Trying to understand (what idealscope image is telling)

[davidgelb]

Hey all,
My ring is in the possession of FedEx right now and it will be arriving at the apprasers's tomorrow. I get to see it (finally) on Wednesday!

In the mean time, I was looking at the specs on the diamond, and am trying to figure out what exactly the idealscope image is telling me:

I realize that this is a WF Expert Selection, but I can't exactly tell how good it looks under the idealscope. I understand that you want mostly dark red (I think!?!?), and that white indicates leakage and the black star pattern indicates symmetry. With all that info, can I deduce that this diamond, based on the idealscope, should have good light return, fire and scintillation? Is the light leakage shown on this image excessive, or is it about normal for an AGS Ideal cut, ex/ex?

Any insight is greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
David

 

[JulieN]

It's so beautiful, it could replace the Rose Window in Notre Dame.

 

[davidgelb]

Julie, hmmmm, not sure about that (it''s not even a H&A!) LOL!

I am just trying to learn whatever I can (I really have been having fun researching and learning), so I thought I would use that image as an example to understand exactly what info I can take from an idealscope image.

Thanks,
David

 

[Ellen]

It''s telling you it should have been an ACA, that it must be some horrid mistake. That it WILL be just as beautiful as an ACA. But luckily, the mistake is in your favor and you paid for an ES.

 

[Ellen]

p.s. The light leakage in this is fine.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 8/7/2006 9:52:52 PM
Author: davidgelb
Julie, hmmmm, not sure about that (it''s not even a H&A!) LOL!

I am just trying to learn whatever I can (I really have been having fun researching and learning), so I thought I would use that image as an example to understand exactly what info I can take from an idealscope image.

Thanks,
David

David, it most certainly IS a hearts and arrows cut! As a matter of fact, that is one of the most beautiful idealscope pictures I have seen. That is a classic cut stone...the leakage is there on purpose to make the stone very sparkly!!! It may not be an ACA due to some little measurement or feature here or there (because the requirements for ACA are very strict), but do not discount it''s value as an outstanding AGS0 H&A stone!

 

[Kaleigh]

That is one killer stone. I can''t wait till you get it and post pics for us.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 8/7/2006 10:15:00 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

David, it most certainly IS a hearts and arrows cut! As a matter of fact, that is one of the most beautiful idealscope pictures I have seen. That is a classic cut stone...the leakage is there on purpose to make the stone very sparkly!!! It may not be an ACA due to some little measurement or feature here or there (because the requirements for ACA are very strict), but do not discount it's value as an outstanding AGS0 H&A stone!

DS, David was right.......this isn't an H&A stone. It's an AGS0, but it's not an H&A. if it was, it would have made the ACA designation. ES stones aren't H&A, and that's why they offer such great value.

That doesn't mean they are totally beautiful performers; in fact, many of them absolutely rival the performance on H&A stones.

Not all AGS0 stones are also H&A. H&A relates only to the crispness/uniformity/standard of the H&A patterning in the stone. If one heart is even the slightest bit smaller, it misses the H&A designation. If one heart has a cleft just a little too long, it misses H&A. If the pattern isn't crisp enough, or if the separation between the heart and the chevron isn't just perfect on all eight hearts, it misses the H&A designation.

This doesn't mean anything relative to the stone's light performance; it speaks *only* to the H&A patterning.

Having said that, David, it's also important to know that the term H&A isn't regulated, and there is no one universally set and accepted standard for H&A. It so happens that Brian Gavin's standard for H&A is among the most stringent around. It's possible that stones he rejects for H&A would be called (and sold as) H&A stones by others whose standards are a bit softer and less exacting.

Either way, it's a beautiful stone. The symmetrical white dots suggest this stone will have really gorgeous contrast and scintillation. You really picked a winner.

 

[belle]

Date: 8/8/2006 12:35:09 AM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 8/7/2006 10:15:00 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

David, it most certainly IS a hearts and arrows cut! As a matter of fact, that is one of the most beautiful idealscope pictures I have seen. That is a classic cut stone...the leakage is there on purpose to make the stone very sparkly!!! It may not be an ACA due to some little measurement or feature here or there (because the requirements for ACA are very strict), but do not discount it's value as an outstanding AGS0 H&A stone!

DS, David was right.......this isn't an H&A stone. It's an AGS0, but it's not an H&A. if it was, it would have made the ACA designation. ES stones aren't H&A, and that's why they offer such great value.

That doesn't mean they are totally beautiful performers; in fact, many of them absolutely rival the performance on H&A stones.

Not all AGS0 stones are also H&A. H&A relates only to the crispness/uniformity/standard of the H&A patterning in the stone. If one heart is even the slightest bit smaller, it misses the H&A designation. If one heart has a cleft just a little too long, it misses H&A. If the pattern isn't crisp enough, or if the separation between the heart and the chevron isn't just perfect on all eight hearts, it misses the H&A designation.

This doesn't mean anything relative to the stone's light performance; it speaks *only* to the H&A patterning.

Having said that, David, it's also important to know that the term H&A isn't regulated, and there is no one universally set and accepted standard for H&A. It so happens that Brian Gavin's standard for H&A is among the most stringent around. It's possible that stones he rejects for H&A would be called (and sold as) H&A stones by others whose standards are a bit softer and less exacting.

Either way, it's a beautiful stone. The symmetrical white dots suggest this stone will have really gorgeous contrast and scintillation. You really picked a winner.

i don't think you can say definitevly that 'es stones aren't h&a' as i understand it, there are many factors that contribute to whether or not a stone makes aca. it may be that this doesn't meet brian's h&a standards for aca (or it could be something else that kept it out) but it could still be a great h&a.
i do agree, either way it will be a beautiful stone! i can't wait to see pics. congrats on your purchase!

 

[strmrdr]

looks good to me..

The IS says that its a classic style cut not painted.
has excellent light return
decent but because its not an ACA likely not perfect optical symmetry.