Thoughts on this stone/IS/ASET

[islandmouse]

Hi all -- can I trouble you for some insight on this stone?

Round brilliant J VS1
AGS Ideal 0
Table 56.8%
Crown 35.2%
Pavillion 40.8%
Depth 62%

 

[yssie]

Nice stone, no flags in what you've posted.

Not precision cut and not H&A, but presumably you know that already

What type of AGSL report does it have - the DQD with Light Performance? And when was the report issued?

 

[islandmouse]

Nice stone, no flags in what you've posted.

Not precision cut and not H&A, but presumably you know that already

What type of AGSL report does it have - the DQD with Light Performance? And when was the report issued?

You've given me a lot of hope, Yssie! Thanks!

Yes, DQD and issued May 2014.

 

[islandmouse]

Sorry just to follow up -- Platinum light performance as well

 

[islandmouse]

Also, I think there is minor leakage. Unless I am reading it wrong? But do you think this will have a lot of fire? That's ultimately what I am looking for.

 

[yssie]

Also, I think there is minor leakage. Unless I am reading it wrong? But do you think this will have a lot of fire? That's ultimately what I am looking for.

Just a couple of wonky hearts (reflection of the pavilion mains - LGFs unevenly polished) - you won't see spots of "leakage" or "transparency" IRL, no worries.

It'll be a bright stone that will certainly show coloured light return in certain types of lighting environments (spotlights). Other "flavours" of RB might tend to show more coloured light return across a variety of lighting environments but the trade-off is brilliance (white light return - the diamond looking like an icy white dot). I think your stone is a happy balance.

ETA: Good re. report type and date, too

 

[islandmouse]

Just curious what y'all think about this one. Similar stats to the above in terms of the Cs. The vendor says this one is a better performer.

Diamond 2
Table 57%
Crown angle 34%
Pavillion angle 41%
Depth 62%
HCA 1.5

The table in these images should be clean (i.e., no inclusions), so not sure why there is a mark shown at about 12:00 in two of them.

 

[digether]

I am not an expert but the second one actually looks like a poorer performer to me. Looks like there is more light leakage under the table (areas that are white). I would definitely go with your first diamond.

 

[islandmouse]

I am not an expert but the second one actually looks like a poorer performer to me. Looks like there is more light leakage under the table (areas that are white). I would definitely go with your first diamond.

Thanks. That's what I was thinking, too! I noticed the white under the table as well, and was skeptical. I am by no means an expert, but from looking at prior forums here, I didn't think the second was as good as the first. But I thought I'd post it because it helps to get opinions, and I'm still learning more and more. Y'all are great!

 

[yssie]

Did your vendor state exactly what he meant by "better performer"?

Brighter? More fiery in some types of lights? There's nothing in those photos/images to indicate that one objectively performs better than the other. That doesn't mean that the vendor isn't right - he could certainly be seeing some differences IRL that push the second to the front of the queue - but we'd need a more detailed description to help figure out the "why".

 

[islandmouse]

Did your vendor state exactly what he meant by "better performer"?

Brighter? More fiery in some types of lights? There's nothing in those photos/images to indicate that one objectively performs better than the other. That doesn't mean that the vendor isn't right - he could certainly be seeing some differences IRL that push the second to the front of the queue - but we'd need a more detailed description to help figure out the "why".

Thanks, Yssie. You have perfect timing because I was literally just about to post a reply to this thread.

So the vendor (who is a trusted PS vendor, high reviews throughout the site) said the second is a better performer because they see it as the better or higher "J" color in comparison to the first. The vendor also said that the second reflects better light from the table.

I haven't seen either of these in person, but my significant other saw them in person and said that, while the stones were nearly identical, he and the vendor believed the second had slightly better angles. The first stone is about $400 less (which isn't a significant difference to us, as both are under our budget). Also, wanted to note that the second stone is not XXX (Vgood polish, but excellent cut and excellent symmetry). I can post the plots of each, if easier. The first has crystal and cloud listed on its cert (one of which appears on the table); the second one has crystal, cloud, and feather listed on the cert, along with the statement, "Additional clouds not shown." None of these inclusions are on the table, but both stones I've been told by my s/o are eye clean.

We are looking at one other stone, which I'll post at some point soon, but just wanted to get some commentary on the above. He's looking to make a move soon, especially as vendors start to get busier with the holidays.

 

[yssie]

They're both perfectly fine choices, so if your SO and your vendor compared them in-person and preferred the second then that's the way to go! This scenario is the perfect example of why I always strongly recommend seeing stones in-person regardless of how much information you've got - every diamond has a different personality that will be influenced by nuances too subtle to convey through digital media, and sometimes people find they definitively prefer the personality of one specimen over another

Both are J, but perhaps the second is closer to an I and the first is closer to a K. More colourless diamond material will absorb fewer wavelengths and less energy and will show higher-energy (brighter), whiter light return. Our eyes interpret "brighter" as "whiter", and "whiter" as "bigger", so higher-coloured diamonds will also look larger face-up than lower-coloured stones of similar size and proportions. Usually these sorts of differences wouldn't be noticeable to most people until the diamonds are a few grades apart - J and G, in my case - but perhaps your SO is particularly sensitive to it?

Direct side-by-side comparisons will also highlight other differences, like flavours of performance... The first stone has a higher crown and shallower pav, and the same table size as the second and similar lower halves; usually this translates into greater odds of seeing coloured light return in various types of lighting environments but the extra fire comes at the expense of some bright white light return in diffuse lighting. Translation: you'll see colour from both in the spotlights at the restaurant and in Costco, no worries! And both would be bright white dots under the office fluorescents or outdoors on a cloudy day. In "mixed" lights - on a sunny day with no clouds, say, you might see more colour from the first, but you sacrifice some brightness... and it sounds like both your SO and your vendor preferred a brighter stone.

There's no wrong answer here! This is all down to personal preference, and in this case two pairs of eyes that you trust have expressed the same preference so I'd recommend running with it

 

[islandmouse]

Thanks so much for your help, Yssie. It means a lot to have the reassurance of PS members. I just wanted to add the GIA cert plan for Diamond #2 in case this helps or if anyone can provide additional insight on the stone. The GIA cert notes that "Additional clouds are not shown." Again, diamond #2 is VS1. S/O says it is eye clean (he saw in person).

At this point, the other stone we are considering is H&A (not posted on this forum), and is eye clean but lower clarity and a bit smaller (although the price is also somewhat less than Diamond #2, but not a concern because both are under our budget).

Any insight is greatly appreciated. THANK YOU!