Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Thoughts on this AGS Ideal diamond?

I don't know the ACA you have, but this JA stone looks beautiful. I love WF and have purchased from them, but it seems like the stone you have may not be mind-clean enough for you if the inclusion bothers you.
 
Sakuracherry|1394483627|3631236 said:
I don't know the ACA you have, but this JA stone looks beautiful. I love WF and have purchased from them, but it seems like the stone you have may not be mind-clean enough for you if the inclusion bothers you.
Click to expand...
I love WF too. Right now they don't have an ACA in my parameters. I wish the inclusion didn't bother me but somehow this particular one, although very tiny, does. I will probably have JA send me the stone so I can see it in person. I wanted to check with you PSers first.
 
That's a great idea. Order this one and compare the two stones side by side. I cannot imagine keeping any stone that is not mind-clean. I had to pass on a VS2 which had a black carbon visible from the sides.
 
It is going to have a different look than the ACA.
It is a near fic.
Notice I did not say inferior just different.
If you order it expecting an ACA like look this isn't it.
 
Karl_K|1394490282|3631309 said:
It is going to have a different look than the ACA.
It is a near fic.
Notice I did not say inferior just different.
If you order it expecting an ACA like look this isn't it.
Click to expand...

Karl, is it possible to elaborate on what that difference might be? I love the look of my ACA. It seems to have something a little extra and glows in all lights. I was even concerned about waiting and purchasing another ACA when it becomes available---- wondering if a 2nd ACA would look as good to me as the one I have now.
 
I have said all I can really say, I am already pushing the rules with what I already said.
Do a search for fic on the forum or maybe one of the prosumers will weigh in on the difference.
 
Karl, thanks. I thought fic was a typo hiccup : )

what I am gathering is---> that the way I naively described my super-ideal was important: it glows under all light conditions.

Not that super-ideal is BETTER, just different.

In other words: what you said.
 
My fiancé has a 1+CT AGS 0 with the exact same crown/pavilion and a 55.1 table/61.9 depth. Very similar to the stone you posted. It's just inside FIC specs and is a sparkling fireball.

I bet you'll like this stone.
 
And, for another POV, my first WF stone was an FIC Expert Selection - from all my research I was certain I would love it, but while it was beautiful, it just did not work for me and I exchanged it for an ACA (which did sing to me). I definitely think you should take the opportunity to see the JA stone in person and in different lighting conditions to see if it meets your expectations.
 
marymm|1394500343|3631396 said:
And, for another POV, my first WF stone was an FIC Expert Selection - from all my research I was certain I would love it, but while it was beautiful, it just did not work for me and I exchanged it for an ACA (which did sing to me). I definitely think you should take the opportunity to see the JA stone in person and in different lighting conditions to see if it meets your expectations.
Click to expand...
mary...what's not to love about a FIC too dark in certain lights?
 
marymm|1394500343|3631396 said:
And, for another POV, my first WF stone was an FIC Expert Selection - from all my research I was certain I would love it, but while it was beautiful, it just did not work for me and I exchanged it for an ACA (which did sing to me). I definitely think you should take the opportunity to see the JA stone in person and in different lighting conditions to see if it meets your expectations.
Click to expand...
Thanks, marymm. This is helpful information.
I've always had a love for diamonds that look dark with fire, and I am beginning to understand that this is what I might see with the JA stone, but I have the feeling I will react the same way you did, since I am mesmerized by the super-ideal cut.
I love how you describe your reaction to your ACA.
 
krisjon|1394499694|3631394 said:
My fiancé has a 1+CT AGS 0 with the exact same crown/pavilion and a 55.1 table/61.9 depth. Very similar to the stone you posted. It's just inside FIC specs and is a sparkling fireball.

I bet you'll like this stone.
Click to expand...

krisjon, that sounds great! I'm having it sent to me. After all this discussion I want to see it in person.

When I went to the website to buy it, it was labeled as a hearts and arrows stone - I don't remember that designation there yesterday, so it was a surprise. Maybe I was just too focused on the stone - and it's too new to have the little images next to it yet.

Should be an interesting comparison with the ACA.
 
Sakuracherry|1394489875|3631308 said:
That's a great idea. Order this one and compare the two stones side by side. I cannot imagine keeping any stone that is not mind-clean. I had to pass on a VS2 which had a black carbon visible from the sides.
Click to expand...

I understand!
 
I bet you'll be surprised at how nice it is. My fiancé's is also about near perfect H&A without it being a branded cut. Also remember that since these specs ride the entry point into FIC territory, you're not getting a darker, fiery stone. I think you get more of a balance of brightness and fire. To me, it's the best of two cuts.
 
krisjon - Talk about *almost* instant gratification - I'll have it by noon tomorrow and will report in! You comments are making me impatient to open the FedEx package! :appl:
 
Don't forget to post pics!
 
Can't wait to hear the results! I looked at your JA link. That stone is a spitting image of one we have and love - just a touch deeper and slightly bigger table. Ours is 61.9/55.1 with identical crown and pavillion angles. It's bright, sparkly and throws back colored flashes like a madman. It also appears to have twice as many facets (virtual).
 
The new diamond arrived and it will take a while to decide which look I like best. They behave almost the same as far as I can tell so far, but the "old" one has a slightly "tighter" pattern [I do't mean the H&A, but the look of the scintillation pattern] and is slightly brighter in some lights.
I will post preliminary photos to see if they generate any comments.
Both are G/VS AGS000 super ideal. One is slightly larger with one grade higher clarity, but the other comes with a better upgrade policy. The costs are equivalent.
I'm not sure these photos will be of much use but they are the best I have so far.
If I keep the one with lower clarity it will only be temporary & I will still be looking for another diamond. Maybe comments will shed more light - I love hearing PSer's opinions.
p1070932.jpgp1070914.jpgp1070913.jpgp1070904.jpg
p1070903.jpg
 
Good pics are hard to get! Both look darker than I know they are in person. In some, the FIC actually looks brighter. It's obviously all a lighting thing, which is hard to get right.

Just for reference/comparison, here are some less-than-great shots of my fiance's very similar FIC.

photo_2_47.jpg
photo_1_49.jpg

As for the "tighter" scintillation pattern on the ACA, it's hard to say. My guess is the FIC's steeper angles create those virtual facets I mentioned before and it breaks up the light/flashes differently.

This is something more for Karl K to clarify/explain.
 
krisjon, yes! you were right in your assessment just going by the numbers before my diamond arrived. Your second photo looks very much like mine [& as you predicted, mine shows a lot of fire too].
I'm going to try for more photos when I get home tonight- thanks for posting your photos. I'd love to see more.
 
Unfortunately, my better half is out of town for work at the moment, so that's all I had on my computer for the time-being. Hopefully, some of the FIC cut experts on here (like Karl) will be back to chime in.
 
The main cut difference between your diamond (FIC) and the ACA is that your diamond has a high crown angle (35.7 in yours vs 34.0-35.0 in ACA's).

Diamonds with high crown angles are more likely to show fire than diamonds with lower crown angles.
If you were to trace a ray of white light entering a diamond, reflecting off the bottom, and out of the top into your eye, you'd find that a high crown angle is more likely to have the white rays fan out out more broadly into its spectral colors (remember ROY-G-BIV?) when it exits the diamond than a diamond with a low crown angle.

Your brain takes in the colors of the rainbow, and reads it as a combination of the wavelengths. If all ROY-G-BIV colors enter your pupil and hit the retina, then you see white. If the white light is fanned out more broadly, then maybe only half of the rainbow can enter the pupil, so what hits your retina is the Red-Orange-Yellow part of the light spectrum--in this case, you see red.

This graphic, from Garry Holloway's site, will show you visually what this looks like:
http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/23_bicfic.htm

In essence, the difference between FIC cut proportions and typical ACA cut proportions is physical optics.

ACA's were designed to balance white light and colored light return under most circumstances to the likes of Brian Gavin (who was the cutter at WF until he founded his own company, Brian Gavin Diamonds).

Many cutters tend to stick to Brian Gavin's proportions, or very slight variations there-of (including BG's BG Signature line, as well as Paul Slegars at Crafted by Infinity-who notably prefers a slightly longer lower girdle facet). These variations do change the character of the diamond slightly.

In the world of top cut diamonds, a high crown angle would change the character pretty significantly. But if you look at all diamonds on the market, a FIC vs a normal TIC or BIC are very equally beautiful, just SLIGHTLY different, and just comes down to matters of price, preference, and/or availability.

I should note that Garry Holloway has said in the past that high crown angles tend to show the effects of dirt more quickly than diamonds with lower crown angles.

Lastly, FWIW, based on the pictures alone, I prefer the one in the diamond holder (not the ring), but it might be because the other one is dirty.
 
Well, it's impossible to get comparative photos! I'm good at glamour shots, but trying to capture the bare bones is proving more difficult.p1070990.jpg

Beginning to think it's a coin toss.

I can either keep the ACA until a larger ACA G/VS1with inclusions I can live with comes on the market-which I know will put me in a higher price range or I can get the AGS000 H&A G/VS1 now which is the size, color and clarity I want.The AGS000 H&A is colorless and completely clean with a 10x loupe.[ I know where the 2 tiny inclusions are and I haven't been able to find them yet]. So from cost, clarity and color this is the right stone, and the difference in cut is so subtle.


So, enough obsessing for tonight. I'll look at these two stones again tomorrow. They are both beautiful and I can't go wrong either way. I was hoping to get steered in one direction or the other, but in the long run there is no wrong choice. =)
Thanks for letting me think outloud!

ps. this is what happens when a person falls in love with every diamond they see. I just want them all :devil:
pps. now, in the evening light, the AGS000 H&A is the performance champ. [[[sigh]]] I'll see who wins in the morning light.

edit: they just posted the scopes for the ASG000 H&A
hearts_5.pngarrows_4.png
 
I love my ACA's. But aside from that, the big reason I'd personally choose the ACA is for the upgrade policy. If 2 years from now you decide you want a larger stone, a higher color or clarity, you can upgrade with no minimum price on the new stone as long as it is more than the original stone. You are kind of stuck if you go with JA. And trust me, I have changed from the original stones I first bought at both WF and GOG!!!
 
diamondseeker2006|1394752349|3633539 said:
I love my ACA's. But aside from that, the big reason I'd personally choose the ACA is for the upgrade policy. If 2 years from now you decide you want a larger stone, a higher color or clarity, you can upgrade with no minimum price on the new stone as long as it is more than the original stone. You are kind of stuck if you go with JA. And trust me, I have changed from the original stones I first bought at both WF and GOG!!!
Click to expand...

DS, hi. I've been thinking about that, and it was one of the reasons for my "back & forth" on these 2 diamonds. I could return the ACA now [I'm almost at the end of the grace period for refund], wear the AGS00 H&A for now and see if it continues to make me happy.

I'm planning to ask WF about my Mom's RB re-cut and that will probably take care of the question of the larger stone, but still, what you are saying is something important to consider.

Thanks.
 
teobdl|1394745612|3633480 said:
The main cut difference between your diamond (FIC) and the ACA is that your diamond has a high crown angle (35.7 in yours vs 34.0-35.0 in ACA's).

Diamonds with high crown angles are more likely to show fire than diamonds with lower crown angles.
If you were to trace a ray of white light entering a diamond, reflecting off the bottom, and out of the top into your eye, you'd find that a high crown angle is more likely to have the white rays fan out out more broadly into its spectral colors (remember ROY-G-BIV?) when it exits the diamond than a diamond with a low crown angle.

Your brain takes in the colors of the rainbow, and reads it as a combination of the wavelengths. If all ROY-G-BIV colors enter your pupil and hit the retina, then you see white. If the white light is fanned out more broadly, then maybe only half of the rainbow can enter the pupil, so what hits your retina is the Red-Orange-Yellow part of the light spectrum--in this case, you see red.

This graphic, from Garry Holloway's site, will show you visually what this looks like:
http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/23_bicfic.htm


Lastly, FWIW, based on the pictures alone, I prefer the one in the diamond holder (not the ring), but it might be because the other one is dirty.
Click to expand...
teobld, thanks. I had read some of this stuff and looked at Gary's graphic and your explanation clarifies.
Both diamonds were cleaned & steamed before I took the pictures.
After I started this thread, JA added the "True Hearts" designation to the diamond and then yesterday posted scopes. Here are the scopes for the ACA first, and the AGS0 H&A second. I think this thread is probably headed for the archives at this point, but wanted to post these in case anyone is curious.
thumbnail-2_0.jpghearts_5.pngthumbnail-1.jpgarrows_4.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top