opinion on light leakage, please

[quaeritur]

Hello-

I'm a sleep-deprived lurker of this forum, and was hoping to get your opinion on light leakage in this diamond. The specs are:

.773 ct. D SI1 5.98X5.99X3.62 AGS triple ideal H&A
depth: 60.5%
table: 56%
crown angle: 34.9
pavilion:40.8

Thank you in advance, and thanks for the amazing wealth of information available on this site. I'm officially a cut junkie now!

The images below were taken with diffuse backlighting (light table). Camera magnification (L) and IdealScope with camera magnification (R)

 

[strmrdr]

The images show a bad ring of death.
ie. bad leakage just out from the center of the diamond.

While the arrows look nice its is my guess that the hearts would be a mess.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Looks like Strm hit the nail on the head.

Here's a link to a past thread that you might find interesting. It contains a discussion of the "ring of death" with pics.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/narrow-down-to-this-rock-need-your-advice.8492/

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Who took the photo - I suspect it is not a vendor because most use much less backlight.
If you took it please take a normal light photo of the girdle edge.

 

[quaeritur]

Thanks for your replies. Below is the original IScope image I received. I'll also post my photos of the hearts and arrows. To my untrained eye, they look good. That's why I'm not sure if I'm viewing this right.

Help!

 

[quaeritur]

For some reason, I cannot get the H&A image to upload. The file is 101KB, so I'm not sure why it's not working.

In any case, the first set of photos I took myself over a small light table. The second photo came from the vendor.

 

[quaeritur]

----------------
On 3/12/2004 10:44:47 AM Cut Nut wrote:

Who took the photo - I suspect it is not a vendor because most use much less backlight.
If you took it please take a normal light photo of the girdle edge.----------------

Hi Cut Nut-

Do you mean a side view of the stone?

Thanks,

 

[quaeritur]

OK, here is the H&A pic. Hope it comes thru. Thanks again!

 

[quaeritur]

Phew. I think I may have finally answered my own question. The two pictures below were shot in identical light situations, the stone I wrote about before has a ring, where the other one doesn't. But I find that either the pictures or my eyes are deceiving me, because without the light table backlighting, the "ring of wimpiness" in the diamond on the left really doesn't stand out that much to my naked eye. Despite that ring, this stone really did look beautiful to me. I will upload some pictures of why I liked it.

Thanks again, and more feedback is always welcome! (I wouldn't mind an opinion on the stone on the right). I can't believe how much I'm learning on this forum. Kudos to all who post such valuable information here!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

You have far too much backlight in your ideal-scope lighting.