Pics! Can you tell the difference between EX steep deep HCA 5.4 and EX HCA 1?

[rogue]

..

 

[rogue]

Blocked flash...

 

[rogue]

Spot smiling...

 

[rogue]

It just started to rain...

 

[rogue]

..

 

[Mara]

love those windowsill shots!!! so pretty...

 

[Beacon]

I also love that red/orange/yellow fireball shot. Very cool!

 

[FacetFire]

I have to be honest here and say that, contrary to popular opinion, I don''t really mind a small inclusion that I can see. I would much rather have (and have chosen on occasion) a stone that returns a lot of light, has great fire, and just speaks to me, even if it isn''t completely eye-clean. The only point where inclusions start to bother me is if I look at the stone and it''s the first thing I notice.

Those pics are great, BTW! That looks like a beautiful stone with a lot of personality. The way you talk about it seems to say everything...

 

[Rod]

That stone is simply beautiful. And since it''s proportions are so so close to that of my own stone, I know how nicely a stone like this can perform. Your pictures (stunning by the way) aptly show off her beauty.

If you get this stone, I hope you truly enjoy him/her as much as I enjoy its'' sibling!

Best wishes.........

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 7/21/2006 9:45:12 AM
Author: rogue
Spot smiling...

LMAO!!! those last two are great, but this one is hilarious... *someone* has to love this stone... might as well be you, you''ve already named it! LOL!!!!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 7/21/2006 9:45:12 AM
Author: rogue
Spot smiling...

::sings off-key:: How much is that puppy in the window? The one with the spot on its nose... How much is that puppy in the window, I sure hope that puppy''s for sale... I swear that ''smile'' picture is calling you! LOL

 

[rogue]

Okay, so Spot went back to Blue Nile (bye Spot!), and I ended up getting the G VS2 from Diamond Source. Here is the thread on SMTR: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pics-of-my-stone-and-mounting-and-my-diamond-buying-experiences.48977/

 

[Regular Guy]

Congratulations! Looks lovely, and I appreciate your sharing about your process.

Who did the megascope analysis?

 

[rogue]

Thanks! Toby from Just Appraisers did the Megascope analysis. Standard issue with a loose stone appraisal. He ran it 3 times just to make sure we got the most accurate numbers.

 

[Regular Guy]

I don''t know well enough about these things (if others do, I hope they''ll chime in) but I''ll bet that, in comparison with what GIA leaves you with, OGI should be trusted, in defference to it.

Not that it matters now. Congrats again!

 

[Rhino]

Nice pix rogue and congrats.

I'd love to get my hands on that 34.5/41.6 for inspection. That's right on the cusp of GIA's Ex grade.

John Q... your comment had me rolling.

 

[rogue]

Rhino, that stone is long returned. With HCA of 5.4 and a discernable ring of death, I would have been excommunicated from this site if I had kept it!

 

[Rhino]

Is that right rogue? The ring of death was easily discernable? Part of my current research is finding the threshold angle within the steep/deeps whereupon this does become easily discernable. Traditionally I''ve always avoided stones with pavilion angles over 41 degrees because of the *critical analysis* (ring of death present and observable under the scopes) however fairly recently when we did an observation survey under diffuse daylight the ring of death was not visible in a stone we had here that had 41.2 pavilion angles with 35.1 crown angles (an AGS 1 because of leakage in the critical exam). It was actually a nice bright stone which is why this thread caught my interest. If you don''t mind I''d like to share a photograph with you of a diamond that does have an easily discernable ring of death to see if what you saw was akin. I appreciate your cooperation and I''ll post it in a bit.

Kind regards,

 

[rogue]

Hi Rhino, I wouldn''t say it was *easily* discernable, but in comparison to a stone with a shallower pavilion angle, with both stones held inside a plastic case with a black spongy backing, you could notice the ring of death in most lighting. Even without a comparison, I could notice it in a dark conference room with a faint flourescent lighting source about 10 feet away -- it seemed to be most noticeable in those conditions. I looked at it most of the time with the light blocked from the pavilion (as it was in the black case). With both stones in the high temporary tension setting, however, it was not very noticeable anywhere but that conference room.

The first picture I posted on the first page of this thread is of this stone, and below are 3 more pics of the same stone.

 

[rogue]

.

 

[rogue]

.

 

[Rhino]

I appreciate your commentary rogue. More than you know. Interestingly light leakage is enhanced against a black background so your comment doesn''t surprise me there. It''s your other comments that catch my interest in more normal viewing conditions. Attached is a picture I have here that is a GIA Very Good because of a deterioration in appearance (brightness) due to a visible ring of death. This first shot is a macro shot taken in diffuse daylight that is magnified with its accompanying DiamXray image and I''m pointing to the dull areas caused by the leakage with the blue arrows. It is this phenomena that I was curious to know if you saw or not in that stone, not against the black.

The next shot is scaled down more to size. Thank you kindly for this feedback rogue. I''m getting a couple of stones in my inventory recut and this was a proportion combination we have not received yet for our study.

Best regards and once again ... CONGRATS on your upcoming engagement.

Jonathan

 

[Rhino]

In the pix you posted rogue against the neautral backdrops, it doesn''t appear to be visible. Not like the one I did at least. This next pic is the same as above but scaled down more to size and you can still visibly see the ring of death.

This particular stone is one of a few I''m using in an upcoming video program on the optical differences between GIA Ex vs GIA Vg''s to help folks better understand the system.

All the best,

 

[rogue]

Great pictures Rhino--I think this could be a very useful post to have in the archives, and your video sounds like it will be invaluable. I don''t think I saw anything nearly that bad in the stone I had. Even against the black background, it wasn''t that pronounced. As seen in the pictures I posted, I think I recognized the darkness directly around the table reflection--very close to where the arrows originate--rather than the more outward areas you point to in your picture. From what I remember, even that darkness (perhaps, the spots of death?), was not that noticeable except in that low light conference room when I blocked the pavilion with my fingers.

I was concerned about that stone not because of the ring of death per se, but because of what its presence might mean for the stone''s light return and optical performance capacity in general, even in those circumstances in which I would not be able to see the ROD. I was afraid that the simple presence of the ROD would mean that the stone would just not have the capability to be as brilliant or would not scintillate as much (even though I didn''t really see a difference with my non-mathematical naked eye). Do you think that''s a reasonable concern to have? Would that only apply if, say, the pavilion is dirty and you have effectively created a black backdrop?

 

[rogue]

I posted the last picture I posted above again here, but with some arrows. The blue arrows show the darkness I was referring to. The black arrows show what I see in almost all stones and what I don''t think is a problem, but this looks like the dull area that you point to above. It looks similar in the photos, but I wonder if the intensity of the light lost is the key difference that makes one a ROD and one a "normal" feature of diamonds?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 8/5/2006 6:09:52 PM
Author: Rhino
I appreciate your commentary rogue. More than you know. Interestingly light leakage is enhanced against a black background so your comment doesn't surprise me there. It's your other comments that catch my interest in more normal viewing conditions. Attached is a picture I have here that is a GIA Very Good because of a deterioration in appearance (brightness) due to a visible ring of death. This first shot is a macro shot taken in diffuse daylight that is magnified with its accompanying DiamXray image and I'm pointing to the dull areas caused by the leakage with the blue arrows. It is this phenomena that I was curious to know if you saw or not in that stone, not against the black.

The next shot is scaled down more to size. Thank you kindly for this feedback rogue. I'm getting a couple of stones in my inventory recut and this was a proportion combination we have not received yet for our study.

Best regards and once again ... CONGRATS on your upcoming engagement.

Jonathan

Great example Rhino.

The bigger problem with that stone Rhino is the reduced light return of the outer girdle facets and lack of contrast that we would expect between the leakage and usually strong light return on a better stone.
Your stone would appear to be the same size or smaller than a stone of 10 to 15% less carat weight - which might cost 10 to 50% less. The well cut stone will also look far better when both were dirty.

 

[pyramid]

Are the dark areas which Rogue refers to not head shaddow rather than ring of death?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 8/6/2006 5:01:48 AM
Author: Pyramid
Are the dark areas which Rogue refers to not head shaddow rather than ring of death?

Yes Pyramid, they are the darkness of the camera lens.
They are also too small for anyone to see with their naked eye.

 

[rogue]

I''m not sure what I was seeing then, but when this was against a black background, I could definitely see the dark ring. Maybe I was in fact seeing the areas I noted with the black arrows that don''t look that dark in the picture?

 

[Rhino]

Hey Rogue!

Sorry for the late response. Thoughts below...

Date: 8/5/2006 9:30:20 PM
Author: rogue
Great pictures Rhino--I think this could be a very useful post to have in the archives, and your video sounds like it will be invaluable. I don''t think I saw anything nearly that bad in the stone I had. Even against the black background, it wasn''t that pronounced. As seen in the pictures I posted, I think I recognized the darkness directly around the table reflection--very close to where the arrows originate--rather than the more outward areas you point to in your picture. From what I remember, even that darkness (perhaps, the spots of death?), was not that noticeable except in that low light conference room when I blocked the pavilion with my fingers.

Awesome. LOL... spots of death are actually reflections off the pavilion that are reflecting back the camera lens. Those dark spots are fine as long as the balance of those don''t fall too much in the direction making the stone too dark which generally results from shallow angled diamonds. When pavilion/crown combo''s fall too much on the shallow side then you get too much darkness (not because of leakage) but facets reflecting back things obstructing light.

I was concerned about that stone not because of the ring of death per se, but because of what its presence might mean for the stone''s light return and optical performance capacity in general, even in those circumstances in which I would not be able to see the ROD. I was afraid that the simple presence of the ROD would mean that the stone would just not have the capability to be as brilliant or would not scintillate as much (even though I didn''t really see a difference with my non-mathematical naked eye). Do you think that''s a reasonable concern to have? Would that only apply if, say, the pavilion is dirty and you have effectively created a black backdrop?

Yep.

Given the two choices you had I would have suggested what you ended up with.

Peace,