Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Help with Idealscope images

Which diamond is best?

  • #1

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • #2

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • #3

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • None of these

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Total voters
    2

sp-1

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Messages
17
Hi everyone, I'm a new member here and in need of some quick help. I've narrowed down my purchase to the three diamonds below and need your help in determining which is best. Thanks in advance!

#1 - lowest price
Carat: 1.8
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 61.1%
Table: 59%
Crown: 33 deg
Pavilion: 41 deg
#1.jpg
#2 - highest price
Carat: 1.8
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 61.9%
Table: 57%
Crown: 36 deg
Pavilion: 40.6 deg
#2.jpg
#3 - middle price
Carat: 1.84
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 60.7%
Table: 59%
Crown: 32.5 deg
Pavilion: 41.2 deg
#3.png
 

Yang Kin

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
56
If you just want an answer between these 3, the 2nd one seems to have the least obstruction as far as I can tell. So, it probably has the best cut among all. However, light return loses to diamond 3. Also, the crown angle is too steep to my liking. But understanding that both crown angle and pavilion angle are an inverse relationship with each other, the shallower pavilion pairing with the steeper crown might work. In fact, all 3 diamonds are showing such inverse relationship... but since I have said that dismond 2’s cut seems to be better, and since diamond 2 has such steep crown angle, hopefully the fire of this diamond is great enough to compensate for the weaker light return.

On a side note, personally, I won’t buy all these. Would rather sacrifice colour for better cut. Hope this helps.
 

sp-1

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Messages
17
If you just want an answer between these 3, the 2nd one seems to have the least obstruction as far as I can tell. So, it probably has the best cut among all. However, light return loses to diamond 3. Also, the crown angle is too steep to my liking. But understanding that both crown angle and pavilion angle are an inverse relationship with each other, the shallower pavilion pairing with the steeper crown might work. In fact, all 3 diamonds are showing such inverse relationship... but since I have said that dismond 2’s cut seems to be better, and since diamond 2 has such steep crown angle, hopefully the fire of this diamond is great enough to compensate for the weaker light return.

On a side note, personally, I won’t buy all these. Would rather sacrifice colour for better cut. Hope this helps.
Thanks, Yang. This was very helpful.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,364
I also would not choose any of them because I value cut the most and go by the numbers below. If I had to choose one of them, I'd choose #2, but it has some leakage in the center which means light return will not be as good as it could be.

These are measurements to help you stay in ideal cut territory with a GIA excellent cut stone.

table: 54-58

depth: 60-62.3

crown angle: 34-35.0 (up to 35.5 crown angle can sometimes work with a 40.6 pav angle)

pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9 (sometimes 41.0 if the crown angle is close to 34)
 

Victor Canera

Shiny_Rock
Trade
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
205
Out of the three stones you listed, stone #3 shows the least amount of light leakage. This would be visible with in an ASET scope too.

This might a matter of taste a bit too but a lot of people don’t like the larger diamond area in between the Lower Girdle Facets as on stone #3. You can see that the lower girdle facets have been pushed up towards the periphery of the table. This is caused by a larger table and interaction of a deeper crown angle with the pavilion angle on the stone. Here are two images to show you what I mean:
Not-so-Ideal.jpg

As compared with "Ideal" proportions:
Ideal-Cut.jpg

Many people, including me, prefer slightly fatter LGFs. I would say that stone #3 has LGFs that are 80% with GIA which are rounded up figures actually.

I think DiamondSeeker2006’s general guidance is a very good place to base your search off of.

Good luck with your search and have fun!
 

Yang Kin

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
56
Out of the three stones you listed, stone #3 shows the least amount of light leakage. This would be visible with in an ASET scope too.

This might a matter of taste a bit too but a lot of people don’t like the larger diamond area in between the Lower Girdle Facets as on stone #3. You can see that the lower girdle facets have been pushed up towards the periphery of the table. This is caused by a larger table and interaction of a deeper crown angle with the pavilion angle on the stone. Here are two images to show you what I mean:
Not-so-Ideal.jpg

As compared with "Ideal" proportions:
Ideal-Cut.jpg

Many people, including me, prefer slightly fatter LGFs. I would say that stone #3 has LGFs that are 80% with GIA which are rounded up figures actually.

I think DiamondSeeker2006’s general guidance is a very good place to base your search off of.

Good luck with your search and have fun!
Hmm, are those DiamCalc images?
 

Yang Kin

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
56
Yes, they are DiamCalc images.
What I meant to say earlier was the the larger diamond area under the table is caused by a deep pavilion mainly and larger table combo.
The upper image was of a 41.2° pavilion \ 59% table.
The lower image was of a typical 40.75° pavilion and 57% table.
Thanks for the explanation! Asking because I am considering to buy a license for DiamCalc. So was wondering if you have any comments on its usefulness in judging a diamond if the standard images are not readily available.
 

Karl_K

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
8,940
Thanks for the explanation! Asking because I am considering to buy a license for DiamCalc. So was wondering if you have any comments on its usefulness in judging a diamond if the standard images are not readily available.
It is useful if you intend to learn about diamond cut or design.
Not so useful as a buying tool because of the rounded then averaged numbers on the report.
In the case of gia they are grossly rounded after being rounded then averaged to the point of being fairly useless.
 

Yang Kin

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
56
It is useful if you intend to learn about diamond cut or design.
Not so useful as a buying tool because of the rounded then averaged numbers on the report.
In the case of gia they are grossly rounded after being rounded then averaged to the point of being fairly useless.
Thanks @Karl_K, but it should be of better use when judging AGS graded diamonds, right?
 

bmfang

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 2, 2017
Messages
1,852
Thanks @Karl_K, but it should be of better use when judging AGS graded diamonds, right?
DiamCalc would be sorta redundant in my books if you have an ASET generated on the AGS report. Handy if you only have the report but don’t have access to an image of the stone though IMHO.
 

gm89uk

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 26, 2015
Messages
1,438
AGS are averaged too just like GIA, but with less rounding. The figures are still an average of 8 or 16 facets depending on which facet it is.
 

Yang Kin

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
56
DiamCalc would be sorta redundant in my books if you have an ASET generated on the AGS report. Handy if you only have the report but don’t have access to an image of the stone though IMHO.
Thanks.

AGS are averaged too just like GIA, but with less rounding. The figures are still an average of 8 or 16 facets depending on which facet it is.
Yes, you are right. But as far as super ideals are concerned, the final result should be more or less close? Since they are cut to a very high optical precision.
 

Victor Canera

Shiny_Rock
Trade
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
205
Thanks for the explanation! Asking because I am considering to buy a license for DiamCalc. So was wondering if you have any comments on its usefulness in judging a diamond if the standard images are not readily available.
For us, DiamCalc we can justify its cost because it helped with the design of our signature cut diamonds. We use it pretty often.

For a consumer that enjoys seeing how changes in a diamond’s proportions effect its performance and appearance, I think it would be worth it.

DiamCalc assumes that a diamond is perfectly cut though. So it presents you with a diamond that has no variance on the facets. Basically a perfect diamond where all facets are at the same azimuth and angles. In the real world a stone like this doesn’t and can’t exist because diamonds are cut by human hands. You can modify the individual facets manually but that would get extremely tedious and I don’t think that it would be very user friendly that way. For a diamond enthusiast though I think it would be a lot of fun.
 

Yang Kin

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
56
It sounds like you would enjoy it.
It wont help you a ton in your search, but if you enjoy geeky stuff it is awesomely geeky.
For us, DiamCalc we can justify its cost because it helped with the design of our signature cut diamonds. We use it pretty often.

For a consumer that enjoys seeing how changes in a diamond’s proportions effect its performance and appearance, I think it would be worth it.

DiamCalc assumes that a diamond is perfectly cut though. So it presents you with a diamond that has no variance on the facets. Basically a perfect diamond where all facets are at the same azimuth and angles. In the real world a stone like this doesn’t and can’t exist because diamonds are cut by human hands. You can modify the individual facets manually but that would get extremely tedious and I don’t think that it would be very user friendly that way. For a diamond enthusiast though I think it would be a lot of fun.
Thanks both!
 

Matthews1127

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 7, 2017
Messages
4,416
I am actually shocked that I had the same thoughts & opinions as VC, above; #3, to my eyes, would be the best of the three, but DS2006 is right: there are so many other better options out there, waiting to be found.
I'm certain others can be extremely helpful in your search, if you can post your preferences (in order of priority), and your min. & max. budget.
 

sp-1

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Messages
17
Thanks for all of the help everyone. In terms of my search, I'm looking within the parameters below listed in the order of priority:

Carat: ~1.8-2.0
Cut: TIC Ideal
Color: H or better
Clarity: Preferably no lower than VS2, but will consider a clean SI1
Budget: $17k max

Please let me know if you happen to come across something that fits this criteria and price!
 

Katie Homuth

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
28
Being in the industry, I cannot provide options for you but, would suggest, AGS ideal only, down to I even J and SI1 to help open up your search:) If the vendor you choose to work with has the diamond in house, they can verify the SI1 for you. Happy hunting!
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,302
Hi All- Can someone please help with below idealscope images for 2 diamonds? Both are very similar in details but differ in carat size. Idealscope images look different so based on your review, I would buy one or the other.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2hk1tdg36fki4do/AADT0WnxhevP8v0YGIyDdRhLa?dl=0

Thank you for your help in advance,

Pankil
Those images are hearts & arrow images not Idealscope images. See if you can request Idealscope image.
If not, at least post the following info from the GIA/AGS report

table %
depth %
crown angle
pavilion angle

BTW...You really should start a new thread for your diamond hunt.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top