threepwood
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2006
- Messages
- 1,036
Anyone know who has the biggest asscher? I would love to see pictures..
Here is Evelynn's 4.98 carat ring thread https://www.pricescope.com/forum/basic-violations/evelynn-s-first-post-with-pics-hopefully-t70180.htmlDate: 11/25/2007 8:58:09 PM
Author: happyfeet1988
I know the center stone in Evelyn's three stone is almost 5 carats..... not sure if it's the biggest though.
Well, beautiful, yes (VERY!!Date: 11/25/2007 9:08:33 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
Here I am sitting here asleep wondering who has the biggers Asscher. Then I wake up and realize - wait a minute, my EC is an Asscher! LOL! It is a 6.39 center stone. It is an estate piece and is an elongated Asscher:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamond-rings.72943/
Date: 11/26/2007 2:06:52 AM
Author: musey
Well, beautiful, yes (VERY!!)... but asscher, no.
Widget''s stone(s) still take my breath away, biggest or no!
Date: 11/26/2007 1:05:54 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
Date: 11/26/2007 2:06:52 AM
Author: musey
Well, beautiful, yes (VERY!!)... but asscher, no.
Widget''s stone(s) still take my breath away, biggest or no!
musey -
What is it about my stone that caused you to say '' . . . but asscher, no.''?
Thanks,
DB
Date: 11/26/2007 2:55:49 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
Just the fact that it is a rectangular emerald cut. Asschers (or square emeralds that are referred to loosely as asschers) are square in shape. I don't know the ratio cutoff offhand. Saying that an emerald cut is an asscher is sort of like saying an oval is a round. Same general idea, but different dimensions (and patterns, for that matter).Date: 11/26/2007 1:05:54 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
musey -
What is it about my stone that caused you to say ' . . . but asscher, no.'?
Thanks,
DB
Date: 11/26/2007 9:42:32 PM
Author: musey
Date: 11/26/2007 1:05:54 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
musey -
What is it about my stone that caused you to say '' . . . but asscher, no.''?
Thanks,
DB
Just the fact that it is a rectangular emerald cut. Asschers (or square emeralds that are referred to loosely as asschers) are square in shape. I don''t know the ratio cutoff offhand. Saying that an emerald cut is an asscher is sort of like saying an oval is a round. Same general idea, but different dimensions (and patterns, for that matter).
I know little to nothing of the ins and outs of this terminology, but I do know that when someone is looking for ''asscher'' pictures, they are referring to antique asschers, royal asschers, or generic asschers/square emeralds... as opposed to emeralds.
Hope that clarifies what I meant!
Date: 11/26/2007 9:52:17 PM
Author: BABYPUFFIN
Elizabeth Taylor refers to the deep asscher cuts in her 33 carat diamond ring in her book 'MY LOVE AFFAIR WITH JEWELRY'. Her ring has a similar look to DiamanteBlu's diamond ring. I wouldn't say Taylor's was all that square.
Date: 11/26/2007 9:42:32 PM
Author: musey
Date: 11/26/2007 1:05:54 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
musey -
What is it about my stone that caused you to say '' . . . but asscher, no.''?
Thanks,
DB
Just the fact that it is a rectangular emerald cut. Asschers (or square emeralds that are referred to loosely as asschers) are square in shape.
You refer to your stone as an "EC", but then call it an elongated Asscher cut. Again, to me, the very clipped corners that produce the windmill effect would have to be there to differentiate it from an emerald cut as well as the crown height, pavillion depth and the equidistant and equal width steps from crown to pavillion. Usually on emerald cuts the crown steps are a bit thinner than those on the pavillion, which does not lend itself to the "Assher style" with windmills and geometric concentric squares within.Date: 11/26/2007 10:34:31 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
Yes, an Asscher should only be called that if it was cut by that house. Perhaps the more correct terminology for a cut such as mine [since we have no idea who cut it] would be Asscher style.
BTW, what do we do about the other shapes cut by the Asschers? And what about the trilliant? I understand that they developed that cut too.
edited: because it's not worth itDate: 11/26/2007 10:03:40 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
Date: 11/26/2007 9:42:32 PM
Author: musey
Just the fact that it is a rectangular emerald cut. Asschers (or square emeralds that are referred to loosely as asschers) are square in shape.Date: 11/26/2007 1:05:54 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
musey -
What is it about my stone that caused you to say ' . . . but asscher, no.'?
Thanks,
DB
Asschers are square in shape? Interesting. Perhaps you should inform the Asscher people of their error link:
'This flawless Asscher-cut diamond in a Van Cleef & Arpels ring, weighing 16.27 carats and with a D colour, was auctioned at Sotheby's on 16 November 1995. It fetched US $ 1,067,000.' [note that the ratio of this stone is 1.18:1, mine is 1.19:1]
Well at least I know what kind of diamond I have. I think...