Understanding ASet images from WF

[kev-man]

I read Garry''s explanation about ASet over at Ideal-Scope.com. However the images he posted are very different from White Flash ASet images. What should I be looking for when looking at an ASet image from WF?

Here are two similar diamonds with very different ASet images. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks.

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/Compare_Diamonds.aspx?idnos=636711,32999#

 

[strmrdr]

2nd is goofy.
First I thought it was just the image but the IS is goofy too.
Its the old report style ags0 too.
How it made ACA is beyond me....Has too be a mistake someplace.


The first one is a much better diamond.

edit: picture shows the same thing as the ASET and IS for the second...

 

[strmrdr]

My advise would be too buy the first one as long as its eyeclean its a real nice diamond, I like it
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/Diamond_Details.aspx?idno=636711

 

[kev-man]

Thanks for the response.

I''m actually looking for diamond earrings so I will need two. I''ve just started my search so I''m trying to understand what I should be looking for in the ASet image. I''ll go with the assumption that the first diamond has a good ASet and Ideal scope image and use those for reference.

Let me know if there are other things in the ASet image I should look for as the guide on Garry''s site doesn''t seem to apply to these images.

Thanks again.

 

[strmrdr]

With rounds just use the IS no real need too mess with aset, just find another from WF that the IS looks like the first one and your good.
Your sales rep can help you find one.

 

[strmrdr]

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-283272.htm#

This one should match up nicely the one color grade difference wont make a difference.

 

[kev-man]

I was looking at that one as well.

My concern is the inclusions in the Hearts report (I started a different thread about that). It is eye-clean according to their definition but I don''t know from close up if the inclusions will be noticeable.

Do you know what magnification they use on those hearts reports?

Thanks for the help.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/12/2008 1:38:59 AM
Author: kev-man
I was looking at that one as well.

My concern is the inclusions in the Hearts report (I started a different thread about that). It is eye-clean according to their definition but I don''t know from close up if the inclusions will be noticeable.

Do you know what magnification they use on those hearts reports?

Thanks for the help.

heart images are taken face down and sometimes an inclusion will reflect, it means nothing as the diamond isnt viewed that way and it likely wont even reflect face up.

 

[kev-man]

Date: 3/12/2008 12:29:48 AM
Author: strmrdr
2nd is goofy.

First I thought it was just the image but the IS is goofy too.

Its the old report style ags0 too.

How it made ACA is beyond me....Has too be a mistake someplace.

You were right about it being goofy. The stone is now under review by WF and may get reclassified.