Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Ideal Scope Pictures - HELP!

R

roundandwhite1

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 19, 2013
Messages
12
Please help me decide between three diamonds I currently have on hold.

# 1 - http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-dia...-h-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-244401

#2 - http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-dia...arat-h-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-238551

#3 - http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-dia...-g-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-190677

Also, here are the IS pictures I just got in.

#1 - 244401.jpg

#2 - 238551.jpg

#3 - 190677.jpg

I'm leaning towards #1 due to the price and size. The gemologist said all three are "eye clean" and look great, but preferred #2 the most. What do you all think?
 
Newbie here but I'll give my 2 cents. There seems to be a leakage under the table for #2, but an Idealscope image is no substitute for a GG's opinion I would assume. The difference in dimension is 0.1mm or approximately 1.5% only which personally I wouldn't notice.

If they are both strong performers then the difference in price would make it easy to make a decision I guess.
I'll let someone more experienced chime in!
 
Also, I'm wondering what others think about the crystals towards the center of stone #1. I know they are visible at 40x, but I'm not sure I would mind as long as the normal eye couldn't spot them. Does anyone know about the 360 degree pictures JA has on their website. Are these videos taken at 10x? Thanks for the help in advance!
 
Did the gemologist mention why they preferred number 2? As far as the inclusions, all three stones were determined to eye clean, I think JA determines eye clean to be face up from 10 inches with normal vision. You should confirm this however, and if you have a different definition ask the gemologist to take another look.
 
Below is what I received from JA. Assuming they are all eye clean from 10 inches, which of these, if any, would you go with?

I appreciate all the help. This process is a little overwhelming.         




       I hope that you are having a great day!  I just received the Idealscope images and results for the three round brilliant diamonds and I wanted to take this moment to pass them your way.  I have attached the images to this e-mail for your review and I am sure that you will be happy to see them!  With the Idealscope images, you want to see a lot of red/pink (this is your direct light return), a fair amount of black (this is your indirect light return) and little to no white (this is your light leakage). 

 

                As I am sure you expected after reviewing the images, the gemologist found all three diamonds to be very lively options!  They all possess an excellent amount of brilliance (white light return), with a great amount of fire (dispersion of color) and sparkle that is well balanced and symmetrical.  They are all also a very beautiful, white color and face up "eye clean".  The 1.42 carat-H-SI1 (diamond 244401; $10,210) and the 1.40 carat-G-SI1 (diamond 190677; $11,510) are beautiful options, however, the 1.35 carat-H-VS2 (diamond 238551; $10,570) has a little more brilliance and was the gemologist favorite.  
 
Just to review...

Diamond 1: GIA 3x, HCA = 1.7, good idealscope

Diamond 2: AGS 0, HCA = 3.7, idealscope with leakage

Diamond 3: GIA 3x, HCA = 1.7, good idealscope


Diamond 2 comes back the best. Is it safe to say that AGS 0 trumps all other measurements/is always the safest bet?
 
I definitely would not go with the one they suggested this time. The ideal scope shows a lot of leakage and the aset image on the report is one of the worst I've seen. I would definitely go with the 3rd one!
 
Anyone else? I'm hoping to purchase soon. Thanks!
 
I agree that #2 is not a great choice. I would leave it up to the experts to pick between #1 and #3. I've been looking at similar diamonds.
 
If you look at the link to stone 2, there was already an IS image of the stone on the link, which looks a little better and closer to the other 2. I'm not sure what happened in their photography of that stone or why they didn't point out that there was already and IS image for it and let you use one of your "chances" up unnecessarily (at least iMO). Even looking at the IS image on the site for it, it still seems to have perhaps the weaker IS image of the 3 stones and it's also the smallest and just assuming all is is fairly equal, I'd probably go with one of the others (1 or 3). I happen to like 3 better just from the pics.
 
All of the Ideal Scopes look good.
 
I just posted a separate thread with my images I just received back. Looking at #2 here that shows all of the leakage it looks like the stone is tilting downward which is one of the questions I was asking about my images that showed light leakage. Is that downward tilting causing that light leakage in the image?
 
How common is it that an AGS 0 has leakage, and if an AGS 0 has leakage how detrimental could it really be? I know it's not uncommon for a GIA XXX to have leakage that adversely affects light performance, but I've been under the impression that AGS 0 will be fine.

That said, It would make sense if the image wasn't done right.
 
Looking again it also looks like the first image diamond is tilted downward and on BOTH of these images the light leak is at the top with the stones pointing downward.
 
The IS of #2 looks like it could be slightly tilted so that could account for the leakage. At that, I would probably assume it is minimal. The crown angle is high too so that might account for leakage as well.

As for #1, I don't like the black inclusion. It might be eye clean but then again, it depends on your definition. There are only two plotted inclusions for an SI1 - my guess is that they would be more significant than I'd be willing to chance.

#3 looks like a contender too - those twinning wisps are often very difficult to spot with the naked eye. I like the IS on this stone.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top