Which diamond to go with? IDEALSCOPE IMAGES OF BOTH!

[prking21]

Which one looks like the better diamond? Diamond A is from WF and is a 1.23ct, SI1, J, EX EX EX, scores a 0.7 on the HCA, and is $200 more expensive. Diamond B is from James Allen and is a 1.2ct, SI1, J, EX EX VG, scores a 1.9 on the HCA. They are both eye clean according to both sellers. Which one do you think is the better choice? Idealscopes and GIA reports of each. Im not sure if their process of taking the photos differ or if that should be taken into account. Thanks in advance!

I did a post several days ago that has more images (x40, ASET, H&A) of Diamond A.

 

[luvdajules]

Is the WF stone eye clean and also a J? If so, that would be my pick, but I think both are great options.

 

[John P]

Both should be strong performers. Both are AGS0 candidates and the care in cutting is clear from the suite of supporting images.

I'd add that both crown + table + lower-half combos should promote great fire, and the optical precision apparent in the IS images supports that. While GIA's rounding prevents knowing precisely what the lower-half averages are, the 75% (A) versus 80% (B) seem correct. Those facet groups are a stage apart, so the broadfire flashes you see may be a bit larger and pronounced in A, while a bit smaller and rapid in B. Understand that the visual difference I describe will be extremely slight - the kind of thing I'd mention in a side by side demonstration of such diamonds which (arguably) might not even be noticed by the average viewer until pointed-out.

Im not sure if their process of taking the photos differ or if that should be taken into account.

It appears the Ideal-Scope for A was placed on a different background than usual in post-processing. Nothing to worry about, the information is still solid.

 

[starryeyed]

It's hard to tell, but does Diamond B look a little cleaner to you?

 

[Diamondbug]

Both stones look awesome but if you want to be super picky and you should, my pick would be for the WF because of the smaller table. I have a WF 1.3 J with a 55% table and a GOG 1.67 F with a 58% table, both superior cut and there is a difference in the fire and scintillation. The WF gives out bigger, bolder fire and I love fire. So my preference is for a smaller table and shorter lower halfs.

 

[John P]

It's hard to tell, but does Diamond B look a little cleaner to you?

Comparisons may not be useful with the limited information. Clarity characteristics exist at different depths in a diamond. Just as a gemologist's microscope must be used to "descend" from table to culet, bringing different inclusions at different depths in and out of focus, a still macro photo is limited to a single plane of focus. Ideal-Scope photos are intended to demonstrate light return (and do) but the focal plane doesn't show the total range of inclusions in either diamond, nor is that the intent.

I used to encourage internet sellers to focus-on the "grade setting" inclusion in magnified (loupe) photos - especially in the SI grades. Over time I've been told - correctly - that doing so can throw-off the look of the image. For example, if the grade-setter is close to the culet the table and star facet lines get blurred, making the diamond less clean and crisp seeming...but if the grade-setter is in the table, focusing on it expressly can exaggerate its implications.

While on the topic, it's worth repeating that the plot on a grading report is not in-scale; meaning that a crazy plot may be noting a dozen inclusions which will never be seen IRL...while a different plot may show only a few inclusions, but all could be eye-visible.

For decisive comments on clarity in I, SI (and low VS) the best answers will come from a trustworthy gemologist with the diamond in-hand.

 

[Niel]

I'd base my decision on where you wanted to get your setting. Like a JA setting? Maybe a wf one better? That would sway my decision unless you plan on getting your setting elsewhere.

If you're getting your setting from neither places and specifically only buying the stone I'd get the whiteflash because 1. I prefer smaller tables and 2 I prefer fatter arrows. But I also like saving money so I'd strongly consider the JA one too. So because of that, I'd consider those thing only if you are not getting a setting from the same vendor. As I feel like the convenience of getting the stone set from the same vendor is more valuable to me than the minute number differences.

 

[prking21]

Wow thanks for all the feedback! Seems like I cant go too wrong with either!

 

[prking21]

Do you think it is a problem that Diamond B has very good symmetry and not excellent?

 

[John P]

Do you think it is a problem that Diamond B has very good symmetry and not excellent?

It's not a problem. On one side, Triple-EX or Triple-Ideal can be taken as a sign of care taken in the production process. On the other side, there is no eye-visible difference between EX and VG symmetry/polish (for that matter, some diamonds will not physically accept ideal-polish, although that's a sidebar here).

The Ideal-Scope image you posted demonstrates robust light return and good optical precision, both of which are more important to the diamond's appearance than EX or VG finish.