Whiteflash ACA New Line - still made?

[Lightfoot]

Dear PriceScope members - regarding Whiteflash's ACA New Line, is it still produced? I did some searching but couldn't find anything recent discussing New Line vs. Classic. I believe the most recent post I saw was something a few years back from Brian Gavin (while he was still at Whiteflash) mentioning how they stopped making New Line and went back to classic due to concerns of "brillianteering" being noted on reports (but only GIA reports if I'm remembering correctly??)

The reason I ask is because I'm looking to go with Whiteflash for an e-ring (they have a nice setting I would like to use) but all the Idealscope images look like Classic ACAs. I haven't seen either in person, and I have read that it is hard to tell the differences between the two, but the description most PS members that New Line has more fluid and brighter flashes does sound more desirable to me vs. a Classic.

I believe I did also read somewhere that New Line ACAs are still cut but only on request - does anyone know if this is true? If a Whiteflash rep would be able to shed some light on this that would be great as well (I'll probably be giving them a call soon anyway).

On a related note, are BGD Signature H&A's similar to Whiteflash New Lines? Their Idealscope images seem very similar to the Whiteflash ones, which again seem just like the Classic Idealscope images that have been posted in other threads.

If anyone can shed some light on this I would appreciate it. Again, I know that many have mentioned that there is no difference in terms of beauty but it does seem, from the older threads I've read, that many PSers have a preference for New Line.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

My guess is that classic sold better and that is why they quit producing the others. I do not believe for a minute that those stones were better than the regular classic cut. It would be impossible to be brighter as far as I am concerned. But I am sure there are people around who might know more to the story, such as John P., maybe.

 

[John P]

You've done good research: Brillianteering variations with break facets are measured in terms of degrees of average deviation from azimuth, or normal indexing. GIA invoked a catch-all penalty at -4 degrees, largely to stop "swindling" strategies seen on the pavilion or on both c/p which were intended to hide girdle thickness issues. However that catch-call also caught the fewer-than-1% of "superideals" being cut that way (crown-only painting) on purpose. The first casualties were among Eightstar's beautiful diamonds, which fell into a "downgrade" zone when sent to GIA. Those diamonds might still have passed muster in AGSL's diamond-specific metric, but with the world's foremost lab unable to award the top grade the (few) manufacturers specializing in crown-only painting of high performing diamonds were less inclined to produce them. As a result they're now few and far-between.

Regarding normal indexing versus the painted look, I agree with DiamondSeeker that while those diamonds had a slightly different appeal the number of buyers who concerned themselves with the differences was a tiny percentage of diamond enthusiasts - and the overwhelming majority of people found them equally attractive. Nevertheless, it's cool that you are aware and interested.

I see that the Classic vs New Line tutorials I composed still appear on the Whiteflash website. Your best bet is to contact them directly to explore all options.

 

[Lightfoot]

John and diamondseeker - just wanted to say thank you for the replies. That's interesting (and I suppose unfortunate) that it affected Eightstars - although as you mention, most people wouldn't notice the effects of crown painting. I also had the opportunity to speak to Bob at Whiteflash who provided similar information and also did not believe that New Line and Classic both looked similar and equally beautiful. (Thanks as well Bob for your help)

I actually had come across that Whiteflash tutorial/FAQ on New Line vs. Classic - it was how I knew the difference between the Idealscope images

 

[Lightfoot]

Not sure how to edit my above post but just noticed a typo.

I wrote, "Bob at Whiteflash who provided similar information and also did not believe that New Line and Classic both looked similar and equally beautiful."

The "not" shouldn't have been there. What I meant to say was that he felt both looked similar and equally beautiful.

 

[Allison D.]

Lightfoot, I'm glad you had an opportunity to talk with Bob about this, but I did want to still answer the question.

Quite some while back (which coincided pretty closely with the rollout of GIA's cut grade metrix), there was quite a bit of discussion here and in other arenas about painting. The demand for that particular look diminished, so we've concentrated on our Classic ACA.

I actually have a few friends who preferred the New Line, but again, it's a personal taste thing.

 

[Andelain]

Lightfoot, I'm glad you had an opportunity to talk with Bob about this, but I did want to still answer the question.

Quite some while back (which coincided pretty closely with the rollout of GIA's cut grade metrix), there was quite a bit of discussion here and in other arenas about painting. The demand for that particular look diminished, so we've concentrated on our Classic ACA.

I actually have a few friends who preferred the New Line, but again, it's a personal taste thing.

Can you post the link to the tutorial about the difference?

I guess I'm in the minority, I'd rather you bring back the New Line. I love the current ACA's but my two Eightstars just can't be beat.

 

[Allison D.]

Lightfoot, I'm glad you had an opportunity to talk with Bob about this, but I did want to still answer the question.

Quite some while back (which coincided pretty closely with the rollout of GIA's cut grade metrix), there was quite a bit of discussion here and in other arenas about painting. The demand for that particular look diminished, so we've concentrated on our Classic ACA.

I actually have a few friends who preferred the New Line, but again, it's a personal taste thing.

Can you post the link to the tutorial about the difference?

I guess I'm in the minority, I'd rather you bring back the New Line. I love the current ACA's but my two Eightstars just can't be beat.

Sure - you can access it here: http://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/aca-classic-and-new-line.htm

As to bringing back the New Line, I can't say there wouldn't be enough demand at some point in the future to consider it. As with most vendors who stock inhouse stones, the goal is the carry inventory that appeals to the broadest audience possible, and a resurgence of demand in that space would certain factor into our inventory choices.

 

[Andelain]

Sure - you can access it here: http://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/aca-classic-and-new-line.htm

As to bringing back the New Line, I can't say there wouldn't be enough demand at some point in the future to consider it. As with most vendors who stock inhouse stones, the goal is the carry inventory that appeals to the broadest audience possible, and a resurgence of demand in that space would certain factor into our inventory choices.

Thanks for that, Allison!

If you ever do I'll have to dream up something else to put diamonds in. Wonder if I could come up with any ideas...............

 

[Lightfoot]

Lightfoot, I'm glad you had an opportunity to talk with Bob about this, but I did want to still answer the question.

Quite some while back (which coincided pretty closely with the rollout of GIA's cut grade metrix), there was quite a bit of discussion here and in other arenas about painting. The demand for that particular look diminished, so we've concentrated on our Classic ACA.

I actually have a few friends who preferred the New Line, but again, it's a personal taste thing.

Can you post the link to the tutorial about the difference?

I guess I'm in the minority, I'd rather you bring back the New Line. I love the current ACA's but my two Eightstars just can't be beat.

Andelain,

I was curious if you wouldn't mind explaining why the Eightstars stand out to you over the ACA's?

I wish there were a video out there comparing New Line vs. Classic.

 

[Andelain]

Lightfoot, I'm glad you had an opportunity to talk with Bob about this, but I did want to still answer the question.

Quite some while back (which coincided pretty closely with the rollout of GIA's cut grade metrix), there was quite a bit of discussion here and in other arenas about painting. The demand for that particular look diminished, so we've concentrated on our Classic ACA.

I actually have a few friends who preferred the New Line, but again, it's a personal taste thing.

Can you post the link to the tutorial about the difference?

I guess I'm in the minority, I'd rather you bring back the New Line. I love the current ACA's but my two Eightstars just can't be beat.

Andelain,

I was curious if you wouldn't mind explaining why the Eightstars stand out to you over the ACA's?

I wish there were a video out there comparing New Line vs. Classic.

Sorry I didn't answer sooner, I missed this.

The most obvious difference is the brilliance all the way out to the edge of the stone. It actually does make the stone look a little larger than the same diameter stone without the brillianteering. The other thing, and it's nitpicky, is the pefection of the pattern. ACA's and my BGD stones have beautiful, excellent patterns that are easily seen, but the patterns of my Eightstars are completely perfect. Not a single flaw anywhere. The other difference is one WF describes well in their tutorial as being more fluid. I've often described mine as being like looking into a rippling pool of absolutely pure water. All these differences are subtle, and most people would never be able to tell the difference, but I can because I live with and love both cuts.

 

[Lightfoot]

Andelain - don't mean to resurrect this thread but just wanted to say thanks for your helpful reply (just saw it).