WF ACA princess questions

[nielteid]

Hi all - I''m new here, but have read a few hundred posts so far.

Anyway, looking at a 1.25 carat princess such as this, I must be misunderstanding how the IS and ASET come in to play. I don''t have the links handy, but someone pointed out that blue adjacent to black is a "disaster" (not paraphrasing). Additionally, from the IS, ASET, and 40x photo, it really looks like this stone has an artifact of some sort, dead center. Yet it got WF''s ACA and five-star rating. (not sure if it''s AGS0 since the report isn''t uploaded yet.)

So... can I hear some thoughts on this specific diamond? I''m using it as a pertinent example since it is similar in size, shape, quality, and price to what I''m after. However, I''ve read threads that show a lot of example IS/ASET images of princesses, and they seem to look more pleasing than this one. I guess what I''m saying is... how did it get WF''s highest ratings? I admit I am a complete newbie at all of this.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Mrs W]

ASET looks really good to me

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/5/2009 3:50:50 AM
Author: Mrs W
ASET looks really good to me

Ditto, this is an excellent tutorial which explains how to interpret ASET images

http://www.highperformancediamonds.com/index.php?page=education-performance

 

[stone-cold11]

Looks good to me.

 

[jet2ks]

Date: 8/5/2009 1:56:03 AM
Author:nielteid
Hi all - I''m new here, but have read a few hundred posts so far.

Anyway, looking at a 1.25 carat princess such as this, I must be misunderstanding how the IS and ASET come in to play. I don''t have the links handy, but someone pointed out that blue adjacent to black is a ''disaster'' (not paraphrasing). Additionally, from the IS, ASET, and 40x photo, it really looks like this stone has an artifact of some sort, dead center. Yet it got WF''s ACA and five-star rating. (not sure if it''s AGS0 since the report isn''t uploaded yet.)

So... can I hear some thoughts on this specific diamond? I''m using it as a pertinent example since it is similar in size, shape, quality, and price to what I''m after. However, I''ve read threads that show a lot of example IS/ASET images of princesses, and they seem to look more pleasing than this one. I guess what I''m saying is... how did it get WF''s highest ratings? I admit I am a complete newbie at all of this.

Thanks in advance.

Agree with the other that the ASET and IS are excellent. It is a beautiful princess.

I think what you are seeing in the center is just the faceting. In the photo, the yellow bit is reflection of something in the room, not anything in the diamond itself. The IS & ASET show a spot of leakage in this area, which happens frequently with this shape, but is nothing to be concerned about.

As I understand it, ACA''s are cut within very stringent guidelines and then examined by WF to make sure the diamond is of highest quality before being included in the ACA line. If it doesn''t meet their requirements, it will become an Expert Selection.

 

[jstarfireb]

Looks like an excellent princess. A little bit of leakage/obstruction is normal and even preferable in some cases to give you some contrast. The amount of leakage showing in this stone is really negligible. And I''ve never heard that blue next to black is a disaster, especially not this minor amount.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 8/5/2009 12:09:29 PM
Author: jstarfireb
Looks like an excellent princess. A little bit of leakage/obstruction is normal and even preferable in some cases to give you some contrast. The amount of leakage showing in this stone is really negligible. And I've never heard that blue next to black is a disaster, especially not this minor amount.

That is a general comment made in many threads which states that obscuration( aset blue) next to leakage(white or black depending upon the ASET background) is bad. This doesn't apply to Princess cut diamonds which are preferred to have precise and symmetrical areas of leakage and obscuration. There are no princess cut diamonds without some contrast and leakage. The High Performance Diamonds Princess Cuts and WF ACA are cut precisely although each of them has a slightly different contrast pattern. You pay a premium for this level of cut precision but many on this board feel this is well justified because you are guaranteed to have a gorgeous looking diamond.

If you want the ultimate in symmetrical optics in a princess cut you might choose this one http://www.highperformancediamonds.com/index.php?page=view-id-diamond-infinity&id=595 although you are giving up some faceup size to do so.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

It is true, as several have already pointed out, that there is almost always some leakage detectable in the light performance images of even the best princess cuts. As stringent as the AGS Ideal standard is for princess, we commonly see Triple 0 stones with slight leakage, and often in the culet. Minimal leakage, detectable in a static image, will have a negligible impact on real-world performance due to the dynamic nature of viewing a diamond. Having said that, many AGS0 princess do not make ACA as a result of more significant leakage issues.