New Poster - Looking at Asschers at GOG.. can I have some opinions?

[trevor9606]

Hi all, I have been lurking here for a while and it has helped a great deal. I am currently looking at asscher stones with Jon from GOG. He has made a video of 4 stones i looked at, I am leaning b/w 2 stones and i was just wondering what everyones opinion was. I know there are some people on here are good with asschers, i think stormdr or something like that is one person who i have seen comment on asschers, i know there are more but i can''t recall the names.

http://goodoldgold.com/diamond/4214/
Shape: Asscher
Carat Weight: 1.23ct
Color: E
Clarity: VS2
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: 1.93%
Lab Report: GIA
Lab Report #: 16305490
In House: Yes
Width: 6.06mm
Length: 6.21mm
Depth: 4.00mm
Table Percentage: 58.79%
Depth Percentage: 65.95%
Crown Depth: 16.60%
Pavilion Depth: 47.17%
Policy: Lifetime Guarantee


http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/4129/
Shape: Asscher
Carat Weight: 1.37ct
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: 4.33%
Lab Report: GIA
Lab Report #: 16387598
In House: Yes
Width: 6.09mm
Length: 6.14mm
Depth: 4.20mm
Table Percentage: 62.35%
Depth Percentage: 68.99%
Crown Depth: 14.44%
Pavilion Depth: 49.57%
Policy: Lifetime Guarantee


When I went to Jonathan at GOG (who was extremely nice and very knowledgeable) the first stone i listed (the 2nd in the video) was the clear winner, it appealed most to me. The 2nd stone I listed (last in the video) was also a nice stone, although i have to say I am considering it more because it is slightly larger than the other stone. They are both in my price range, i feel that the 1.23 is the better stone but i''m debating sacrificing a little bit in optics for a bigger stone. The 3rd stone in the video is very comparable to the 1.23 in size but i feel that the 1.23 had the better optics.

Any opinions and advice would be helpful. The video is on this page: http://goodoldgold.com/diamond/4214/

 

[trevor9606]

Just a note, as far as computers go, I am a Mac guy, so jonathan put the video up in Quicktime (the first time he''s used quicktime for one of his videos) so i can share it with my parents who use macs and aren''t too computer savvy.
I hope that everyone is able to see the video, let me know here, I know it will be helpful to jonathan to know if Windows users are able to see. I actually had problems when i used my Firefox web browser, the video wouldn''t come up... but when i used Safari as my web browser the video was right there on the page.

Once again thanks for all your help, i appreciate any input.

 

[Ellen]

Great vid!

Number 2 and 3 are clearly the winners, you couldn''t go wrong with either. Overall though, I''d pick 3, I think it looked the best in all lighting.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Just a note: though the 1.37 carat technically weighs more than the 1.23 carat, the 1.23 carat actually faces up larger than the 1.37 carat because the depth on the smaller stone is only 66% whereas the depth on the larger stone is 69%.

 

[trevor9606]

that is a good point, i will take it into consideration...thanks for your help

 

[strmrdr]

"When I went to Jonathan at GOG (who was extremely nice and very knowledgeable) the first stone i listed (the 2nd in the video) was the clear winner, it appealed most to me."

Buy it.
Simple as that.

higher table, same spread and looked better too your eye, no contest!

 

[trevor9606]

Yeah storm you are right, I said it myself, that was the one that looked the best to me and every time I look at the video I love it even more! Thank you all for your help, this forum has been a very valuable asset!

 

[strmrdr]

your welcome!
just don''t forget the pictures once its set! :}