Your Pick: Princess Idealscopes!!

[boody09]

I have made a panel of a few idealscopes including 2 stones which I am considering purchasing. Which of these diamonds is your favorite? Either rank them by number or pick a number(s) and talk about what attracts you to it. In-depth and critical analyses will be much appreciated. Thanks... ENJOY!

 

[diamondlil]

Well, I am certainly no expert when it comes to princess cuts, but #3 and #6 look most appealing to me.

The #4 comes in third place, and the rest just don't look right at all. Can't wait to hear what the experts think.




DiamondLil

 

[valeria101]

Black stands for direct-hit light flash, red for bright light return, pink and white for less-brilliant areas, just fitted to provide contrast...

According to this 'mantra': #4 is the winner for me, with #3 closing by and #6 on the third position at a distance. Any 'black' is a fancy's signature is a blessing and dark reds the best to expect.

The #1 picture seem to have some technical issue: it could be that the stone is not at all brilliant, or that the lighting for the pic was not great, or both... Plenty to pick from aside it though

 

[bling]

i too, am noo expert at princess cuts, but if you asked me to rank them just by looking at the idealscope images..i would say, 4, 3, 6, 5, 2 and then 1. 4 and 3 have the nicest saturation of dark reds..then from there still nice reds, but getting pinker..till the later one..that have what seem to be more leakage? but again...My very humble opinion...

 

[moremoremore]

I would be very careful not to base a decision based on those results alone!!! Only by seeing them in person will you know their TRUE performance!

Just my 2cents on princess cuts!

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 4/2/2004 4:23:18 PM moremoremore wrote:


Only by seeing them in person will you know their TRUE performance! ----------------

Yes

and call #3 and #4 in... Both should be the among the best this cut can deliver....

Unlike any 'numbers reading' anout diamonds these pictures give an impression on the stone itself - all the factors taken into account They are much more revealing than normal pictures - for light return that is. Cameras are not great at capturing dynamic 'sparkle' - this is about as close as you canget. Even videos don't relaly work (too low resolution... who knows what the lighting was... and so on).

It would be great to get to handpick the winner between these two. Is the lineup comming from the same seller? Some would have brilliant enough reputatiosn around here to be routinely trusted for recommendations with choosing between such high class runner-ups

 

[glitterata]

3 and 4 have the deepest red and the most blacks. 5 has nice symmetry, but it's paler, so maybe leaks more light? 6 has lots of dark red and black, and it's nice and symmetrical, but it's rectangular rather than square. If I had to pick one (not a princess fan, myself), I would want to look at 3, 4, and 6 in person and see which looked best.

 

[valeria101]

Silly... but the comment on square-ness left me wandering. In the pic below the black outlines are perfect squares... all these stones are at least visually perfect squares with infinitesimal variations. No idea what this magnification is, but my guess would be that for real-life object of less than a square centimeter... these would be trully no-excuse squares.

 

[moremoremore]

you gotta get the bscope to go with those results...!

 

[moremoremore]

p.s.- how DARE you not give is details!

.... I want details!!! Size, color, etc!!! PULEEZE.

 

[moremoremore]

well, if images are so telling...how might one explain this bad boy- don't love the lightscope...but OMG...look at that stone!
http://www.goodoldgold.com/princess_1_14ct_d_vs2.htm

 

[moremoremore]

oopsie- idealscope

 

[boody09]

#3 & #5 are stones that I am considering from Whiteflash

#3 (1.02ct, g, vs1) DETAILS $4400

Report: GIA
Shape: Princess
Carat: 1.02
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 75.2
Table: 69
Crown Angle: 38.2
Crown %: 10.6
Pavilion Angle: 58.1
Pavilion %: 60.4
Girdle: Extremely Thin To Slightly Thick (worried??)
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: No
Measurements: 5.64-5.45X4.10
Length/Width: 1.03

#5 (1.15ct, E, si1) details can be found here in a previous post. $5100

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pros-what-do-you-think-about-these-images.13947/

ENJOY!

OH and yes... when I get them, I will likely get a Bscope done where I am having the stone set since they kindly offered.

 

[moremoremore]

and I love a slightly rectangular share....visually, it will look a bit larger, drawing the eye upward and it's just such a flattering shape on the finger!

Oh my, I'm chatty today. Must be b/c it's friday and I'm still stuck in my cage at work. Let me out!

 

[strmrdr]

All six look good.
1> looks like too strong a light was used. otherwise looks good. maybe just a hint more leakage than the rest hard to tell.
2> the stone is eaither tilted or one of the large right side facets is off.
Judgeing by the shape im thinking the facet is off look at the picture val posted with a box around it the center of the diamond is slightly off center.
3>looks good close second place. some edge leakage but thats normal for princess cut.
4>looks real good and in first place but 3 has a size advantage it depends on what your looking for.
5>I dont like the white x in the center. wierd white glob in the upper center. again the lighting isnt the best.
6>solid 3rd place and a nice diamond but it again like the right side facet looks off but not as bad as 2.

So 3 or 4 depending on the size you want just going by the ideal-scope images but other factors have to be considerd.
color clarity and price.
All 6 are better than average for a princess by a long shot.


pass on any princess with less than med girdle.
Thin is only acceptalble if its a small area and not a corner.
Anything thinner than thin I wouldnt touch it.

 

[verticalhorizon]

Hey this is fun! It's like a practice GRE except for Gemologists in training!

The extremely thin girdle is something to be concerned about, depending on the setting you choose.

 

[moremoremore]

heelllllleeeeuuuwwww! LOOK at the picture of #5! Looks beautiful! Also, it's going to look a lot bigger than the other b/c of the depth!

 

[strmrdr]

----------------
On 4/2/2004 4:36:59 PM moremoremore wrote:

well, if images are so telling...how might one explain this bad boy- don't love the lightscope...but OMG...look at that stone!

http://www.goodoldgold.com/princess_1_14ct_d_vs2.htm----------------

Lightscope is more sensitive than idealscope and can not be directly compared.
Iv seen better looking princesses on GOG's website and the b-scope results match the great but so-so performace on the lightscope.

here is a real fireball:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/princess_1_65ct_g_vs2.htm

http://www.goodoldgold.com/princess_1_73ct_h_vs11.htm

 

[moremoremore]

I can do ya one better...

... LOL.....

http://www.goodoldgold.com/princess_1_62ct_g_vs2.htm

 

[strmrdr]

----------------
On 4/2/2004 5:07:02 PM moremoremore wrote:

I can do ya one better...

... LOL.....


http://www.goodoldgold.com/princess_1_62ct_g_vs2.htm

----------------

That one appears to be sold it isnt listed in the current for sale section but yes it is a cream of the crop princess in light return but it isnt very square.

 

[moremoremore]

i luv em that way- i think they look bigger!

I feel bad...I hijacked this post with useless info...I'll be good

I wonder what a flanders image looks like. I love the princess, but my heart belongs to flanders!

 

[boody09]

WOW moremoremore... sometimes less is more

Thanks for the input...er..I mean post hijacking

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

First were they all taken in the same environment?
If so you need to factor in the intensity of the red.

Second - the black is not a direct light hit. It is a direct blockage of light from where your head would be (GOG has this all wrong).

Third - you need a good even distribution of black AND leakage in a princess because these are the 2 main sources of contrast that help give an otherwise bland brightish stone some scintialliation.

fourth - if there is too much leakage along the edge the stone will look smaller.

All these stones are better than average, and most look exceptional.

 

[boody09]

Thanks Gary. I think I am going to stick with my #5 for now since I like the color and clarity and comfort of girdle thickness.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

But if the photo's are all standaridsed then #3 is redder = more light return.

This is why we need a standardized system

It is drawing ever closer.
I say my first ever perfectly auto cropped round stone this morning from our new rapid photographing and storage system, which is now undergoing testing.

 

[pricescope]

more food for thoughts here: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/light-leakage-and-light-return.14357/