Help in understanding premium line idealscope image.

[helpmefindDIA]

Hi,

I'm trying to understand purely from a cut perspective, based on the idealscope and aset image which diamond would outperform the other. It looks to me that the BGD has some light leakage in comparison to the idealscope image of the WF. Being that these are from well respected vendors and both are from their signature line my understanding is that there shouldn't be any light leakage. If I were to look at both diamonds in person would I see any noticeable difference between the two?

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3195401.htm
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.236-h-si1-round-diamond-ags-104047809027

Also perhaps I'm missing something but there was a thread earlier this week on WF reevaluating their ACA to ES due to haziness. Is this another case where the signature line needs to be reevaluated?

Thanks,

 

[RockyRacoon]

Hi,

I'm trying to understand purely from a cut perspective, based on the idealscope and aset image which diamond would outperform the other. It looks to me that the BGD has some light leakage in comparison to the idealscope image of the WF. Being that these are from well respected vendors and both are from their signature line my understanding is that there shouldn't be any light leakage. If I were to look at both diamonds in person would I see any noticeable difference between the two?

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3195401.htm
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.236-h-si1-round-diamond-ags-104047809027

Also perhaps I'm missing something but there was a thread earlier this week on WF reevaluating their ACA to ES due to haziness. Is this another case where the signature line needs to be reevaluated?

Thanks,

The idea that there won't be any light leakage in any 'signature' line is erroneous. There are better and worse examples available in anyone's line.

You've done a good job of highlighting the differences here. I would take the WF stone in a heartbeat over that BGD stone (though I do like BGD stones).

Your question about the haziness was a feature only in the ES line. I believe (at least I hope!) they have since corrected the issue. Since ACA stones are all evaluated in person, this issue does not exist on the A Cut Above stones. No concern for haziness there.

 

[helpmefindDIA]

Thanks RockyRacoon.

I agree that NO lightleakage might be a little strict, but being that this is their signature line, this idealscope seems a bit 'laxed'. I guess the idealscope might not mean much if i see both diamonds in person and can't tell a difference. But I guess I would like others who have a bit more experience seeing diamonds and their corresponding idealscopes to chime in here. Would I be able to notice any difference between the two?

Also we have members on here giving advice to pass on a diamond given an idealscope images. Is the BDG idealscope comparable to the idealscope found and discussed here? [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-help-with-this-idealscope-image.207979/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-help-with-this-idealscope-image.207979/[/URL]

Thanks,

 

[JulieN]

The cloudy stone was an ES.
There is no light leakage visible in either IS picture.

 

[helpmefindDIA]

The cloudy stone was an ES.
There is no light leakage visible in either IS picture.

JulieN - you're right it was an ES. [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/should-i-be-upset-about-this-diamond-i-just-purchased.207505/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/should-i-be-upset-about-this-diamond-i-just-purchased.207505/[/URL]

Can you elaborate on your comment "there is no light leakage visable in either IS picture". Do you mean no light leakage visable to the unaided eye? That is between the WF and BGD if you were to look at them side by side in a controlled envn, you would not see any difference? Just trying to understand better.

Thanks in advance.

 

[helpmefindDIA]

Is there anybody who can comment on the idealscope image between the two diamonds? RockyRacoon, made the comment that it could be just be variance in the premium line (better ones and worse ones). Is this just simply that or are there other factors going on in the image? I have read there are instances of idealscope images not correctly being taken sometimes causing idealscope images to be inaccurate.

If this is one that is 'worse' from their signature line, putting it next to a diamond which has what appears to be a better idealscope (WF ACA), would I easily be able to notice the difference?

Thanks,