Performance Images Comparison (ACA vs ES)

[the_mother_thing]

@Dancing Fire Thank you; I thought that was the case. Would you mind posting - also - a close-up pic of the diamond as well? Looking at the hearts image, the arrows don’t look skinny to me, but I’m too lazy right now to hunt down in your past posts what I know you likely have at your fingertips.

 

[sledge]

Here is the question I would have and it relates to size, but I hope it's not taken in a negative manner as it's not meant that way.

In pretend land, if you were to get two stones identical in every proportion, color, clarity, imperfection, etc except size how would they perform next to each other? Now let's get further into pretend land and assume you have identical light sources, angles, environments, etc.

If a stone has the ability to produce a rainbow flash of level 9 on both stones, wouldn't that flash appear stronger on the larger stone? Not necessarily because you prefer size, but because you'd have more surface area so while the intensity is still a level 9, the size of the flash is larger giving the impression it is stronger?

You've probably read enough of my posts to realize I care way more about performance than size, and I don't associate value with size. I love the fact you are diving into details and trying to logically understand your own preferences and what will happen by tiny changes and if it will be worthwhile to you or not.

To me, it seems you have a stone you love and you want to replicate what you have but in a bigger size. You aren't sure if you are okay with tiny proportions changing because you are afraid you may lose something you love, but if the changes result in a positive experience for you then all is good. It's been my experience in life that the devil is in the details.

 

[Dancing Fire]

@Dancing Fire Thank you; I thought that was the case. Would you mind posting - also - a close-up pic of the diamond as well? Looking at the hearts image, the arrows don’t look skinny to me, but I’m too lazy right now to hunt down in your past posts what I know you likely have at your fingertips.

Here's a arrow pic. You tell by looking at the hearts. Notice the clefts on the hearts?. You'll start to see little clefts on the hearts at 79% LGF or >.

 

[Wewechew]

Very much enjoying this thread

 

[the_mother_thing]

@sledge It’s been a long day but I *think* I agree with you if what you’re saying is: if you had two diamonds that are entirely *identical* in every way — except one is approximately 30% larger — that a person could reasonably expect to see a larger/stronger ‘flash’ off an arrow (for example) in the larger diamond than the smaller one. I would agree with that because ... one is bigger than the other, thus one’s ‘arrows’ are bigger than the other and would produce a bigger flash.

And therein is the crux of my dilemma in deciding on an upgrade diamond and why I am asking the questions I am. Realistically, no two diamonds are absolutely identical; therefore, I have to determine if whatever differences (regardless of how minute they may be) I see in a potential upgrade diamond are =/+ to my current diamond’s performance, and only my eyes can determine that once I see it in person. Thankfully, I’m not in a position to have to “buy blind”, and instead can bring upgrade candidates into my home, my lighting, my environment, and assess them with my eyes and compare them with my current diamond ... so that I know without a doubt that my decision will not leave me wondering “is this diamond really as good?” simply because someone else told me *they think* it is. And that is precisely why I’m asking questions like “what impact a smaller table may have on the appearance of the arrows in normal viewing”. If - this morning - a few people had come back to me on here and said “a smaller table tends to minimizes the appearance of X” or something else that I know my eyes want to see, then I might reconsider my choice or at the very least, called WF and asked my SA to check that.

But rest assured @sledge I am not at all put off by your question as it relates to size because I think you know (or at the VERY least, have enough respect to not assume) that I’m simply “after big diamond.”

 

[Wewechew]

I’ve heard a couple people mention that even a diamond’s rough (exact mineral makeup) can play a part in how it looks. Each diamond has its own “soul”.

 

[the_mother_thing]

@sledge My apologies; you asked me earlier about Sarin details for my ES; I posted the Sarin details up-thread/Page 1, along with those of the ACA.

@Dancing Fire Thank you! Your wife’s diamond is stunning with her ‘long legs’! Looking at that picture, I think it maybe/kinda reinforces in my head what I’m thinking about a smaller table, but honestly, I’m too drained to try and articulate it right now). While I can see the arrows are a little narrower as they extend out, they don’t look like what - in my mind - I’d imagine 80 LGFs would look like. When I browse still images of diamonds (with consistent photography), I feel like I’m getting a lot better at being able to tell which ones have higher/lower LGFs.

@Wewechew I agree and enjoy threads where I can read & understand the various considerations people take into account when choosing what they do, even if/when it differs from my own likes/dislikes. And I believe I read that same thing recently as well with regard to the rough, but can’t remember exactly what/where it was.

 

[Dancing Fire]

@Dancing Fire Thank you! Your wife’s diamond is stunning with her ‘long legs’! Looking at that picture, I think it maybe/kinda reinforces in my head what I’m thinking about a smaller table, but honestly, I’m too drained to try and articulate it right now). While I can see the arrows are a little narrower as they extend out, they don’t look like what - in my mind - I’d imagine 80 LGFs would look like. When I browse still images of diamonds (with consistent photography), I feel like I’m getting a lot better at being able to tell which ones have higher/lower LGFs.

AFAIK, Super ideal cuts will not have a LGF of > 78%. I posted a Q about my wife's stone. As you can see some PSers say it is a true H&A stone, but say no...

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...-notice-the-tiny-clefts-on-the-hearts.247387/

 

[the_mother_thing]

AFAIK, Super ideal cuts will not have a LGF of > 78%. I posted a Q about my wife's stone. As you can see some PSers say it is a true H&A stone, but say no...

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...-notice-the-tiny-clefts-on-the-hearts.247387/

That is an interesting thread, which included another link I’ll also include here for reference, because I think it’s helpful, and an interesting read, as it relates to H&A alignment. https://www.pricescope.com/articles/hearts_and_arrows_diamonds_and_basics_diamond_cutting

I understand ‘super ideal’ criteria may ‘exclude’ LGF >78, but why? Does LGF >78 have a resulting/measurable negative impact on performance? Less light return, fire?

 

[mwilliamanderson]

I understand ‘super ideal’ criteria may ‘exclude’ LGF >78, but why? Does LGF >78 have a resulting/measurable negative impact on performance? Less light return, fire?

Interesting article. I seem to understand a little more each time I read it. My take is it does not have an impact on light return. DF’s wife’s stone looks amazing to me. It seems that the romantic aesthetic of cupids hearts and arrows simply doesn’t allow for broken (split) hearts!

 

[Dancing Fire]

I understand ‘super ideal’ criteria may ‘exclude’ LGF >78, but why? Does LGF >78 have a resulting/measurable negative impact on performance? Less light return, fire?

I think once you hit 78% LGF there is a possibility of seeing heart clefts thus the reason you won't see many 78% from the super ideal vendors. Don't think I have seen a 78% from BGD.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I think once you hit 78% LGF there is a possibility of seeing heart clefts thus the reason you won't see many 78% from the super ideal vendors. Don't think I have seen a 78% from BGD.

I guess that’s what I don’t ‘get’. Yea, there are little clefts in an image that you must have a specific scope to see - and only when the diamond is loose and upside down. But if the clefts don’t actually, negatively impact performance somehow ... guess it is basically a ‘mind clean’ thing. Or something one accepts if they prefer ‘skinnier’ arrows? What is your wife’s preference there? Is she as particular as you on matters of bling?

In other news, it’ll be here tomorrow.


And I fear I’m alone in this, but - dare I say - I am almost afraid of the size increase over my current diamond.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I guess that’s what I don’t ‘get’. Yea, there are little clefts in an image that you must have a specific scope to see - and only when the diamond is loose and upside down. But if the clefts don’t actually, negatively impact performance somehow ... guess it is basically a ‘mind clean’ thing. Or something one accepts if they prefer ‘skinnier’ arrows? What is your wife’s preference there? Is she as particular as you on matters of bling?

In other news, it’ll be here tomorrow.


And I fear I’m alone in this, but - dare I say - I am almost afraid of the size increase over my current diamond.

My wife knows nothing about diamonds. She just wear whatever I buy her. Don't worry,You'll love the size increase.

 

[junebug17]

I guess that’s what I don’t ‘get’. Yea, there are little clefts in an image that you must have a specific scope to see - and only when the diamond is loose and upside down. But if the clefts don’t actually, negatively impact performance somehow ... guess it is basically a ‘mind clean’ thing. Or something one accepts if they prefer ‘skinnier’ arrows? What is your wife’s preference there? Is she as particular as you on matters of bling?

In other news, it’ll be here tomorrow.


And I fear I’m alone in this, but - dare I say - I am almost afraid of the size increase over my current diamond.

No, don't say that LOL! You'll get used to it. It's going to be amazing!

I can't contribute anything else...I was struck by how similar the images were. ES stones do seem to be a solid choice. I'm really looking forward to hearing what you think when you view the diamonds side by side.

 

[Wewechew]

@Dancing Fire are you able to see the clefs from the face up view? Does it affect how you see the arrows?

 

[Wewechew]

And I fear I’m alone in this, but - dare I say - I am almost afraid of the size increase over my current diamond.

I was actually wondering about this because I remember you previously saying you were most comfortable in a 7-7.5mm stone

ETA I hate to say this, because your stone is one of my favorites on the board, but when I look at both diamonds side by side, I prefer the larger one. And not because it’s larger, but I truly prefer how it looks.

 

[Wewechew]

I believe @Karl_K said LFG % could be +/- 2%? I wonder if the new stone leans on the higher side of a -1% or -2%, and the CBI leaned more of a +1% or +2% ?

Regardless, I can’t wait to hear your thoughts once you see it in person!

 

[the_mother_thing]

Don’t have a ton of time because I need to run and get ready to head to my SS’s soccer game, but preliminary assessment is: WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER! I’ll come back later with more details, but this diamond is UUUUUH-MAZ-INNNNNG! It performs almost identically to my ES, but with more fire, bigger flashes, visible depth/contrast, and I don’t even notice the difference in arrows/LGFs ... likely because the ACA is bigger.

I’d be a terrible PSer if I didn’t share a couple of quick videos ... though the outdoor video isn’t great because it was cloudy. Of course, more to come ... but I’m loving what I see so far!

 

[Wewechew]

Don’t have a ton of time because I need to run and get ready to head to my SS’s soccer game, but preliminary assessment is: WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER! I’ll come back later with more details, but this diamond is UUUUUH-MAZ-INNNNNG! It performs almost identically to my ES, but with more fire, bigger flashes, visible depth/contrast, and I don’t even notice the difference in arrows/LGFs ... likely because the ACA is bigger.

I’d be a terrible PSer if I didn’t share a couple of quick videos ... though the outdoor video isn’t great because it was cloudy. Of course, more to come ... but I’m loving what I see so far!

Um, yep... that’s kind of an amazing stone

When you come back you better be ready for my first question- does it have faint fluorescence?

 

[mwilliamanderson]

Thanks for the teaser! That is one perfect looking diamond...enjoy...we know you’ll be sitting in the car with it taking pictures At least I would be.

 

[tyty333]

Gorgeous @the_mother_thing ! I think you'll get used to the size . Seems like most people do! What are you doing for setting?

 

[junebug17]

 

[Dancing Fire]

@Dancing Fire are you able to see the clefs from the face up view? Does it affect how you see the arrows?

No, you can only see the clefts with an H&A scope.
No, like any other stones it depends on the lighting conditions.

 

[kmoro]

Hi All .... I haven’t been around for awhile and read *most* posts on this thread ....

I am right that the main issue here is between 76 and 77 LGF???? What?????? A 77 LGF is absolutely perfect and sparkly and flashy and gorgeous.

And all the stuff about small table size .... ACAs all have small table size! They all have amazing fire!

I’ve spent a lot of time on this forum over analyzing and nit-picking too ... wanting the perfect specs ... I have two ACAs now, both with different specs, and they are both stunningly gorgeous and blinding to everyone who is around.

Maybe you might see a bit of a character difference in larger diamonds side by side ... but at some point you have to realize that your eye can’t see a microscopic difference between super ideal diamonds - no matter what you see in the videos.
Just my opinion after spending some time away from here.

 

[MissGotRocks]

@the_mother_thing the new stone is gorgeous! I have been following your threads and I think this is a 2+ carat size stone? Not sure of the color/clarity but it is just stunning! ACA diamonds are the bomb - welcome to the club!

Can't wait for tons more pictures as you have time - start a new SMTB thread so that everyone can enjoy them!

 

[MissGotRocks]

Hi All .... I haven’t been around for awhile and read *most* posts on this thread ....

I am right that the main issue here is between 76 and 77 LGF???? What?????? A 77 LGF is absolutely perfect and sparkly and flashy and gorgeous.

And all the stuff about small table size .... ACAs all have small table size! They all have amazing fire!

I’ve spent a lot of time on this forum over analyzing and nit-picking too ... wanting the perfect specs ... I have two ACAs now, both with different specs, and they are both stunningly gorgeous and blinding to everyone who is around.

Maybe you might see a bit of a character difference in larger diamonds side by side ... but at some point you have to realize that your eye can’t see a microscopic difference between super ideal diamonds - no matter what you see in the videos.
Just my opinion after spending some time away from here.

And I think that is the point of these super ideals - while there can be some variance in specs, the light performance and overall look is consistently gorgeous. I've had two ACA stones now and in terms of the razzle/dazzle of the performance, you could not tell one from the other!

 

[the_mother_thing]

@Wewechew I am REALLY digging it. Now that I’m back home and able to play with it a little more ... the size is a little ‘much’ for me/my lifestyle, but the performance is really enhanced (magnified, perhaps) by the size. I guess it’s easier for me to see the crisp faceting, depth, contrast, etc. so I’m just kind of drawn deep down into it. The videos maybe capture it, but they still don’t show what I see in person. The ACA probably looks a little brighter than the ES because it’s setting up high in the tension holder, and my cell phone case is white (same thing happened with the CBI videos). But there is just something about this one ... it’s just mesmerizing. And I just LOVE it! And to answer your question re: fluorescence ... negligible at best.



@mwilliamanderson Thank you, but no, I didn’t take it with me to the soccer fields since it's only in a temp ring holder.

@tyty333 Thank you; I’m sure I will get used to the size, especially since I can’t take my eyes off it! I’m bummed I’ll need to send it back for setting. I’m up in the air right now about a setting for it. I promised hubs I’d attempt to downsize a bit, and figured I’d probably go 3-stone with it, as that’s what I was toying with doing with my ES ... I like @yssie / WF Butterflies, as well as @mrs-b & @MissGotRocks gorgeous 3-stone rings. But I may opt to set it in a temp simple-soli for the time being while I get used to its size & personality as well as really decide on three stone setting options. Decisions ... decisions ... I was thinking I will likely repurpose the diamonds from my three stone, but up in the air if I’d prefer the smaller ones or finding a match for the center, and use the smaller sides for studs. I kind like the idea of a honkin’ center with small-ish sides so the center stays the focus.



@kmoro Part of what I was trying to figure out (before receiving this beauty) was whether the differences would be discernible to the eye in person. Yes, the cut/proportion differences are small, but it was fun reading & learning in the mean time. I am very happy with the appearance of the ACA’s arrows. I can’t say for sure if I’d be able to tell the difference if both diamonds were otherwise the same. But I can tell - in my .70 MRB - that the arrows do reflect the 80 LGF (or closer to 80, since it’s GIA).

@MissGotRocks Thank you; happy to be joining ‘da club! Yes, it’s 2.10ct, K, VS2; here’s the link to it on WF. I will probably take a few more pics/videos tonight and tomorrow morning and post them, but likely wait till I set it for a SMTB thread. For reference, what size is your ring finger? You know I’m stalking EVERY three stone ring for different combos, sizes, etc. to get a sense for potential scale.

 

[Wewechew]

@the_mother_thing I’ve been on the three stone bandwagon too. Was actually browsing side stones at BGD today. Can’t wait to see what you come up with!

 

[the_mother_thing]

@the_mother_thing I’ve been on the three stone bandwagon too. Was actually browsing side stones at BGD today. Can’t wait to see what you come up with!

I am kind of all over the place on 3-stone options. I’ve been combing 3-stone threads, google searching, all the regular PS vendors’ sites, etc. I really like the Butterflies setting; my only apprehension is if it’s a smidge too delicate for my everyday life, and if I need something a little more ‘solid’ feeling (e.g., Sholdt-esque). That’s why I’m thinking about going ‘Team Simple Soli’ for the short term while I sort that out, and it’ll give me time to adjust to the new diamond size for a little while as well. What options are you considering for settings? I feel like we have pretty similar taste, so maybe we can get a 2-fer!

 

[Dancing Fire]

@the_mother_thing
I guess this one is a keeper?