Please help decide between 5 WF ACA ~2.5ct Round Stones

[kuso]

I'm a diamond noob and I'm having trouble deciding 5 stones at WF.

The stone comparisons can be found here: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=3986369,3978020,3965440,3991272,3947727

Stone 1: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3986369.htm
Stone 2: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3978020.htm
Stone 3: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3965440.htm
Stone 4: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3991272.htm
Stone 5: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3947727.htm

My basic parameters are being quite eye clean and G color or better. I'm not sensitive to the magical 2.5ct number.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Dancing Fire]

#4 is a well balanced stone. The specs are in the middle of ideal range.

 

[rockysalamander]

I like #2, 3 and 4. #2 has the largest spread. I would probably ask WF to pull all three and take some side-by-sides and give you their thoughts. They have these inhouse, so can give you an opinion based on the actual stones.

 

[CareBear]

I also like 2,3,4. If you don't care about the 'magic' 2.5 number, then #3 is the best "deal" because you are getting a VS1 for the same price, with approximately the same diameter as the 2.5x VS2. But I would ask WF to do a line-up of them and see which one is the most colorless.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would also choose between 2,3, and 4. Someone else has the G VS1 on hold, but that one would be my personal choice because it is basically the same face up size as the others but higher clarity.

 

[TreeScientist]

I vote #4. All of the inclusions are white/transparent, so looks like it would be eye-clean from the video. Also a very well-balanced stone as mentioned by @Dancing Fire.

I'm not a fan of #3. The crown is painted, which could make the fire a little "mushy," although it would certainly result in the stone looking brighter if that's the look you're going for.

 

[ac117]

I prefer #4 followed close behind by #2. I agree with @rockysalamander that you should ask WF to pull your top 3 choices and have them evaluate and compare them for you. They could send you side by side pics/videos and tell you what they see.

 

[JLW05]

I vote #4. All of the inclusions are white/transparent, so looks like it would be eye-clean from the video. Also a very well-balanced stone as mentioned by @Dancing Fire.

I'm not a fan of #3. The crown is painted, which could make the fire a little "mushy," although it would certainly result in the stone looking brighter if that's the look you're going for.

TreeScientist - I am always so confused when it comes to painting and digging. This topic has come up before and I think I can spot digging but how did you spot that the crown in #3 is painted?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I vote #4. All of the inclusions are white/transparent, so looks like it would be eye-clean from the video. Also a very well-balanced stone as mentioned by @Dancing Fire.

I'm not a fan of #3. The crown is painted, which could make the fire a little "mushy," although it would certainly result in the stone looking brighter if that's the look you're going for.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that. No way is the "fire going to be mushy". The painted stones I have seen don't have the white portions around the edges, and this one definitely does. The stone just looks slightly tilted in the idealscope photo. This stone is my first choice!

 

[TreeScientist]

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that. No way is the "fire going to be mushy". The painted stones I have seen don't have the white portions around the edges, and this one definitely does. The stone just looks slightly tilted in the idealscope photo. This stone is my first choice!

Nope, this stone is clearly painted. At least on half of the diamond. Look at the right hand side of the ASET. See the green claws between the arrows? That is indicative of about 3-4 degrees of painting on the crown.
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/visible_effects_painting_digging_superideal_diamonds

Now, whether someone would be able to notice 3-4 degrees of painting IRL is another debate, but the crown is clearly painted.

 

[gm89uk]

@TreeScientist, I'd have to disagree with crown only painting of this degree causing mushy fire. The difference is exaggerated by prosumers. I'd say at most 2 to 3 degrees and almost certainly no one will notice. There was a more painted ACA posted about and @Texas Leaguer did a thorough investigation into it, including posting a side by side video Vs a none painted ACA.

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...-have-painting-digging.210763/?hilit=painting

Here is the side by side video

ACA used to have the new line which was purposefully crown only painted.

In another thread here is JP discussing crown only painted stones

You've done good research: Brillianteering variations with break facets are measured in terms of degrees of average deviation from azimuth, or normal indexing. GIA invoked a catch-all penalty at -4 degrees, largely to stop "swindling" strategies seen on the pavilion or on both c/p which were intended to hide girdle thickness issues. However that catch-call also caught the fewer-than-1% of "superideals" being cut that way (crown-only painting) on purpose. The first casualties were among Eightstar's beautiful diamonds, which fell into a "downgrade" zone when sent to GIA. Those diamonds might still have passed muster in AGSL's diamond-specific metric, but with the world's foremost lab unable to award the top grade the (few) manufacturers specializing in crown-only painting of high performing diamonds were less inclined to produce them. As a result they're now few and far-between.

Regarding normal indexing versus the painted look, I agree with DiamondSeeker that while those diamonds had a slightly different appeal the number of buyers who concerned themselves with the differences was a tiny percentage of diamond enthusiasts - and the overwhelming majority of people found them equally attractive. Nevertheless, it's cool that you are aware and interested.

I see that the Classic vs New Line tutorials I composed still appear on the Whiteflash website. Your best bet is to contact them directly to explore all options.