Whiteflash ACA Faceup Images Difference

[Gnmu]

Not trying to say anything against Whiteflash, but purely out of curiosity, I've noticed that the faceup images can be dramatically different for ACAs.

For example,
Stone A: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3823428.htm
Stone B: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3964563.htm

Don't get me wrong, both look great! But you can clearly see that stone A just seems to look significantly whiter than B, despite being an I rather than an F. Since I can only assume Whiteflash uses a consistent lighting/camera exposure/white balance setup, it seems the difference must be due to cut, but the only significant variation is a 34.5 CA in stone A instead of 34.8 in stone B. Does this really contribute that much to the overall difference in appearance? Or is it just a matter of lighting?

 

[Karl_K]

Different color shirt?

 

[MissGotRocks]

Diamonds are graded face down so it can be difficult to compare face up images. However, if you will notice, the specs are different. First diamond is 34.5/40.8 and the second is 34.8/40.8. I have had both cuts of diamond and can tell you that to me there is a visible difference. Not right or wrong, just different. However, I feel that the color grade of the stone has nothing to do with the difference. A 34.8 crown angle is steeper and creates what I call shading. Not a technical term - just my explanation for the difference. They are both beautifully cut diamonds though - I can assure you of that first hand.

 

[Johnbt]

" the faceup images can be dramatically different "

Have you compared the two videos?

 

[flyingpig]

For example,
Stone A: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3823428.htm
Stone B: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3964563.htm
Since I can only assume Whiteflash uses a consistent lighting/camera exposure/white balance setup, it seems the difference must be due to cut, but the only significant variation is a 34.5 CA in stone A instead of 34.8 in stone B. Does this really contribute that much to the overall difference in appearance? Or is it just a matter of lighting?

Although they try, the setup cannot be 100% consistent at all times. Diamond photography is extremely sensitive to light.
Stone A is well exposed to white diffused light entering the table, with minimal light entering from the side. That's why it appears white and frosted.
For Stone B, you have more light entering from the side into the pavilion, probably. The result is more glassy and crystal-like appearance.

See the third photo in this thread.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...light-performance-diamond-photography.227610/
It is the same stone under nearly identical conditions. But it appears more white and frosted on the right.

Yeap, it is just a matter of lighting. To quote @Karl_K, it is all about LIGHT, LIGHT, LIGHT, and LIGHT

 

[MissGotRocks]

I agree with you about the lighting. It makes a huge difference. However, if you look at the WF images, you will see that diamonds with lower crowns generally look whiter than ones with higher crowns, i.e. 34.2 - 34.5 vs. 34.8. Again, not good or bad but different. I have looked at inventory extensively and have found this to be the case. I've also had both and can see a difference. I wouldn't necessarily say that one stone is whiter than the other but I do think the photographs of them can bear this out. I think it is the difference in crown height. Many here prefer the higher crown especially when coupled with the smaller table as they think they produce more fire. Not sure I always agree with that either but the higher crown stones seem to have an edge to the look. Not a bad thing either. The real proof is with the diamond itself - not the static images on the website.

 

[tigertales]

Trust your eyes. Color discrepancies with Whiteflash AGS have been discussed on PS numerous times. For example:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/the-story-of-my-rings-grading-issue.245823/

 

[Gnmu]

I agree with you about the lighting. It makes a huge difference. However, if you look at the WF images, you will see that diamonds with lower crowns generally look whiter than ones with higher crowns, i.e. 34.2 - 34.5 vs. 34.8. Again, not good or bad but different. I have looked at inventory extensively and have found this to be the case. I've also had both and can see a difference. I wouldn't necessarily say that one stone is whiter than the other but I do think the photographs of them can bear this out. I think it is the difference in crown height. Many here prefer the higher crown especially when coupled with the smaller table as they think they produce more fire. Not sure I always agree with that either but the higher crown stones seem to have an edge to the look. Not a bad thing either. The real proof is with the diamond itself - not the static images on the website.

I have noticed that too. Slightly steeper crown diamonds I've looked at do seem to have more of the "shading" that you termed. But interesting that you said you have noticed the difference in real life!

 

[MissGotRocks]

I have noticed that too. Slightly steeper crown diamonds I've looked at do seem to have more of the "shading" that you termed. But interesting that you said you have noticed the difference in real life!

It is subtle and slight but noticeable to me. I honestly couldn't tell you that I preferred one over the other. Many folks would say they couldn't see the difference so it wouldn't color my choice.