Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity
  • Pricescope Upgrade/Maintenance Is Complete.

    We still have a few things to iron out. If you see any bugs, issues or have any concerns, let us know here in this discussion.

Is this Asscher too Dark (attached images)

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

f4t3

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
13
Hi guys,

I had posted images of another asscher and the responses all thought it was too dark so I kept looking. This one is better I believe what do you guys think? (about darkness, windmills, or anything else I may not be taking into account) Thanks so much in advance!

1.57
G
VVS2

DI40X_GIA151322000.jpg
 

Sponsored By:

Related topics:

Shay37

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Messages
3,343
I am no expert. I will say that I think it looks to be a very nice stone. I like the size of the windmills too. They seem not too small or too large. HTH or FWIW


shay
 

SKR

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
199
The more I look at asschers the more I like them. Completely classy.
 

diagem

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
4,881
Date: 12/22/2006 1:49:13 PM
Author:f4t3
Hi guys,

I had posted images of another asscher and the responses all thought it was too dark so I kept looking. This one is better I believe what do you guys think? (about darkness, windmills, or anything else I may not be taking into account) Thanks so much in advance!

1.57
G
VVS2
Visible from the picture, i would want a smaller table and a higher crown depth...
 

Garry H (Cut Nut)

Super_Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
14,581
Date: 12/22/2006 4:04:48 PM
Author: DiaGem

i would want a smaller table and a higher crown depth...
Why would you want specific specs DG?
I have never found them much use. But these look to be good #''s to me.

It looks good - I would like an ASET and a 3D file to be sure.

There will be a dark patch near the center - but it should make for great contrast.
 

starryeyed

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
Hi f4t3.

I would agree that this one looks like a nice stone. It doesn't look dark directly under the culet, so I would agree with Garry that the dark band may be good contrast.

Asschers are very dynamic stones, so what might appear to be a dark area at one angle, is very bright at a slightly different angle. What is important is that the stone has that hall-of-mirrors effect that draws you in, which is hard to see in a picture.

This one looks like it has nice windmills - they are a good width (in my opinion) and are straight. The contrast along the edges of the stone looks nice too.

Garry, any thoughts on the spread?

I know Storm was having surgery, but maybe he'll chime in....
 

f4t3

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
13
Thanks all for the great input.
For reference here is the other stone from before:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/asscher-help-attached-sarin-and-images.54991/

I agree that this one definately looks better in static pictures however my girlfriend ended up liking the other one after seeing both in person.

Maybe its just personal taste but when seeing them both from up close and far away in multiple lighting conditions my girlfriend consistently liked the previous stone. So now she is thinking of maybe calling one more in to compare against the one chose today to be sure sure.

What I am trying to say is I learned that these pictures really only tell you a tiny bit of how the stone''s are going to look in person and am feel lucky we did not have to base our decision on the pictures alone.
 

starryeyed

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
Hi f4t3. That''s really interesting - great you could see them in person! I totally agree that it''s really hard to tell how an asscher will perform live.

I am really curious - did your GF say WHY she liked the first stone better? It looks like the windmills are a little thinner in the first. Does the first stone look deeper? Is there more contrast?
 

f4t3

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
13
I think there was definately more contrast in the first one and she said that brought out the patterns more in it especially at a distance.

Basically she said that it is true that the one above here did look a bit more sparkly close up than the other but she said the main reason she wanted the asscher was for the step and windmill patterns and both were much more evident and dynamic when the stone moved in the first one because of the contrast.

It is actually weird that the windmills are more noticeable in the first since in the static images they looked much thinner but the contrast makes them more noticeable.

My girlfriend said seeing them side by side the one that was slightly brighter overall actually looked dull and had less character in her opinion.
 

diagem

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
4,881
Date: 12/22/2006 4:49:58 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 12/22/2006 4:04:48 PM
Author: DiaGem

i would want a smaller table and a higher crown depth...
Why would you want specific specs DG?
I have never found them much use. But these look to be good #''s to me.

It looks good - I would like an ASET and a 3D file to be sure.

There will be a dark patch near the center - but it should make for great contrast.
But based upon the 1st. image, something is visiualy bothoring me on the face-up appearance.
I think that a smaller table would add to the look, i would consider wider corner facets too.

yes, you are right, the #''s look good, but you know me...., i am not a great believer in #''s, especially on fancy-cuts.
Its more in the eye''s (observer!!)

But other than that, it looks like a white and a decent Asscher...
 

starryeyed

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
Hi f4t3. I think I can see what you are saying. When you look at the IS of this second stone, there isn''t as much contrast between the facets under the table and the windmills. If I squint my eyes, they definitely run together.

However, the first stone is much different. There is clear contrast between the windmills and the facets under the table. When I squint my eyes, the windmills stay distinct.

This is VERY helpful. Brightness under the table is important, but the contrast is key, especially for the windmills against the other facets.

So are you going to call in a 3rd stone or stick with the first? Keep us posted and good luck!
 

f4t3

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
13
The plan is to call in one or two SI1s that are bigger but in the same price range and let my GF decide if we want to go that route. I had originally ruled out even looking at SI1s because I had assumed we wouldn't be able to see them in person. However when I was dealing with Whiteflash I noticed their phone number was Houston area code and as luck would have it we were driving home from Chicago to Houston for the holidays.

I have to say once again that before we went in to see them in person we were totally ready to just go with the stone above just from these images. After the seeing both stones without knowing which was which we switched. That experiment made me realize that specs and static pictures aren't everything to my GF and that is the reason why we decided to open up our clarity parameters a bit to see if the tradeoff between size and clarity is worth it.

I plan to try and get them to bring some in for us this week so we can make a final decision this week and I will post here with any updates.

I did have two questions for you guys though that if you guys would be helfpful in finding another stone to bring in.

How does depth effect this cut in particular visually? Both stones I looked at seemed to get the comment that they would like more depth but without really much explanation with what more depth would do visually to the stone.

I also have the same question about the table as I believe the tables here were judge to be too big?

Thanks so much guys!
 

starryeyed

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
Hi f4t3. That''s so great that you are in Houston and can visit WF directly. I recently bought an asscher from WF, and they have been great. They told it to me "straight" and have a lot of expertise.

The table-depth thing is tough. On the one hand, there are the "Storm proportions", which are very useful. However, there are several people who have found stones that they like outside of these proportions. It really depends on preference and expectation.

I am not an expert, but it seems to me that there are so many possible combinations of crown/pavilion angles (depending on 3, 4, or 5 step cuts) that you can''t really rule out anytrhing definitively. Probably the more stones you see the better. If it''s 2-5% (or whatever) of the purchase price, it''s worth it.

Please keep us posted! I''m anxious to hear what you think of the SI''s!
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
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.

New posts

Top