can't wait to see what you get, manda! I've been waiting to see what you'd update us with for a while :apple:



ETA: Can you ask Jonathan to source you a comparable authentic OEC to compare to those AVRs? Something in your budget? I love those almost-AVRs that he has found before.
 
missymoo|1352904708|3306274 said:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/0-95CT-GIA-H-VS1-CERTIFIED-VINTAGE-OLD-EUROPEAN-TRANSITIONAL-CUT-DIAMOND-1-CARAT-/170941589080?pt=Loose_Diamonds&hash=item27cce9a658

this one is a bit more ($3.5k) but probably has a better facet pattern and is 6.1 x 6.2 mm. Hope I'm not sticking my nose in where it doesn't belong....!
Click to expand...

Hi Missymoo - thanks for posting these. I don't like the first one, but the second one is nice. I am waiting to get info from GOG from their inventory.
Manda
 
GIA H (#2) will be super white!
 
Here are a few pretty OEC's from Old World Diamonds:

Not sure if you are ok with very thin girldle but:
http://www.oldworlddiamonds.com/detail.php?ID=1078&SHAPE=EU

Such a pretty cut:
http://www.oldworlddiamonds.com/detail.php?ID=1043&SHAPE=EU

A little more (the stone looks dirty in the pic so I'd ask for better photos or a video)
http://www.oldworlddiamonds.com/detail.php?ID=681&SHAPE=EU

Not sure if this is in your budget but you could see if they would negotiate the price!:

http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/Jewelry/Loose-Diamonds/87ct-Old-European-Cut-Diamond/26264363_cQG9jQ#!i=2188218906&k=dfjV5t2
 
mandasand, if you want an old stone, Jonathan has access to the stock at Old World Diamonds. Were you wanting an AVR or an old stone more?
 
ForteKitty|1352838502|3305621 said:
And Jon, you have to admit that the ASET for stone #1 is pretty off. :bigsmile: Can you blame people for thinking there is a nailhead where there is almost no definition under the table?
Click to expand...

Hi forte, I realize you guys don't see a lot of ASET's on OEC's but just curious ... if you consider the ASET of the 1st AVR to be "pretty off" what would you consider the other 5 OEC's to be based on the same data below?

oecasetcompare.jpg
 
Rhino|1352916454|3306449 said:
ForteKitty|1352838502|3305621 said:
And Jon, you have to admit that the ASET for stone #1 is pretty off. :bigsmile: Can you blame people for thinking there is a nailhead where there is almost no definition under the table?
Click to expand...

Hi forte, I realize you guys don't see a lot of ASET's on OEC's but just curious ... if you consider the ASET of the 1st AVR to be "pretty off" what would you consider the other 5 OEC's to be based on the same data below?
Click to expand...


I knew you misunderstood me. I meant the diamond wasn't centered properly. And I repeated it multiple times, suggesting it may have been crooked when the picture was taken, that's why it looks off.

And I've seen a lot of ASETs, mainly my own oecs. Most of them look nothing like the five you posted, especially not my big one! :bigsmile:
 
ah ... ok. ::)
 
Now that I have additional info (thank you so much Jonathan for your support and guidance), I can say that these two stones are so beautiful. The symmetry is perfect and they face up so bright. I just love the faceting pattern. These stones are both within our budget, so I am not sure if I want to look at true OECs anymore. I feel like I can search and search and never know if I'm making a good choice with a true old cut stone. With the AVR or AVC, it's guaranteed. I think I would be happy with a .80-ish stone. Bigger than I was originally looking at (a .60 MRB) and bigger than an AVC (which I still also love).

I am not a fancy girl...I love vintage things. I would feel uncomfortable with a huge diamond ring. I would consider myself lucky to wear one of these stones.
 
I adore fortekitty's diamonds, for the record!! :love: Her hard work looking for the needle in a haystack really paid off! :appl:

But I also appreciate the opportunity to buy a modern cut chunky faceted stone that is excellent in light performance and symmetry. I'd have both kinds if I ever come across the right stones! But I know I cannot go wrong with an AVR because the ones I have seen were exceptionally beautiful! So I am happy for you, manda, that you have found stones that you love!!! :appl:
 
mandasand|1352922381|3306537 said:
Now that I have additional info (thank you so much Jonathan for your support and guidance), I can say that these two stones are so beautiful. The symmetry is perfect and they face up so bright. I just love the faceting pattern. These stones are both within our budget, so I am not sure if I want to look at true OECs anymore. I feel like I can search and search and never know if I'm making a good choice with a true old cut stone.
Click to expand...

Well, there you go! :appl: OECs can be challanging. I have about 25 in my stash and returned only 3, so I've had extremely good luck. If you don't trust your eyes to make the right decision, it can be really stressful.

Which one are you getting?
 
ForteKitty|1352832849|3305526 said:
mandasand|1352832390|3305512 said:
Chrono|1352831975|3305505 said:
That's a strange looking AVR. Actually, both are, only that it is more obvious in the first one.
Click to expand...

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

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.
Click to expand...

To me this is a contrast issue -- the pavilion mains are not distinct from one another in those images, under the table, which seems to be the result of low contrast. Contrast happens when "on" and "off" facets are next to one another, and with a stone with nice contast, you can really see the patterning in the stone because adjescent light and dark areas allows the pattern to be discerned.

Whether this AVR has poor contrast under the table is separate from whether it has ideal light return under the table. Those facets may well send back a tonne of white light. The ASET shows they do. But they might not have a pleasing constrast pattern. It looks like three of the mains tend to light up or off at the same time -- the clumping or blobbing that FK and Chrono mentioned.

Again, can't say if it happens in person, that would remain to be seen.

ETA: I think some of the argument in this thread is from semantics. "nailhead" as I understand it references a situation of extreme extinction in a stone where the center turns black on close inspection. I do not see that as an issue in this AVR. On the other hand, the "clumping" a few people referenced or flatness in the center could be due to lower contrast in that region, with two or three pavilion mains turning "on" and "off" in concert rather than each pavilion main turning "on" and "off" distinctly from its neighbour, an effect that creates a lovely disco ball appearance. I think the bright light return but potentially lower contrast under the table in the K SI2 is evident in the ASET scopes. I prefer high constrast, but would take bright light return and lower contrast over a nail head or leakage any day.
I
 
mandasand|1352842282|3305675 said:
I have to clarify something. I emailed Sarah inquiring about the .81 SI2 K and she provided feedback and offered to take some pictures in a setting for me. I never inquired about settings, only the stone. She asked what kind of setting I liked just for representation purposes. From the pictures, the only thing I can really say is that it doesn't appear to have a yellow tint (my biggest worry) and I have to trust that she says it is eye clean, since the photos were not meant to be a close-up shot.

I can keep searching and searching for months and months. But, if the AVRs all have similar qualities, I just have to love the cut and make sure my budget and size match up. I wish more than anything I could see the stone in person first, but alas I have the BF making the final decision and having it set so he can surprise me.

I am a very visual person, so any amount of pictures, videos, etc. is helpful for me.
Click to expand...

Most K colored diamonds will have a warmth, and also a chameleon effect that you may or may not like. Colorless stones tend to look white in all lighting. K color stones tend to "take on" ambient colors, especially beige, crown, taupe, and yellow, so that the stone itself takes on a similarly brown or beige tone. If you want a stone that always look white you need H color or better in my opinion, and that includes old cuts.
 
mandasand|1352841278|3305659 said:
OMG - I feel like a rock star has responded to my post! Thank you "Rhino" for your perspective. Between the .80 VS2 K and the .81 SI2 K, is one better over the other? Sarah said the SI2 is eye clean and faces up white.

I am actually still so in shock I have to re-read the posts!
Click to expand...

Manda, I am glad that Rhino was able to answer some of your questions here on PS, but please do not get star struck about his participation. He is a wonderful contrbutor on PS but as a consumer who is working with vendors, always remember that it benefits vendors on a business level to answer questions like this, especially if someone has been critical of their goods. I do not mean this to impugn Rhino's motives or positive contribution to PS. Its just that as a consumer advocate I like to see consumers keep a nice level head. In a thread like this I personally prefer to see vendor participation at a minimum or not at all. I think contact between vendors and clients should be directly one-on-one and off PS, to avoid exactly what happened here -- some sense of celebrity or awe on the part of consumer that can color an important business transaction.
 
When I see AVR's being called nail heads and their ASET's being described as "pretty off" I saw the need to jump in and clarify Dreamer. People on these forums take consumer's words as gospel in many cases and not all the information is what I would consider on the level. Even in this thread actual nail heads are described as "beautifully cut". When I see those inaccurate descriptions being thrown around you can bet I'll jump in.
 
What nailheads are described as "beautifully cut"? One of the 5 oec ASET you posted? I was trying to be nice, but they all looked kinda crappy (except the one directly under the AVR, and that one is just okay), and I didn't want to insult you in case you owned them.

And if you had read all 4 of my posts that clearly states that the photography is probably contributing to the ASET being "off", maybe you wouldn't have been so offended? I had hoped that you'd come in and say, "hey now, the camera was crooked so it wasn't sitting properly. Here is what it really looks like." But you didn't, and totally missed the point.
 
I agree that the stone was tilted slightly. That was why I wasn't worried about that ASET image at all.
 
I'm curious to see nailhead was praised as "beautiful". I went thru the whole thread and didn't see anything that fit?
 
Rhino|1352930590|3306678 said:
When I see AVR's being called nail heads and their ASET's being described as "pretty off" I saw the need to jump in and clarify Dreamer. People on these forums take consumer's words as gospel in many cases and not all the information is what I would consider on the level. Even in this thread actual nail heads are described as "beautifully cut". When I see those inaccurate descriptions being thrown around you can bet I'll jump in.
Click to expand...

I think such corrections and addendums make sense, certainly. Note that I myself corrected the nailhead comments in my posts, and also attempted to clarify the contrast issue that people may have been discussing.

But your posts went further. Offering advice about your preference between two diamonds you have for sale, well that is something I would prefer happen on a personal level off PS : (e.g., "Both are awesome really and both face up beautifully. In brief though, what would make me lean towards either one ... [etc. etc]). ETA: I know Manda asked you questions directly, so obviously not everyone feels like I do about this type of things. Its just my opinion that vendors should not offer such opinions on PS. It may be construed as self-promotion by some. Also, indirectly commenting on the (poor) quality of stones offered by competing vendors, which is what I think you are referencing with your "beautifully cut" comment about nailheads, is not appropriate IMO.

Just my two cents!
 
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