Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Need input on this diamond - 40x, Ideal Scope and Sarin Attached

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

abs100

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
18
Hi -

I just had this one tested and I am looking for feedback. Being new to this, I don't know exactly what to think. In my limited research I have seen "cleaner" Ideal Scope images and I am not sure if I should be worried about the "symmetry" value of 1 on the Sarin report for the crown angle? I almost forgot to mention, this one is a 1.71ct J VS2 and scored 1.0 on the HCA.

Just to help me understand better, how would this stone compare to this other one at White Flash for example: http://whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-311795.htm#?

Or even this one I posted about the other day:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/thoughts-criticisms-of-this-diamond.70409/

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Here is the IS image:

IS_GIA16196569.jpg
 
Here''s the 40x:

DI40X_GIA16196569v2.jpg
 
Here''s the Sarin:

SARIN_GIA16196569.jpg
 
ABS, I am no expert but the IS looks good to me. Good luck with your diamond search. I am sure that others will be able to give more meaningful feedback on your choices.
 
Diamondseeker:

Thanks for the response. I took a look at the link you posted and it would be great if you could share some specifics with me regarding why you feel it is better. In terms of HCA it seems similar to other one, both IS images are similar. The one I posted is larger and has a higher clarity score although the color is better on the one you posted. I did notice that the crown and pavilion angles are similar as well. I really would like to be able to make an informed decision and I very much appreciate your insights.

Andrew
 
Okay, on the stone you posted, the crown angle was 33.5 on the Sarin. I know that 34-35 is preferred. I also would rather have an I color stone than J, personally. Now I am picky about clarity and usually prefer VS, but in this case, I''d take the better color and cut over the VS2 clarity. I''ll look back and see if there was any other reason. Those were just the things I remembered.
 
Hi abs,

Out of the three you listed, assuming the color J is fine with whomever, I'd pick the 1.71. I think it looks fine. (really they all did) But the first one's definitely bigger.
31.gif
 
DiamondSeeker - Thanks for explaining. This all makes sense to me. Let me ask you this question, from your experience what differences would I notice between a stone cut with a slightly higher crown angle and slightly lower pavilion angle as compared to the 1.71 listed above? I am willing to compromise on color but I really need to be sure I am not making a mistake with the cut. Note - I am not hung up the concept of the traditional definition of an ideal cut even though this one does have a GIA "excellent" for cut.

Ellen - Thanks for the response, this is also what I was thinking but I wanted to be sure . . .

A couple more questions - do I need to be concerned in the variance of the crown angles and the resultant symmetry value on the Sarin being a "1"? Could this mean that the stone was polished in a sub-optimal way to maximize weight and keep it over the 1.70 mark?

Also, from the specs how could I calculate how big this stone will appear based upon "spread"?

Thanks again for all the input.

Andrew
 
At this point I''d call WF and have them look at the stone for you and answer any questions you might have.
 
Date: 10/13/2007 4:51:29 PM
Author: Ellen
At this point I''d call WF and have them look at the stone for you and answer any questions you might have.
Click to expand...
That is certainly a good idea!

I am not able to tell you exactly what the appearance difference would be with the crown angle at 33.5. I know I love the side profile of diamonds with crowns on the higher side as opposed to a more flat crown. That''s why I wouldn''t go below 34, personally. And I would not be happy with a J color diamond. I know there are people on here who have them and love them. I appreciate the beauty of all well cut diamonds of every color. But I''d rather have a 1.5 H or I than a 1.7 J. But this depends on your girlfriend''s expectations and preferences, not mine.
 
Ellen and Diamondseeker:

Thanks again - I have been discussing this stone with WhiteFlash but I was looking for some additional perspective which you have shared with me already. I do have a new question which pertains more to the HCA and the overall light performance of a diamond. Earlier today it suddenly dawned on me that the Sarin report is giving me both the averages and the extremes for the crown and pavilion angles. I ran all four combinations of the extremes such as low pavilion angle and high/low crown angle as well as the inverse high pavilion angle with low/high crown angle and I discovered that many of the HCA scores were lower than the score I received when applying the averages. What is the general consensus - is it good enough to just use the averages or do I need to be worried about all of the combinations of angles when looking at the HCA? Put another way - is the light performance of a stone with "tight" cuts going to be better than one with more variance in the cut accuracies?

Thanks.

Andrew
 
I think the answer is "not necessarily". The HCA is only an initial screener to help you eliminate stones that are clearly not good. As long as these stones scored around 1-2, then they should be fine.
 
Date: 10/14/2007 10:31:24 PM
Author: abs100
Ellen and Diamondseeker:

Thanks again - I have been discussing this stone with WhiteFlash but I was looking for some additional perspective which you have shared with me already. I do have a new question which pertains more to the HCA and the overall light performance of a diamond. Earlier today it suddenly dawned on me that the Sarin report is giving me both the averages and the extremes for the crown and pavilion angles. I ran all four combinations of the extremes such as low pavilion angle and high/low crown angle as well as the inverse high pavilion angle with low/high crown angle and I discovered that many of the HCA scores were lower than the score I received when applying the averages. What is the general consensus - is it good enough to just use the averages or do I need to be worried about all of the combinations of angles when looking at the HCA? Put another way - is the light performance of a stone with ''tight'' cuts going to be better than one with more variance in the cut accuracies?

Thanks.

Andrew
Click to expand...
HCA can only work with the averages. "Combination" means nothing as every stone comes with certain variance which can yield dramatically different scores when used individually. HCA assumes perfect symmetry and gives generally sound judgment for reasonably tighly cut diamonds like the J.

Everything else being equal, a less tightly cut diamond will not have better light performance and/or visual property than a more tightly cut diamond. Unless the variance gets pretty big however, it will have nearly zero negative effect. The J stone is tight enough not to worry about the variance.
 
Thanks for the response - that makes me feel better. I guess it was just my natural focus on the minutia.

Andrew
 
Date: 10/15/2007 12:17:34 AM
Author: gontama

Date: 10/14/2007 10:31:24 PM
Author: abs100
Ellen and Diamondseeker:

Thanks again - I have been discussing this stone with WhiteFlash but I was looking for some additional perspective which you have shared with me already. I do have a new question which pertains more to the HCA and the overall light performance of a diamond. Earlier today it suddenly dawned on me that the Sarin report is giving me both the averages and the extremes for the crown and pavilion angles. I ran all four combinations of the extremes such as low pavilion angle and high/low crown angle as well as the inverse high pavilion angle with low/high crown angle and I discovered that many of the HCA scores were lower than the score I received when applying the averages. What is the general consensus - is it good enough to just use the averages or do I need to be worried about all of the combinations of angles when looking at the HCA? Put another way - is the light performance of a stone with ''tight'' cuts going to be better than one with more variance in the cut accuracies?

Thanks.

Andrew
Click to expand...
HCA can only work with the averages. ''Combination'' means nothing as every stone comes with certain variance which can yield dramatically different scores when used individually. HCA assumes perfect symmetry and gives generally sound judgment for reasonably tighly cut diamonds like the J.

Everything else being equal, a less tightly cut diamond will not have better light performance and/or visual property than a more tightly cut diamond. Unless the variance gets pretty big however, it will have nearly zero negative effect. The J stone is tight enough not to worry about the variance.
Click to expand...
Ladies and gentlemen.
Paper scissors rock.

It is clear from the ideal-scope image that that stone with a little variance in crown and pavilion angles has an inproper scan or a tiny table tilt. Either way there is nothing any mortal can ever detect.

If there was a real variance within the crown and pavilion angle then we would see this much variance in the ideal-scope image.

I have been discussing this issue at length in this thread
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/a-cut-question-to-garry-h-and-others.70491/


symm vs table tilt.jpg
 
Thanks for weighing in Garry. I had actually been following that other thread and it made perfect sense to me although I was not sure how to go about determining if the issue was one of cut or one of measurement. Fortunately, you just answered that question in that the issue (if it existed) would show in the IS. Thank you.

Andrew
 
Hey Garry..
.5 and .3 inst enough to need too make excuses.
The sarin scanner isnt accurate enough too play this game anyway.

The odds of the stone being less than 100% aligned in the IS is 100000 times more likely than scan issues.
Even with a full sarin report .srn file accurate virtual images are not assured.
Basing one on 2 facets is gigo.
 
As for the stone itself some of my favorite combos are the shallowish/borderline steepish ones.
I dont have any problem with the angle combo of this stone.
The IS looks real good.
 
Just popping in to say that I have a J color stone (AGS-0, 2.36) and I LOVE it. It faces up beautifully white, and it''s a killer diamond. I am all about cut (beauty) and SIZE, and choosing a J color diamond let me maximize SIZE!
31.gif
 
Date: 10/15/2007 4:15:27 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)


Date: 10/15/2007 12:17:34 AM
Author: gontama



Date: 10/14/2007 10:31:24 PM
Author: abs100
Ellen and Diamondseeker:

Thanks again - I have been discussing this stone with WhiteFlash but I was looking for some additional perspective which you have shared with me already. I do have a new question which pertains more to the HCA and the overall light performance of a diamond. Earlier today it suddenly dawned on me that the Sarin report is giving me both the averages and the extremes for the crown and pavilion angles. I ran all four combinations of the extremes such as low pavilion angle and high/low crown angle as well as the inverse high pavilion angle with low/high crown angle and I discovered that many of the HCA scores were lower than the score I received when applying the averages. What is the general consensus - is it good enough to just use the averages or do I need to be worried about all of the combinations of angles when looking at the HCA? Put another way - is the light performance of a stone with 'tight' cuts going to be better than one with more variance in the cut accuracies?

Thanks.

Andrew
Click to expand...
HCA can only work with the averages. 'Combination' means nothing as every stone comes with certain variance which can yield dramatically different scores when used individually. HCA assumes perfect symmetry and gives generally sound judgment for reasonably tighly cut diamonds like the J.

Everything else being equal, a less tightly cut diamond will not have better light performance and/or visual property than a more tightly cut diamond. Unless the variance gets pretty big however, it will have nearly zero negative effect. The J stone is tight enough not to worry about the variance.
Click to expand...
Ladies and gentlemen.
Paper scissors rock.

It is clear from the ideal-scope image that that stone with a little variance in crown and pavilion angles has an inproper scan or a tiny table tilt. Either way there is nothing any mortal can ever detect.

If there was a real variance within the crown and pavilion angle then we would see this much variance in the ideal-scope image.

I have been discussing this issue at length in this thread
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/a-cut-question-to-garry-h-and-others.70491/
Click to expand...
Garry, can you please explain how you determined where the max/min c/p angles are?
If opposite (c/c or c/p) sides compensate each other, "my understanding" is that regular IS does not show that.
Please enligthen me.
 
Date: 10/15/2007 9:03:07 PM
Author: Lynn B
Just popping in to say that I have a J color stone (AGS-0, 2.36) and I LOVE it. It faces up beautifully white, and it's a killer diamond. I am all about cut (beauty) and SIZE, and choosing a J color diamond let me maximize SIZE!
31.gif
Click to expand...
Ditto! (....well, except that mine is only a 1.59, not a 2.36
emcry.gif
)
 
Hi everyone - just wanted to post a quick update. I have decided to move ahead and purchase this diamond. I appreciate everyone''s input and feedback and with the help of the posters on this board, the research I was able to find from here and the help of the White Flash team, I now feel extremely confident in my decision.

On a separate note, I also wanted to mention that the team over at White Flash has been terrific through and through. Overall very helpful and supportive while answering all of my newbie/naive questions with the utmost patience!

My biggest challenge now is to try and pick the perfect setting from the vast array available . . .

Regards,

Andrew
 
Congrats abs!


If you hit a snag deciding on a setting, just post about it and the gals will help you out.
28.gif
 
Hi Ellen -

It was a bit of a challenge to try and find the perfect setting. I ended up taking my soon to be fiance to look at various settings from a variety of stores. This worked out well as I was able to set some criteria to help me decide . . . In the end, I selected the Laureto Half Round in platinum from WF, here:

http://www.whiteflash.com/Engagement-Rings/Styles/Solitaire/Laureato--Half-Round-for-WF_689.htm

I am hoping she will love it. It is not too thick, has a nice prong style, should be set lower than some of the other settings and is not a "knife edge" so I am hoping won''t stick out as far . . .

I will post some pics once I have the final ring in a couple of weeks.
 
Date: 10/27/2007 8:57:20 PM
Author: abs100
Hi Ellen -

It was a bit of a challenge to try and find the perfect setting. I ended up taking my soon to be fiance to look at various settings from a variety of stores. This worked out well as I was able to set some criteria to help me decide . . . In the end, I selected the Laureto Half Round in platinum from WF, here:

http://www.whiteflash.com/Engagement-Rings/Styles/Solitaire/Laureato--Half-Round-for-WF_689.htm

I am hoping she will love it. It is not too thick, has a nice prong style, should be set lower than some of the other settings and is not a ''knife edge'' so I am hoping won''t stick out as far . . .

I will post some pics once I have the final ring in a couple of weeks.
Click to expand...
I''m sure she will, it''s beautiful!
2.gif



Good luck, we''ll be waiting.
 
I received the ring from WF this past Friday and the craftsmanship is truly excellent and I couldn't be happier with the setting.

I have looked at the stone under a few conditions such as spot lights, flourescent lights and direct sunlight. The good news is that the this stone faces up nice and white and appears to have good scintillation as well as showing very nice white flares/sparkles.

The bad news is that it appears to have less "fire" than I had anticipated. It has an occasional yellow flash here and there, but virtually no blue or red that I can detect. I knew that the crown angle was a little lower than some had suggested as optimal, and when I ran the numbers in the HCA, the results suggested to me that there would still be good fire in the stone although leaning toward bright performance. I am a novice when it comes to diamonds and I don't quite know how to think about this? I should point out that I am comparing the performance of this stone to one my brother purchased a few months back (see it here: link) which has numbers which very closely approximate a WF ACA stone. I had an opportunity to look at his fiance's stone at length a couple of weeks back and that stone has tremendous fire - for me it had a high "WOW" factor. I guess this one I just purchased looks more like a BIC than a TIC?

What I don't know is if I am thinking about this stone the wrong way - were my expectations too high? Should this stone have more fire than it seems to show? Should I be testing it under different conditions? Maybe I just misinterpreted the results of the HCA? Had I not seen my brother's fiance's stone, this might have been a non-issue, but with that frame of reference I'm not quite sure what to think now?

I am really looking for some expert opinions/guidance.

Thanks in advance,

Andrew
 
Here are the images from WF:

imageabs19999.jpg
 
Date: 11/12/2007 9:11:17 AM
Author: abs100
I received the ring from WF this past Friday and the craftsmanship is truly excellent and I couldn't be happier with the setting.

I have looked at the stone under a few conditions such as spot lights, flourescent lights and direct sunlight. The good news is that the this stone faces up nice and white and appears to have good scintillation as well as showing very nice white flares/sparkles.

The bad news is that it appears to have less 'fire' than I had anticipated. It has an occasional yellow flash here and there, but virtually no blue or red that I can detect. I knew that the crown angle was a little lower than some had suggested as optimal, and when I ran the numbers in the HCA, the results suggested to me that there would still be good fire in the stone although leaning toward bright performance. I am a novice when it comes to diamonds and I don't quite know how to think about this? I should point out that I am comparing the performance of this stone to one my brother purchased a few months back (see it here: link) which has numbers which very closely approximate a WF ACA stone. I had an opportunity to look at his fiance's stone at length a couple of weeks back and that stone has tremendous fire - for me it had a high 'WOW' factor. I guess this one I just purchased looks more like a BIC than a TIC?

What I don't know is if I am thinking about this stone the wrong way - were my expectations too high? Should this stone have more fire than it seems to show? Should I be testing it under different conditions? Maybe I just misinterpreted the results of the HCA? Had I not seen my brother's fiance's stone, this might have been a non-issue, but with that frame of reference I'm not quite sure what to think now?

I am really looking for some expert opinions/guidance.

Thanks in advance,

Andrew
Click to expand...
Hi Andrew,

I'm glad you posted. If I recall correctly I think we spoke about this on the phone just prior to your purchase? You said your brother had a diamond in the middle of the ACA range. I mentioned I'd be interested to hear your feedback regarding this very side by side 'look,' since the CA is a bit lower than the range we hold ACA to. To answer your question, it's possible for one to become accustomed to a certain look, but I don't know if your expectations were 'too high' since there are different - equally attractive - looks... I would counter your question by asking if you've given the diamond a chance on its own? Have you compared it to commercial makes in local shops under their lighting for overall performance? Have you checked it out in fire-friendly lighting such as multiple small direct LED or spotlights - as well as a range of lighting to appreciate its overall brightness, contrast, etc.? As you know, there is a reason Brian Gavin chose a particular 'recipe' for visual balance but it's not the only option out there. I'd hate for you to short-change this diamond because of a preconception. Curious to hear your thoughts.
1.gif
 
abs, I agree with John, I wonder if you''ve given it enough of a test run yet. Have you compared your stone to the same places/situations you saw your brothers in?
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top