Whiteflash: A Cut Above - How to describe them

[dandoboy]

I''ve read various people''s accounts on what Eightstar diamond look like, and Infinity diamonds as well. I have yet to come across any comments on what Whiteflash ACA diamonds look like. Is anyone able to attempt an in detail description of them for me?

 

[Mara]

Pretty.

ETA:..oh i see detailed description.

What are you looking for exactly?

There are two lines of ACA diamonds..Classic and New Line. New Line has light return from edge to edge for the most part with tweaked girdle cutting. They have longer more subtle flashes of light...and when I say subtle I don't mean hard to see. Just more of a consistent, all over beautiful sparkle. You see alot of flashes of light from the arrow tips particularly. The Classic are more like shards of symmetrical glass sparkle, harder and faster when you turn the diamond. They are both stunning in their own rights, it just depends on your eye. I had the opportunity to finally see a Classic recently as I have only owned New Lines and they were beautiful, I'd love for my next stone to be one just for fun...to mix it up a bit.

I'm sure John Q will chime in here with more a more detailed description on the differences between the two cuts and also maybe what makes an ACA unique but for me it's a well-cut stone, just like an Infinity or an Eightstar, but with it's own little cut nuances and personality...it is just what your eye prefers in terms of a type of cut or a brand...if you have the opportunity to view different ones in person, you should!

 

[Shay37]

Dandoboy, from the perspective of a consumer, I can try. I will preface this by saying I have owned both a Superbcert and now an ACA. Both were in the 3/4 ct. range. Here is what I see, the differences if you will.

The SC was cut to have thinner arrows. The ACA has thicker arrows. It''s sort of a cross between an Eightstar and an SC (or unbranded GOG stone). I think that Jon likes the thinner arrows and seeks them out to sell. When I say cross between, I mean that it''s arrows are thicker than the SC but not as thick as the 8. I think it has to do with the lgf % being around 78%. Jon''s and I think SC''s are 80 to 81%. 8''s are 75%. If I mess up, somebody jump in please?

Now for what I see. My ACA has a lot of BIG flashes of fire. In a lighting conducive to fire, the flashes are phenomenally big. The SC had smaller flashes. The difference between little Christmas tree lights versus the bigger ones. The SC is more of a twinkler, and the ACA just explodes. They both perform very well. I have found that I prefer the bigger flashes. The ACA performs very well in low light. Both were about the same in gray gosh it''s raining out light. In my bedroom, which was the worst lighting in the house for my SC, the ACA knocks my socks off. Lots of white light return. In an environment with a lot of ambient white light, the ACA becomes all about contrast (lights and darks). This would be my living room and dining room with no sunlight coming in but on a sunny day so lots of light available. Gee whiz, I hope this is the kind of commentary you were looking for. In sunlight (direct), everyone without exception has said to me are you trying to blind me with that thing. The flashes are so big that you almost can''t look directly at it. Under halogens at night, equally impressive. Arrows pop like crazy. I will link my new ring thread because I have a lot of photos in there. You cannot tell everything from them, but they are good photos and show a lot. Obviously, no camera lens can capture what the human eye sees, and there will be slight differences. If you have any questions, ask away.

BTW, I loved my SC. It had a very unique look. It looked good in a variety of lighting. Bottom line: I prefer the look of my ACA. It knocks your socks off. It''s not as quietly beautiful. It''s more in your face if you know what I mean. Hope this helps.

Shay

 

[Shay37]

Dandoboy, here is the link to my thread. I hope that this is the kind of stuff you were looking for. ring

Shay

 

[strmrdr]

Nice description shay.
one point then my comment
GOG has a wide range of personalities available in the diamonds he sells.
That he mostly goes for longer lgf% is falling by the wayside as he explores and offers a wider selection of personalities in his diamonds.

back to the ACA''s
From a technical standpoint I see them as middle of the road super-ideals.
By avoiding the extremes they look great in a wide variety of lighting conditions as shay mentioned.
They are well balanced and some will like that and some will like diamonds on the extremes or somewhere in between.

The more I learn about diamond cut the more respect I have for the knowledge and skill that went into designing the 2 ACA lines.
In some ways the science of cut is just now catching up with that the cutters like Paul and Brian have been doing for a long time.

 

[glitterata]

Shay, is yours new line or classic?

 

[Shay37]

Date: 10/10/2005 11:42:23 AM
Author: glitterata
Shay, is yours new line or classic?

Glitterata, mine is new line.

Shay

 

[Kim N]

Mara and Shay,

Where does it say whether it is New Line or Classic?

ETA: Also, do the ACAs have a lot of "fire"? I noticed you described the white light flashes, but I didn't hear mention of color flashes.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/10/2005 11:16:55 AM
Author: Mara

I'm sure John Q will chime in here with more a more detailed description on the differences between the two cuts and also maybe what makes an ACA unique but for me it's a well-cut stone, just like an Infinity or an Eightstar, but with it's own little cut nuances and personality...it is just what your eye prefers in terms of a type of cut or a brand...if you have the opportunity to view different ones in person, you should!

Thanks, Mara. The thing I would highlight about ACA is that every one is cut within a very specific range of proportions that, in Brian Gavin's opinion, result in the best possible Visual Balance. What this means is that he has worked to acquire facet construction that provides the best possible performance through the broadest range of illumination scenarios, whether direct light, diffuse light or soft light like candlelight. As for fire and white light - all proportions, including the minor facets, are crafted for specific visual balance. Of course, a smaller table and slightly higher crown might result in a diamond with somewhat enhanced fire within Brian's overall tolerances (as per some of the other active threads), but the aim is for the optical signature of every ACA to live in the same basic family.

As for the observations about Classic versus New Line, bear in mind that the differences are very subtle. I have compared it to the differences between two superb Cabernet Sauvignons from the same winery. One client and enthusiast contributed a nice write-up about those differences, in this thread (found in the glossary).

 

[belle]

jellybeans,
here is some info about aca''s

 

[Lord Summerisle]

so much to write... so little time...

but in a word... lovely.

Caz and i can often be found staring into her diamonds depths, seeing the arrows blaze with light and colour, the rainbows created on the car''s roof in sunlight.

 

[Shay37]

Date: 10/10/2005 12:57:02 PM
Author: jellybeans
Mara and Shay,

Where does it say whether it is New Line or Classic?

ETA: Also, do the ACAs have a lot of ''fire''? I noticed you described the white light flashes, but I didn''t hear mention of color flashes.

JB, check your IS pic. The new line has no light leakage. The classic line has deliberate light leakage around the edges of the Idealscope pic.

As far as fire, that is what I was talking about when I talked about popping colors. Plenty of those.

Shay