WF's new AGS princess cuts

[researcher]

Guess what I discovered today while talking to Denise from WF? Well, I guess I ruined the surprise with my heading, but Whiteflash now has AGS princess cuts!!!

Link 1
Link 2

Could the numbers or ideal scope images be more perfect?!?!

For those of you who are not into this cut, these stones may make you change your mind!

 

[WinkHPD]

I looked at the AGS reports with both stones listing the polish and symmetry of both stones as Excellent not Ideal. I could not find a cut grade on either report, but I believe both of those stones will be AGS 1''s, not 0''s.

Both of them should be extraordinary to look at.

John Quixote, am I confused?

Wink

 

[Shay37]

Good grief, those IS pics are simply luscious.

shay

 

[WinkHPD]

agreed!

 

[Kaleigh]

Thanks for the heads up researcher, they are gorgeous!!!

 

[researcher]

Date: 11/4/2005 6:47:12 PM
Author: Wink
I looked at the AGS reports with both stones listing the polish and symmetry of both stones as Excellent not Ideal. I could not find a cut grade on either report, but I believe both of those stones will be AGS 1''s, not 0''s.


Both of them should be extraordinary to look at.


John Quixote, am I confused?


Wink

Oops! That would be my fault. I was just excited when Denise was helping me find a stone and she noted there were two new gems. I want to make sure it''s known that I assumed they were AGS 0--Denise never said they were. I guess I''m just used to excellent as being the best on polish/symmetry, and never considered the ideal category. Either way they''re amazing stones!!!

 

[Regular Guy]

If they''re not zeros, they''re getting no help from AGS from camoflauging the fact. Look at that doc number!

 

[researcher]

Guess I should have used this link to figure out the scores!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

I think that we are doing Brian and his friends at Whiteflash a disservice with this thread.

However beautiful the IS on these stones is, they are clearly not AGS-0. They have an AGS DQR (Diamond Quality Report), and not a DQD (DQ Document). The DQR is entirely comparable with a GIA-grading report, since it only grades Polish and Symmetry. AGS promotes it as their report to use, if your stone does not have Ideal Light Performance.

Also, knowing Brian and his strong defense of optical symmetry, I think that he is not yet satisfied with optical symmetry on these stones. The stones as such look promising, and probably much nicer than the average princess on the market, but I expect Brian to come out with more impressive products sooner or later.

Looking forward to that,

 

[valeria101]

Many happy returns! AGS0 included

Out of curiosity: does Sarin and AGS measure the same things for crown and pav. angles? The airs of reports for each preincedd do not quite agree - with several degrees difference. I realize these numbers are not informative in the way they might for rounds. Just wondering if the wast variation comes from some startling range of measurement error or some diffence in the object measured.

Thanks

 

[strmrdr]

AGS uses helium on stones less than ~8mm.
on fancies the added accuraccy is huge compared to the sarin.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/4/2005 6:47:12 PM
Author: Wink
I looked at the AGS reports with both stones listing the polish and symmetry of both stones as Excellent not Ideal. I could not find a cut grade on either report, but I believe both of those stones will be AGS 1's, not 0's.

Both of them should be extraordinary to look at.

John Quixote, am I confused?

Wink

Hi all, and thanks for the replies.

Yes, the report is a little premature. We've sent some princess cuts to AGS as Brian tweaks our design in order to acquire the 0 grade for light performance in their metric, but as Paul noted these are not final products. Thanks for the interest and - Researcher - I am pretty sure you will be at the top of the list to know when we introduce the ACA Princess

 

[LadyluvsLuxury]

Researcher, I''d like to know what you were talking to Denise about anyway!