karl... you around for a quick look at an asscher?

[Miss Fortune]

what do you think of this asscher just from first look? thanks!!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I am not Storm - but it looks great - can you get an ASET photo?

 

[Miss Fortune]

Hey Garry! Thanks for your expertise. No ASET photo - I'm hoping to talk to the jeweler tomorrow. It's GIA F VS2 Ideal cut. Thanks again!

EDIT - the windmills look really good to me.

 

[bgray]

wowza...........pretty and i like that the corners arent too big

 

[Miss Fortune]

thanks! the symmetry is pretty great. the table is 2% larger than I would like but I do think the stone is really pretty.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/19/2008 1:28:43 AM
Author: Miss Fortune
thanks! the symmetry is pretty great. the table is 2% larger than I would like but I do think the stone is really pretty.

table and depth?
Crown height?
As Garry said IS or Aset is the next step

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 11/19/2008 1:04:30 AM
Author: Miss Fortune
Hey Garry! Thanks for your expertise. No ASET photo - I''m hoping to talk to the jeweler tomorrow. It''s GIA F VS2 Ideal cut. Thanks again!

EDIT - the windmills look really good to me.

Ideal cut according to whom and using what scale? This is not a grade issued by GIA.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/19/2008 7:40:17 AM
Author: denverappraiser

Date: 11/19/2008 1:04:30 AM

Author: Miss Fortune

Hey Garry! Thanks for your expertise. No ASET photo - I''m hoping to talk to the jeweler tomorrow. It''s GIA F VS2 Ideal cut. Thanks again!


EDIT - the windmills look really good to me.

Ideal cut according to whom and using what scale? This is not a grade issued by GIA.


Neil Beaty

GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA

Professional Appraisals in Denver

Thankfully they don''t. It is bad enough that AGS failed at doing so because they don''t understand the cut.

 

[Miss Fortune]

It''s a stone from james allen and they''ve listed the cut as ideal. I''m still waiting for the GIA report. Thanks.

 

[Miss Fortune]

Measurements: 6.50*6.50*4.44

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/19/2008 1:28:43 AM
Author: Miss Fortune
thanks! the symmetry is pretty great. the table is 2% larger than I would like but I do think the stone is really pretty.

What is the table%?
measurements listed above are good.

 

[Miss Fortune]

63% I know... a little large. My current smaller asscher has a table of 58% which is more to my liking but with a bigger stone I think it''ll be alright. your thoughts?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/19/2008 2:44:27 PM
Author: Miss Fortune
63% I know... a little large. My current smaller asscher has a table of 58% which is more to my liking but with a bigger stone I think it''ll be alright. your thoughts?

63 is fine as long as the crown height is high.
Have them run an ogi scan on it and get the IS image.

 

[Miss Fortune]

thanks!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/19/2008 1:43:08 PM
Author: Miss Fortune
It''s a stone from james allen and they''ve listed the cut as ideal. I''m still waiting for the GIA report. Thanks.

The JA ratings are not very helpful I have seen good that were better than ideals using their system.
Which is what Neil was getting at above.

 

[Miss Fortune]

oh.... got it. thx!

 

[boyscout]

Date: 11/19/2008 2:44:27 PM
Author: Miss Fortune
63% I know... a little large. My current smaller asscher has a table of 58% which is more to my liking but with a bigger stone I think it'll be alright. your thoughts?

May be good--depends how it performs in person. It is .15ct bigger than one I just bought that was 6.59*6.58*4.5, with a depth of 68.4 and a table of 54%, so given your stone's smaller dimensions, there is more mass in the crown (it does have a wider table), but that may also indicate a nice crown.

 

[Miss Fortune]

thanks boyscout- congrats on your purchase. I sounds beautiful! 54% table

 

[Miss Fortune]

Date: 11/19/2008 2:50:43 PM
Author: boyscout

Date: 11/19/2008 2:44:27 PM

Author: Miss Fortune

63% I know... a little large. My current smaller asscher has a table of 58% which is more to my liking but with a bigger stone I think it''ll be alright. your thoughts?

May be good--depends how it performs in person. It is .15ct bigger than one I just bought that was 6.59*6.58*4.5, with a depth of 68.4 and a table of 54%, so given your stone''s smaller dimensions, there is more mass in the crown (it does have a wider table), but that may also indicate a nice crown.

depth of this stone is 68.3... thoughts?

 

[boyscout]

Date: 11/19/2008 4:55:14 PM
Author: Miss Fortune

depth of this stone is 68.3... thoughts?

Everything I know about Asschers I learned from (a) this site, Karl in particular, (b) a great independent appraiser who knows Asschers and (c) viewing a few dozen stones. I am the first to admit I am a newbie, but given that I am somewhat OCD when it comes to researching any major purchase, I can tell you that I really did my homework.

There is no specific spec for Asschers, although the CW is that the depth should be in the high 60s to 70%. The table, ideally, should be mid 50s to low 60s. Once you have this combination, which you do, it all comes down to how the stone looks in real life. Photos and Asets help, but as Karl has said before, the ole MkII Eyeballs are the only real test. There is a great thread on here called "All About Asschers" with very useful info. It is in the FAQ section, I believe.

68.3 is in the sweet spot. It could be great, but it could also stink...never can fully tell with Asschers on specs alone. It is in the range that should be great, but the only way to tell is with your eyes.

 

[strmrdr]

What he said..
68.3 is fine if everything else is right.
In this case we need the CH and IS to tell that.

 

[boyscout]

Miss Fortune: If you are really interested in this stone, you should contact the vendor and ask them to reserve it for you...I think it is being discussed in another thread by another person too.

 

[Miss Fortune]

Date: 11/20/2008 8:44:51 AM
Author: boyscout
Miss Fortune: If you are really interested in this stone, you should contact the vendor and ask them to reserve it for you...I think it is being discussed in another thread by another person too.

thanks boyscout... Yeah, I just saw this. I'm always reluctant to post specifics and pics of stones on here. Shoot!

thanks again for the heads up.