Sarin, IS, ASET 1.32 Evaluation Advice please - pix attached

[JA72]

Hi Guys!

I hope Lorelei, John Q and the rest of the veteran experts are around today because WF (those fast and wonderful people) have sent me pictures to evaluate a diamond I am interested in. Please take a look and let me know what you think.

 

[JA72]

And #2

 

[JA72]

#3

 

[JA72]

#4

 

[kcoursolle]

Overall it should be a very nice stone that is very sparkly and bright. However, the stone is a teeny tiny bit shallow with a slightly large table, but this mostly boils down to preference.

 

[JA72]

and lastly.... Sorry the title is wrong... it should be : 1.32 F next to a 1.25 G VVS2 AGSL 000 Ideal Comparison.

Please let me know if you see any problems with the 1.32 .

Thanks guys! You ROCK!

 

[JA72]

Thanks I am not very informed on the ASET images yet, so I am trying to figure out if the colors in the aset are what they should be, if there is too much of anything (green or blue). I am soooo excited and need to make a decision in 24 hours. I hope everyone is on the forums today. I want to know everyones honest assessment of the diamond. Originally when I posted I didn''t have any images (ASET, IS, 40x or Sarin) to post for an accurate evaluation. Thank God WF came to my rescue, brought it in and is evaluating it for me. I wish I had more time to look them over but I have to bring my hubby to the dentist for a wisdom tooth extraction in less than 2 hours! I hope I come back to many, many comments from the veterans and even newbies like myself that will tell me what they think. Hugs!

 

[phildominator]

Is it just me, or do the images make the diamond look off-center?

I've been staring at a computer screen for 10 hours, so I'm a bit bamboozled here.

 

[strmrdr]

a bit on the larger table and shallow crown side of the high performance range.
Should be a nice diamond but will have a different look than the typical ideal cut.

 

[megeve]

JA72, is this stone an ACA or from the expert selection? I am just wondering because of the shallow depth and a tad slightly bigger table and still scoring all the 0 ideals in sarin!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/24/2009 2:44:21 AM
Author: megeve
JA72, is this stone an ACA or from the expert selection? I am just wondering because of the shallow depth and a tad slightly bigger table and still scoring all the 0 ideals in sarin!

sarin ags score is the old system not the modern 3d system.

 

[megeve]

Date: 4/24/2009 3:08:33 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/24/2009 2:44:21 AM
Author: megeve
JA72, is this stone an ACA or from the expert selection? I am just wondering because of the shallow depth and a tad slightly bigger table and still scoring all the 0 ideals in sarin!

sarin ags score is the old system not the modern 3d system.

Ah, I see. Would it still falls in the ACA cut criterium?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/24/2009 2:21:32 AM
Author: strmrdr
a bit on the larger table and shallow crown side of the high performance range.
Should be a nice diamond but will have a different look than the typical ideal cut.

Ditto! What I would have said.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/24/2009 3:11:27 AM
Author: megeve

Date: 4/24/2009 3:08:33 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/24/2009 2:44:21 AM
Author: megeve
JA72, is this stone an ACA or from the expert selection? I am just wondering because of the shallow depth and a tad slightly bigger table and still scoring all the 0 ideals in sarin!

sarin ags score is the old system not the modern 3d system.

Ah, I see. Would it still falls in the ACA cut criterium?

No.

 

[JA72]

Thanks everyone.

Hi Megeve, The 1.32ct diamond was brought in for me. The reports and images taken and sent to me today. The two diamonds in the hand shot are the two that I am debating on. The smaller one 1.25 G VVS2 is an ACA, the other since it was brought in for me .... I don't know what it would classify as. Here is what my SA said:

When comparing the performance, the 1.26 is slightly brigher and the all around performance really became aparent when I held the diamonds under the table. While the 1.32 went a little dark, the 1.26 ACA did not. This is to be expected given the difference in proportions.

Overall, the 1.32 is a rocking diamond and very beautiful. No matter which one you choose, it will be a win-win.

Thanks I still think it is beautiful... even with the table being large and depth @ 59.7%, If AGSL and my SA say its Ideal I think I am comfortable with those percentages. Much better than most of the stones I see on others since I have been looking around the last year at every diamond that passes my way. But, I am open to resuming my search to find a diamond with better stats. I will sleep on it and see how I feel in the morning.

Thanks again everyone

 

[JA72]

Is it just me or does it seem like its more and more difficult to find larger colorless, VVS2 and above diamonds graded by AGSL right now..... If so, does anyone know why this is?

 

[Lorelei]

Larger colourless VVS diamonds are rare to begin with, so those graded by AGS won't be plentiful anyway, to cut to these standards often necessitates greater wastage of the rough to produce a diamond of this cut quality. Colourless diamonds of VVS and above can sometimes be cut with other targets in mind such as keeping the most weight etc, as these will often sell readily on colour, clarity and carat alone.

 

[JA72]

Hi Lorelei,

You are up late (or awake early). Thanks for the replies.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/24/2009 6:13:58 AM
Author: JA72
Hi Lorelei,

You are up late (or awake early). Thanks for the replies.

LOL! I am in the UK so different time zone! And you are most welcome!

 

[JA72]

Ahh, I am in Asia myself. Running into problems finding insurance. Chubbs no longer sells jewelry insurance over here ~ boy was I surprised to hear that last night! I think I remember you saying you had Chubbs in a previous post, but could be confusing you with another regular. Did you have problems finding an insurance company overseas? I am going to take it as a sign if I don''t find insurance that this diamond was not meant to be and to keep looking (or waiting) for more AGSL Ideals colorless, VVSish, 1.25 or above to become available. Won''t feel comfortable wearing such an expensive piece without great insurance.

I think I may be looking at the wrong time. I read somewhere that the more rare stones in my ct. range are being held back right now, I am guessing because the drop in prices and the lower demand with the recession, maybe? Not sure, but it sure seems impossible to find what I am looking for. You really have been extremely helpful with the explanations of the various aspects of the cut. I think I am getting frustrated and ready to just grab one since they are so hard to come by. It is rare to find an F, VVS2, AGSL 000, no flor. Ideal cut over 1.25. I just wish the depth, table and angles were a tad better ~ even though this is still an ideal.

I am pretty stubborn about getting what we want and not budging on the clarity and color at the same time pushing the limits of an ideal cut but still insisting that it is an AGSL ideal. Maybe I should start looking at GIA''s.... there seems to be so many more of them available. The cut is still ideal, but I know it could be "more" ideal especially after reading all the posts here on PS. But as you probably remember, after chatting with you back and forth, I started to really want a balance so that there is a great balance of fire and brilliance.

I think I just need to put this aside for a few hours and really think about my options. My poor, sweet husband really wants the best for me and is leaving the diamond selection up to me. I was ecstatic when he first told me he would let me pick whichever I wanted but I had no idea that it would be so much work. His only requests were that it be ideal cut, colorless, VVS or better and over 1.2ct. I think this is why it is hard for me, because he is being so patient and telling me to find only the best, I am trying to make sure it is. Time to grab a coffee, relax and put this out of my mind for a few hours before I have to start calling insurance companies. Hopefully I can find one to insure me over here.

Thanks again everyone, you guys are very helpful and supportive.

 

[megeve]

Date: 4/24/2009 5:33:25 AM
Author: JA72
Thanks everyone.

Hi Megeve, The 1.32ct diamond was brought in for me. The reports and images taken and sent to me today. The two diamonds in the hand shot are the two that I am debating on. The smaller one 1.25 G VVS2 is an ACA, the other since it was brought in for me .... I don''t know what it would classify as. Here is what my SA said:

When comparing the performance, the 1.26 is slightly brigher and the all around performance really became aparent when I held the diamonds under the table. While the 1.32 went a little dark, the 1.26 ACA did not. This is to be expected given the difference in proportions.

Overall, the 1.32 is a rocking diamond and very beautiful. No matter which one you choose, it will be a win-win.

Thanks I still think it is beautiful... even with the table being large and depth @ 59.7%, If AGSL and my SA say its Ideal I think I am comfortable with those percentages. Much better than most of the stones I see on others since I have been looking around the last year at every diamond that passes my way. But, I am open to resuming my search to find a diamond with better stats. I will sleep on it and see how I feel in the morning.

Thanks again everyone

Thanks for the information. That clarifys a number of issues!

 

[John P]

Hi Guys!

I hope Lorelei, John Q and the rest of the veteran experts are around today because WF (those fast and wonderful people) have sent me pictures to evaluate a diamond I am interested in. Please take a look and let me know what you think.

Hi JA72,

I'm on vacation but a little bird told me you'd like my input so I'm going up-periscope for a minute here.

The ASET for the 1.32 is great. As was mentioned, it's closer to a 60/60 make than a near-Tolkowsky. The image shows a great balance of intense light return and contrast and the face-up optical symmetry is in a different league than commercial cuts. The performance will be beautiful. Statistically you'll have a brighter diamond on your finger than most people you'll ever run into.

As far as comparisons go, you're considering two great performers with slightly different qualities: The near-Tolkowsky has a higher crown and tighter cut consistency - a bit more fire and brighter in some low-light conditions in my exp (did your SA compare them in low-light as well as diffuse and direct?). The near-Tolkowsky also has some "mind-clean" value in human craftsmanship and branding, which may or may not matter to you.

It's a win-win from where I am sitting...but I am long distance so I'd weigh the words of a trusted expert with the diamond in-hand more heavily. I think you should get the one you feel is the best value.

Ahh, I am in Asia myself. Running into problems finding insurance.

Where are you in Asia JA?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/25/2009 9:56:02 AM
Author: John Pollard

Hi Guys!

I hope Lorelei, John Q and the rest of the veteran experts are around today because WF (those fast and wonderful people) have sent me pictures to evaluate a diamond I am interested in. Please take a look and let me know what you think.

Hi JA72,

I''m on vacation but a little bird told me you''d like my input so I''m going up-periscope for a minute here.

LOL!

 

[JA72]

Hi John,

Thank you very much for taking the time from your vacation to review the diamond images I have posted. You are a sweetheart and being a fan of your posts, it means a lot to get your assesment of the stone.

We are taking the weekend to decide if we feel comfortable dropping so much $$ on a stone when we aren''t even sure if we can insure it or at the very least if we feel comfortable with mediocre insurance. I live in Japan. Chubbs will not sell a policy to me even if I write up a policy on my next trip to the US in Aug/Sept. We are trying to decide if we should wait to purchase until we can find out if we can even get a policy while over here. But that would risk the diamond being sold while we are trying to secure a policy. The upside of waiting is the peace of mind and knowing that I found a great and patient SA that will be there once all the ducks are in a row.

I am almost certain I would love this stone if we purchase it but if I can''t wear it until we make it back home to the US that would be a huge dissapointment. However, I really do take everything more experienced diamond lovers out there say and I know that while I would love this one, I would love one cut to better more "ideal" portions better. It is going to be a hard decision but one that has to be weighed carefully.

You are great, thank you for your post and evaluation. Feeling a little dejected but still hopeful that when it is meant to be all of this will work out. Who would have thought Chubbs would eliminate such a huge potential market in Asia!

 

[Stephan]

Ok, I have a newbie question here:

In the IdealScope picture: upper girdles are dark red, kites are bright red.
In the ASET picture: upper girdles are bright red, kites are dark red.

Why this difference and what does it mean?

Thank you!

 

[JA72]

I would love to use these images to understand the colors and aspects of an IS and ASET too Hoping the diamond masters will resume this class session soon....

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/26/2009 2:02:16 PM
Author: QueenMum
Ok, I have a newbie question here:

In the IdealScope picture: upper girdles are dark red, kites are bright red.

In the ASET picture: upper girdles are bright red, kites are dark red.


Why this difference and what does it mean?


Thank you!

different angles for different scopes, back light vs no back light.
Doesn''t mean much of anything.