Idealscope and OEC/Transitional?

[redleaf]

Hello Psers! I would appreciate thoughts on this diamond I'm considering. Its a 2.5 ct transitional. I've been researching the various threads on old cuts/transitionals. There's a lot of information, and I think I'm starting to get lost in it all. Anyways, I purchased an idealscope and made an attempt to take pictures of the diamond with the viewer. These pictures are obviously not professional pictures, as I only had my iphone and less than rock steady hand trying to take the pictures through the viewer. These two were the closest photo approximations of what I actually see. I tried taking an aset image but the hole on that viewer is even smaller and that was a no go with the iphone camera. The aset looks similar to what an H&A would look like, but with the fat arrows in blue.

Some of my general questions:

1) Are the exaggerated arrow patterns considered undesirable in this type of stone?

2) When the arrows are this large, is this considered obstruction, and is that necessarily a bad thing? Or, how do you know when there's too much contrast in the center and its a bad thing?

3) Is there any value in trying to evaluate this type of stone using an idealscope or aset? Or is it really 'just use your eyes?' I'm used to having a MRB and there's a part of me that wants kind of 'mind clean' affirmation that this stone is a good performer. But then I got lost in the threads and wasn't sure if this was a good performer based on the images I saw, and I started wondering if I really knew anything at all...

Thank you for your help!

 

[redleaf]

second image and a pic of what it looks like in real life (please excuse that the stone isn't perfectly clean)

Thoughts? Comments?

 

[arkieb1]

I own a fat arrowed transitional as well. Use your eyes. Some people like me love them because they perform wonderfully well in specific lighting conditions like indoors under lots of bright lights, they are really blingy then, you get the fire of a RB (or more) but with the chunkier cut pattern of an OEC the rest of the time. Having said that there is certain lighting like outside in the shade next to bright sunlight where you might notice the darker arrows. Big contrasting arrows can bother some people, especially if they don't know what they are seeing and if they are in that type of lighting the majority of the time.

All the Idealscope tells us is the stone has big arrows, it's well cut, so now it's up to you to see if it is the right "flavour" of stone for you. You might in fact prefer an OEC with a more flower petal pattern in the centre, or a transitional with smaller arrows or a thin flower pattern in the centre. They only way you will learn this is by looking at a range of stones if you can.

 

[redleaf]

Hi arkieb1,

Thanks for responding. I’ve been admiring your fat arrowed transitional, and it’s nice to hear firsthand what you think of this type of cut. From my thread searches, I couldn’t find a ton of discussion or examples of stones like these. I wonder if most people just prefer the look of a more traditional oec. I do think I really like this kind of stone; the faceting reminds me of a snowflake or a norwegian star, which i love. The symmetry really appeals to me as well.

I see that you also have an AMAZING oec. Do you wear both equally? Or do you find you reach for one of them more often?

 

[arkieb1]

The transitional stone is the better performer of the two, I actually like it better than top cut H & A round brilliants, I have compared the transitional next to them and I just prefer the chunkier flashes of light that I get from it. The only two things about it that bug me is that it was described when I bought it as a high J and the slight tint bugs me no end. I think My large OEC which hides or masks colour better faces up on the hand not much different to the J and it's an L, but it's a different cut entirely so that is why it hides colour better.

I think the reason the colour bugs me in the transitional a lot more than the big OEC is because of the cut, the tranny is closer to a RB and I have a lower threshold for seeing tint or colour in modern rounds than I do in OECS if that makes sense. The contrasting arrows about 10% of the time annoy me as well, but I accept you have to have them in order to get the great performance, if I walk into a jewellery store, or a department store or virtually any indoor lighting situation with the tranny people say you can see it across a room, it's all show, fire and sparkle.

The big OEC is a lot more moody, bigger chunkier flashes of fire again than the transitional and a much larger fat flower petal pattern because of the size of the stone to stare at, which I love. To be truthful I wear the big OEC more of the two but I put that down to the simple setting that the OEC is in, the pave on the sides of the halo and setting I have with the transitional in tends to annoy me because I have really really sensitive skin so I only wear the transitional ring as a RHR occasionally and take it off again.

My ideal stone would probably be a 4+ carat transitional like my smaller stone or a new Old cut round from Victor Canera, a perfectly cut stone to again have max fire and light performance. Having said that there is still something about Lola the big old gal I have (she is more of a cushiony round, wonky and still really charming), I consider myself lucky to have found her. And out of the two that is the stone I am more attached to because I love the size and history uniqueness and charm of the larger stone.

 

[redleaf]

Thanks for the insight!

 

[LLJsmom]

Hi OP, I saw a fabulous tranny (I think) at Lang Antique. I took a video and linked it below. I think it was an M, GIA , About 3.4 carats. It's on the right. On the left was a K OEC. The price on the M was enticing, even for Lang. I think the GIA report called it modified brilliant because it did not meet the parameters of an OEC. Let me know if you are interested. I can take more pics for you or just call Nicole at Lang and talk to her about it. Btw, the setting was unbelievably gorgeous. Of course this was in jewelry store lighting. However I do recall the faceting being quite clear.


https://youtu.be/7RVqRPxDakk

 

[ringo865]

Hahaha just when I started getting into the video, it switched to a jerry springer episode.

 

[redleaf]

Hi OP, I saw a fabulous tranny (I think) at Lang Antique. I took a video and linked it below. I think it was an M, GIA , About 3.4 carats. It's on the right. On the left was a K OEC. The price on the M was enticing, even for Lang. I think the GIA report called it modified brilliant because it did not meet the parameters of an OEC. Let me know if you are interested. I can take more pics for you or just call Nicole at Lang and talk to her about it. Btw, the setting was unbelievably gorgeous. Of course this was in jewelry store lighting. However I do recall the faceting being quite clear.


https://youtu.be/7RVqRPxDakk

Thanks LLJsmom, I much appreciate the offer. I think I'm going to stick with the stone I have. After living with it for a few days, I think I'm in love! 3.4 cts I think might be past my comfort threshold, my finger is a very short and stubby size 4! Maybe another PSer will see this thread and want to get in on the Lang tranny, it's gorgeous in your video.

BTW, LOVE your new upgrade. I was following your thread about switching from an MRB to OEC, there was a lot of good insight in there. I also looked at your pictures of your old MRB a lot to see how a 2+ ct stone would look on a size 4+ finger. So you've been a good reference for me!

 

[redleaf]

Hahaha just when I started getting into the video, it switched to a jerry springer episode.

Hahahahah I got this video too! Something about a Tranny tricking a man?? Gotta love when the Internets tries to find you related videos it thinks you might be interested in!