Opinions? Images included.

[elle_chris]

Your thoughts please. I''m concerned about obstruction and as I don''t have any stones with these numbers, not sure what it''s gonna look like.

As per GIA:
Crown 35
Pavilion 40.6
Depth 61.6
Table 56
lower half 80%

As per the Sarin: Image attached.

 

[elle_chris]

IS

 

[elle_chris]

ASET

 

[stone-cold11]

Looks good to me. No obstruction issue.

 

[Ellen]

First, I''d ask if the diamond was tilted, IS/ASET looks off kilter. Also, the ASET seems to have more black in it than normal by the arrowheads, and has hints of that "paddle" appearance seen in a shallow/shallow cuts, though this isn''t what I''d consider shallow/shallow. I would ask them about that too.

 

[strmrdr]

can you post the WF regular picture?
It is right on the edge but looks ok, ask them to look at it from close range(as close as they can focus) moving out to 1/2 arms length.
The arrow shafts and or arrow head will go dark close but as it is moved away at what distance does it go away?
It is normal for it to go dark when you over obstruct it up close it is only a problem if it stays that way to far away.

 

[elle_chris]

Stone, Ellen and Storm- thanks for replying.

Ellen- I know what you mean about the "paddles". In fact, i see them in the x40 pic.

Storm- Sorry, here''s the pic. I thought i uploaded it with my original post.

I was thinking of doing an upgrade but to be honest, I''m not loving this one at all. WF just got the stone in yesterday but their gemologist won''t get to see it until Tuesday. I''ll see what he says. But based on the pics so far, i don''t think this one''s gonna work.

 

[strmrdr]

reg picture is showing strong obstruction issues.
looks like the majority of the pavilion facets are under 40.6
An in person look is needed to tell how big a real world issue it is.
I would say there is some but no way to tell how bad for sure from pictures.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/5/2009 7:34:49 PM
Author: elle_chris
Stone, Ellen and Storm- thanks for replying.

Ellen- I know what you mean about the ''paddles''. In fact, i see them in the x40 pic.

Storm- Sorry, here''s the pic. I thought i uploaded it with my original post.

I was thinking of doing an upgrade but to be honest, I''m not loving this one at all. WF just got the stone in yesterday but their gemologist won''t get to see it until Tuesday. I''ll see what he says. But based on the pics so far, i don''t think this one''s gonna work.

Gotta say, me either, after seeing the reg pic. However, it won''t hurt to ask about it. Let us know what they say elle, it will be good for education purposes if nothing else.

 

[elle_chris]

Storn- I thought so too, but I still don't know so enough so thought I was seeing things, thanks.

Ellen- I will as soon as they let me know on Tuesday.


Thanks again, guys.

 

[haagen_dazs]

Date: 9/5/2009 1:09:07 PM
Author: Ellen
First, I''d ask if the diamond was tilted, IS/ASET looks off kilter. Also, the ASET seems to have more black in it than normal by the arrowheads, and has hints of that ''paddle'' appearance seen in a shallow/shallow cuts, though this isn''t what I''d consider shallow/shallow. I would ask them about that too.

hi ellen
1) the tablet looks off centered..is that right?
2) what do you mean by a paddle appearance?
3) what does more blacks in the shaft of the arrow mean? (compared to the lighter black arrow heads)

thanks

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/16/2009 12:44:38 AM
Author: haagen_dazs

hi ellen
1) the tablet looks off centered..is that right?
2) what do you mean by a paddle appearance?
3) what does more blacks in the shaft of the arrow mean? (compared to the lighter black arrow heads)

thanks

Hi hd, sorry, I didn''t see this post until just now.

Yes, the table does look off. Sometimes it can look like this, but it''s only because the diamond was not level when the pictures were taken. However, all 3 pics are off in here, so it may be the stone.

If you look at the ASET picture, there is a faint blackness in the shape of a "paddle" surrounding the actual arrowhead. Then if you look at the real life picture, you can see where it is more pronounced, it''s not just a crisp well define arrowhead. If you go to WF and compare these pics with some pics of ACA''s, you''ll see the difference.

I''m not sure which pic you are referring to on the last question, so not sure how to answer that.

HTH!




elle, I saw a post this morning that reminded me of your thread, hence how I ended up coming back here. Did you ever hear back on this diamond?

 

[elle_chris]

Hi Ellen-

When WF got the stone and Bob saw it, he did say it was a pretty diamond(albeit in my price range). But then it turns out my appraiser no longer carries insurance so he couldn''t accept the stone. That coupled with finding a new appraiser, paying a few more hundred if i decided not to keep it as I was already out $140 for having it called in, and the pics, well, it turned me off.

The diamond went back to the supplier. It was not meant to be

 

[Ellen]

I see. Good luck in your search!