Pop the cork - I just bought the first Ocatvia

[Gypsy]

It''s just a stunning diamond. It does look like the diamond is just having a light party. I love your pics as well Kenny. I can barely operate a point and shoot.

It is an amazing gift and I know that whichever way it is set it will shine like a beacon.

 

[bling addict]

Amazing stone

wow! really. You take GORGEOUS pics

I like setting #3 the best for this stone.

 

[LaurenThePartier]

Date: 12/31/2009 3:59:45 PM
Author: kenny
Left: 2.26 ct F VVS2 asscher
Right: 1.34 ct H VS2 Octavia

Holy moly

- Kenny, thank you for posting this comparison! I''ll be interested to see what it looks like when it''s set, because as it stands, you just saved my dear W about $10k in potential "upgrade" (aka, new diamond) costs. LOL

 

[upgrade]

What a stunning stone! I''m in love...

I like setting 3 the best too.

 

[kenny]

Review of Octavia vs. Asscher. (Sorry, very long post!)
Here are links to the specs of each.

My Octavia
My Asscher

I'll call the Octavia O, and the Asscher A.
First, buying them does not make me an expert.
This is just opinion and is a blend of subjective and rational, left-brain and right.

I really wish I had an O of the same weight as my A.
Comparing a 1.34 carat O to a 2.26 carat A is not fair.
Obviously a bigger rock has more impact.
To make it even more unfair the A’s longer bars command more attention and draws the eye in, so a more fair comparison might involve the O actually being larger since its geometric features are smaller.

I put my A away for a week to cleanse my palette.
As I was drooling over only the O I worried that I’d not like my A any more.
Not true.
When I brought the A back out I was stunned how much I love its distinctive pattern.

Each cut has a certain atmosphere to its look.
The A strikes me as more classical, opulent, commanding and refined while the O is more active, aggressive, magical and exciting.
A mature look vs. a young look, if you will.
Old money vs. new.

I’ve read on PS to experience the characteristic 3-D hall of mirrors effect you should get the largest A you can, preferably over 1.25 ct – though I’ve seen stunning smaller ones, especially LaurenThePartier's.
Time will tell but I’m thinking to really see O’s distinctive pattern you may want to also keep it above 1.25 ct. or perhaps even larger since it does not have those obvious long bars to help anchor the look.
I’m talking about seeing the cut pattern here, not quality of light performance, which will be superlative in even the smallest Os.
But one good thing about the O is I think it will not be as fussy about color and clarity as the A is since it does not have those long revealing bars which make a diamond naked.
Also I’m in my 50s and younger eyes may get the effect of these cut patterns in a smaller diamond.

The 3-D hall of mirrors effect is very strong in the A but much less pronounced in the O.
Sure, this O is smaller but I’m pretty sure even at the same weight the A’s hall of mirrors will be stronger than the O’s since it is the result of the A’s long bars.
Instead of long bars the O has it’s own geometric features it uses to cast its equally seductive yet very different spell.

With the design of the O I really think Karl has tapped into something subliminal, something that we often see repeated in nature.
Google fractal image.
We see it all over nature.
One place is on the side of a pineapple.
When looking at the O in soft light the pattern is obvious in shades of gray.
In spotlighting the colored triangles illuminate on and off with an almost musical rhythm.

I’ll try to describe how their look differs in spot lighting.
In spotlight the A's the large bars and smaller triangles at the windmills alternate on and off.
The rate of on and off increases a lot as you turn the diamond so it is facing you (on axis).
With the Octavia you do not need to hold the diamond near the on axis sweet spot to get a lot of fire.
The greater crown height of the O means you get more of a light show when the diamond is viewed from further off axis.
This reminds me of good stereo speakers that sound good even when you don't sit right in front of them - better design.

When it comes to light return, the O is brighter in every environment I have encountered thus far.
In spot lighting the smaller O was so explosive that it seemed as large as the A.
It was like a V6 tying in a race with a V8 car.

In strong spot lighting I prefer the volcanic nuclear eruption blow your head off fireworks of O.
In soft or semi-spot lighting I prefer the pattern-rich look of the A.

Outside on a cloudy day the O looks brighter overall.
The A has those wonderful contrasty dark and light bars and the O has some contrast dark triangles mixed in but if you just blur your eyes, or see them both from a distance, the O is definitely brighter overall.

The O’s smaller table is also a huge benefit when it comes to glare.
In anything but the softest lighting when you move your diamond around you hit the place where the table’s glare turns the whole table white (or blinds you in the sun).
It is like the diamond's light show stops for a moment but with the O the table glare is just PART of the show, even in the sun.

A’s table is 61% and O’s is 33%, so you may think the O’s table is about half as large but actually is a quarter as large.
(Compare 1 and 2 inch squares: 1x1=1 but 2x2=4).
This means table glare is 4 times the problem in the A than in the O.
The absence of table glare problem is a real advantage with the O.

The O seems to have better spread, see the side by side pics in this thread.
The O looks almost the same size as the much heavier A.

In summary, neither is better.
They are very different looks.
If the hall of mirrors is your priority get the A.
If blow-your-head-off fire in spotlighting is your priority, get the O.
If your credit limit can handle it buy both and return one.
Still pics and even videos pale in comparison to live comparison.

Finding a well-cut A is very important but difficult, while finding an O that is an O is easy.

Oh and one last thing.
I hope there is a Big O in my future.

 

[beaujolais]

No. 3, for sure.

Say, your first asscher is a awesome, too. Really !

 

[kenny]

I'd love to hear feedback (disagreements?) about my review from Karl, Rhino, and DiaGem (and others) whom have seen Octavias and good asschers.

 

[yssie]

Thanks, Kenny!


That was a very helpful summary, esp. in combination with the dozens of pics you've posted of both beauties

. Definitely interested in hearing more input from any and all interested sources!

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/2/2010 6:52:24 PM
Author: kenny
I'd love to hear feedback (disagreements?) about my review from Karl, Rhino, and DiaGem (and others) whom have seen Octavias and good asschers.

I agree with what you said.
The Octavia is mostly med some large VFs and your larger asscher is Large-Very large-very very large VFs.
That is by design with the Octavia, I capture the look of some of the antique asschers I loved and boosted the brightness to modern levels at the same time.
There is a place in the market for both.

I love well cut asschers and both of yours are some of the best there is anywhere.
I would be very happy to own either one. I love them both!!!

congrates!!! and thank you!!!

 

[kenny]

Date: 1/2/2010 9:23:30 PM
Author: Karl_K

The Octavia is mostly med some large VFs and your larger asscher is Large-Very large-very very large VFs.

That is by design with the Octavia, I capture the look of some of the antique asschers I loved and boosted the brightness to modern levels at the same time.

Thanks Karl.
I do not understand this ????

VF?

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/2/2010 9:26:14 PM
Author: kenny

Date: 1/2/2010 9:23:30 PM

Author: Karl_K


The Octavia is mostly med some large VFs and your larger asscher is Large-Very large-very very large VFs.


That is by design with the Octavia, I capture the look of some of the antique asschers I loved and boosted the brightness to modern levels at the same time.

Thanks Karl.

I do not understand this ????


VF?

virtual Facets
http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/61/1/Virtual-Facets-and-patterns%2c-a-Discussion-about-step-cuts-.aspx

 

[kenny]

Karl is the spread of Octavias substantially better than generic asschers?

2.26 ct on the left.
1.34 ct on the right.
They look too similar.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/2/2010 10:14:34 PM
Author: kenny
Karl is the spread of Octavias substantially better than generic asschers?


2.26 ct on the left.

1.34 ct on the right.

They look too similar.

its in the same ballpark as asschers in the 67% depth range.
At 2.26ct it would be around ~7.35mm yours is 7.38/7.41

 

[kenny]

Edit.

So Octavias have about the same spread as my asscher.

So the similarity in apparent size is to be expected and must be because as you go up in weight an additional carat makes less and less of a difference in width.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/2/2010 11:13:01 PM
Author: kenny

Date: 1/2/2010 11:06:52 PM

Author: Karl_K

Date: 1/2/2010 10:14:34 PM

Author: kenny

Karl is the spread of Octavias substantially better than generic asschers?

2.26 ct on the left.

1.34 ct on the right.

They look too similar.

its in the same ballpark as asschers in the 67% depth range.

I'm confused.

My Octavia depth is 76.87%

My asscher's depth is 67.27%


So shouldn't my Octavia have worse spread than my asscher?

No, it has very close to identical spread.
At 2.26ct it would be around ~7.35mm yours is 7.38/7.41

Spread is not proportional to depth in step cuts.

 

[kenny]

Thanks Karl.
We both edited our last 2 posts after the other responded.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/2/2010 11:13:01 PM
Author: kenny
Edit.


So Octavias have about the same spread as my asscher.


So the similarity in apparent size is to be expected and must be because as you go up in weight an additional carat makes less and less of a difference in width.

correct.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/2/2010 11:17:18 PM
Author: kenny
Thanks Karl.

We both edited our last 2 posts after the other responded.

lol yea I noticed that.
I posted the info then decided to get the actual numbers.
its kewl :}

 

[kenny]

But if Octavias are 10% deeper how did you get them to have about the same spread?

I'm not sure I'll understand the answer so use small words.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/2/2010 11:22:27 PM
Author: kenny
But if Octavias are 10% deeper how did you get them to have about the same spread?


I'm not sure I'll understand the answer so use small words.

Octavias have a narrower pavilion ie shallower pavilion angles.
Others also run the p1 and p2 facets farther down the diamond which hides weight.
Also the small table on Octavia makes it lighter for the same depth as a larger table.

 

[y2kitty]

Personally, I''ve always wanted a PSer to take a road trip here to take shots of their stones/rings. kenny, any chance you will take Octavia to a glamorous local for some pictures?

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/3/2010 12:55:36 AM
Author: y2kitty
Personally, I''ve always wanted a PSer to take a road trip here to take shots of their stones/rings. kenny, any chance you will take Octavia to a glamorous local for some pictures?

wow that would be awesome!

 

[kenny]

Click here to see the Octavia set in a Boone Rings tension setting.

 

[Amethyste]

I am late to the party... but this is AMAZING!!!
Luscious stone!!!!

 

[diamondwanted]

OMG!!!!!!!!!!! I think I just felt drool fall in my lap...SERIOUSLY...That diamond SINGS!!

I honestly cannot get over the beauty of that diamond!!! I NEED ONE!!!!!