Two Emerald Cut ASETs

[stuckebowl7]

Hoping people can weigh in on these- which looks better based on the ASET? I was told they both have nice light performance and brilliance, but first one has more sparkle. Thanks for your offering your opinions!

 

[Niel]

hey id request to have this moved over to rocky talky so you get more responses

also, link us to both of those stones? they both look very nice!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

#2 looks excellent!!! I do not like #1.

 

[Niel]

#2 looks excellent!!! I do not like #1.

I was thinking the same thing. Seems strange they would recommend 1 over 2, I feel like 2 looks perfect.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

#2 looks excellent!!! I do not like #1.

I was thinking the same thing. Seems strange they would recommend 1 over 2, I feel like 2 looks perfect.

I am noticing a pattern where they seem to recommend the stone that has the worst ASET! Have you noticed that today?!

 

[Niel]

#2 looks excellent!!! I do not like #1.

I was thinking the same thing. Seems strange they would recommend 1 over 2, I feel like 2 looks perfect.

I am noticing a pattern where they seem to recommend the stone that has the worst ASET! Have you noticed that today?!

haha I have! step cuts specifically. theres a recent oval thread that i felt like they recommended the best ASET i saw though. I do think ASETS are a tool that has its limitations, like any tool, but with how perfect that second one looks, im surprise they wouldnt just say " no contest"

 

[heididdl]

Two is just gorgous

 

[chrono]

Any pictures or video of the 2 ECs? I am wondering about EC1, if the wide shoulders and patterning is giving it a slight edge, in spite of one's first great impression of EC2's ASET. I get hesitant when I see the bars blend in together, no matter how red they are. It might hint at incorrect P3 angles. Not only that, if the stone is slightly tilted, the red now becomes green for EC1, so I would want to see the stone.

 

[Lula]

Without the rest of the numbers (depth, table, crown height percentages), and photos or a video of the actual stones, it's hard to say for sure. The ASETs are certainly helpful, but they don't tell the whole story. And the first diamond may have more pinpoint sparkle because of the wide corners, but less fire than the second stone if its crown height is lower or if the angles are off.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Honestly, I wouldn't have been able to choose my asscher without this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7SBfNGxTFE&list=UUEV7slr-i-VduBBnfv9MxhA&index=2

I would probably not be willing to choose a step cut without a video showing the light performance.

 

[YoungPapa]

Hi folks,

I appreciate the fact that some of you have made light of our contradictions (rather than criticize them), but am as confused as you are as to why it happens.

Our GG's (who, by the way, are almost all women, despite being constantly referred to as 'he' on the boards) have absolutely no incentive to recommend one diamond over another. They are all highly trained, average five or more years in experience, and have resumes that include employment with GIA, highly regarded independent appraisers, and some of the most prestigious jewelry brands in the world. When they inspect diamonds for clients, their only goal is to be the "eye's" of our customer and recommend the diamond that they would select if the money being spent was from their own wallet.

With that said, they just don't always agree with ASET images. As part of our process, they purposefully inspect the diamonds and make their recommendations without an ASET or Idealscope, and only take those images after the fact. We include the images as part of our analysis, but believe it is a bit disingenuous on our part to recommend whatever image looks best. If we did, that would surely make our lives easier, but I don't think it would be in the best interest of our clients.

This brings me to a couple of conclusions. The first is that our GG's are not nearly as professional as I believed (or are professional and have questionable taste). The second is that ASET images have some limitation that isn't fully understood or often discussed, and that a diamond can be more beautiful in real life than an image would suggest. I'm willing to admit it could be either, but hopeful it doesn't require an entirely new staff. Regardless, we are always seeking the truth, and will do whatever we can to make this process better for our clients.

 

[Niel]

This brings me to a couple of conclusions. The first is that our GG's are not nearly as professional as I believed (or are professional and have questionable taste). The second is that ASET images have some limitation that isn't fully understood or often discussed, and that a diamond can be more beautiful in real life than an image would suggest. I'm willing to admit it could be either, but hopeful it doesn't require an entirely new staff. Regardless, we are always seeking the truth, and will do whatever we can to make this process better for our clients.

i dont think anyone is saying they are great at their jobs.... I find the people (mostly girls ) very honest and forthcoming about the performance of the stones. Ive seen them many times recommend a stone that was cheaper that another one, even someone here just reserved one stone and even when it was a pass/fail situation, they still were honest and said it wasnt the right ston (showing they are being honest not just trying to sell you something)

I just find it interesting that we rely so much on aset yet they seem to be most limiting than we realize. I have mentioned this ones before regarding pears, but it was brushed off... i think an ASET is a tool, along with many other things we use to evaluate a stone, but along with everything else we use, an aset is limiting. And there has been a handful of example recently saying that, though very helpful, doesnt seem to be the end all be all of evaluation tools

 

[chrono]

I am coming to the conclusion that an ASET is one tool amongst many to evaluate a diamond's performance. Taken alone, it can easily be misinterpreted. There's no question it is very helpful to use the ASET but there should be a physical visual verification because it does have its own limitation. I've seen this clearly for cushions and step cuts over the last few months.

 

[stuckebowl7]

Wow, thanks everyone for offering their opinions! I should have linked in my original post and wasn't exactly expecting to start a whole discussion on the limitations of an ASET!

Diamond 1: http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/0.67-carat-g-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-191715

Diamond 2: http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/0.57-carat-d-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-213491

Thanks again!

 

[stuckebowl7]

Any thoughts after seeing the photos/videos? Thanks!

 

[Niel]

i would rather have a larger stone than a .5, and sense they reccomended the G i say the G.

 

[ariel144]

#2 looks excellent!!! I do not like #1.

I was thinking the same thing. Seems strange they would recommend 1 over 2, I feel like 2 looks perfect.

I am noticing a pattern where they seem to recommend the stone that has the worst ASET! Have you noticed that today?!

I was noticing that too...hmmmmm. #2 ASET is obviously the best ASET, but as he states above; ASETs don't always tell the whole story. Interesting.

 

[chrono]

Tough call as the two are very close but for me , EC1 gets the slight edge due to the smaller table and wider shoulders having a different impact on the sparkle. EC2 is also gorgeous, make no mistake about it. Basically, you can't go wrong with either choice.

 

[Karl_K]

There are a ton of things that effect the beauty of a diamond that ASET does not show.
Lets start with what it does show here:
It shows that these both are above average in brightness potential and both should do well.

What it does not tell us is how much scintillation and life each stone has.
A stone with a technically worse ASET could have a lot more life than one with a better ASET with step cuts.
For example a stone with huge p2 facets at 41 degrees looks awesome in ASET with a ton of red but not so great in the real world when you start moving it.
ASET works better with rounds where the facets are locked in relationship with each other by the design.
There are a billion more variables that ASET can't account for in step cuts than in rounds.

I like to get ASET images for them but I pay close attention to what someone who is looking at the stones themselves has to say.
Then balance one against the other. If a stone has an awful ASET I would pass even if someone thought the diamond looked good but otherwise I would carefully consider the persons who is viewing its opinion.