Does this diamond have painting/digging?

[JL321]

Hey all,
Do you think this diamond has painting/digging? I'm noticing a substantial amount of more green compared to other ideal diamonds...
Is this something of concern?

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3328831.htm

 

[pfunk]

I'm not an expert but I would say yes, this diamond has a slightly painted crown. Somewhere around 4-5 degrees I would guess. Here is a great link for you to check out. Crown only painting is not a bad thing until it reaches an extreme, which this diamond does not.

https://www.pricescope.com/journal/visible_effects_painting_digging_superideal_diamonds

 

[diamondseeker2006]

That is a gorgeous diamond at a great size at just under a carat! WF wouldn't put a stone in their ACA line that had any negative effects to the cut whatsoever. You should be comparing idealscope images for white and lack of white and not really the ASET. There is only a tiny amount of green on that ASET! That is going to be one very bright stone!

 

[JL321]

Thanks for the input guys. I researched too much and became way too picky. The ASET was just different from their other diamonds.

 

[JL321]

Ive just confirmed it has not been painted. Phew

 

[pfunk]

Did whiteflash say that the diamond is not painted or who confirmed that? Like I said, I'm no expert but I think it is quite easy to see on the ASET and even on the ideal scope that there is slight crown painting. Also, as stated this will not make the diamond look worse, and in fact will likely do the opposite. But to say it isn't painted is, as far as I can tell, inaccurate.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Even if it was, it was clearly not to edge it to the 1 ct mark because it isn't close enough. It would only have been done to enhance the beauty of the diamond.

"Relative to crown-only painting: To acquire desirable visual properties. A measure of crown-only painting on 'superideal' diamonds can improve the diamond's brightness and increase the amount of visible broadfire dispersion."

 

[Karl_K]

"Relative to crown-only painting: To acquire desirable visual properties. A measure of crown-only painting on 'superideal' diamonds can improve the diamond's brightness and increase the amount of visible broadfire dispersion."

at the expense of on/off scintillation.
That stone is clearly painted.

 

[pfunk]

"Relative to crown-only painting: To acquire desirable visual properties. A measure of crown-only painting on 'superideal' diamonds can improve the diamond's brightness and increase the amount of visible broadfire dispersion."

at the expense of on/off scintillation.
That stone is clearly painted.

I agree, which is why I was curious who told you it was not painted. I'd ask them to explain the long V's extending from the girdle towards the table in between each arrow. On the ASET they are green, and on the idealscope they are more white/transparent looking. Nothing wrong with a painted diamond and their ability to be beautiful isnt in question, but if you are asking the question you should be getting an accurate answer.

 

[JL321]

It was Whiteflash who said it is not painted. I asked two reps and they said they dont carry painted/dug diamonds.

May i quote, "The green you’re seeing on the outer edge of the stone is just a reflection of the meet-points of the upper girdle facets."

I also thought this image is only possible with painting.

 

[pfunk]

Well in their defense I will assume they mean they don't carry badly painted or dug out diamonds that would lead to poor performance, but they should refrain from making a blanket statement that none of their diamonds are painted. I think it is well known that crown painting on super ideal cuts is employed from time to time, and they must carry some diamonds that have crown painting such as this. I would ask them again and if needed, as for a gemologists opinion, not just one of the reps.

 

[JL321]

Wouod you stick with this diamond or find a new one? Not too fond of painting.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

This stone has been brought to my attention and I am looking into it. ASET and IS do indicate some crown painting. It is a new stone and we are doing some more detailed analysis on it.

I agree with pfunk that blanket statements about painting and digging are not particularly helpful. To some extent even super ideals may have some slightly tilted uppers or lowers. The question really is, if present is it detrimental in any significant way?

I will report back when I have a little more info.

 

[JL321]

This stone has been brought to my attention and I am looking into it. ASET and IS do indicate some crown painting. It is a new stone and we are doing some more detailed analysis on it.

I agree with pfunk that blanket statements about painting and digging are not particularly helpful. To some extent even super ideals may have some slightly tilted uppers or lowers. The question really is, if present is it detrimental in any significant way?

I will report back when I have a little more info.

Thanks a bunch, that would be very helpful. I really like all the other specs but was trying to avoid painting if possible.

Even though both reps did say no painting/digging done for your diamonds, it's probably an honest mistake on their part and the service has been tops so far.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

This stone has been brought to my attention and I am looking into it. ASET and IS do indicate some crown painting. It is a new stone and we are doing some more detailed analysis on it.

I agree with pfunk that blanket statements about painting and digging are not particularly helpful. To some extent even super ideals may have some slightly tilted uppers or lowers. The question really is, if present is it detrimental in any significant way?

I will report back when I have a little more info.

Thanks a bunch, that would be very helpful. I really like all the other specs but was trying to avoid painting if possible.

Even though both reps did say no painting/digging done for your diamonds, it's probably an honest mistake on their part and the service has been tops so far.

Definitely an honest mistake. Years ago Whiteflash experimented with a version of a superideal that had intentional and pronounced painting to create more brightness. We no longer market that style, which was what the reps were probably alluding to. In any case, it's a good time for us to synch up on our messaging. We certainly aim to give the most comprehensive and accurate information available.

 

[Karl_K]

This stone has been brought to my attention and I am looking into it. ASET and IS do indicate some crown painting. It is a new stone and we are doing some more detailed analysis on it.

I agree with pfunk that blanket statements about painting and digging are not particularly helpful. To some extent even super ideals may have some slightly tilted uppers or lowers. The question really is, if present is it detrimental in any significant way?

I will report back when I have a little more info.

It really depends on how much and the viewer and expectations if it is detrimental.
Small amounts are not an issue and any RB will have some.

It is likely enough that gia would give that level a VG but not enough that it would not make ags0.
The trade off with that level of painting is slightly watery scintillation vs sharp on/off scintillation from the upper girdle area.
That AGS and GIA disagree on it is an indication that there is no consensus about them one way or the other.
I tend to agree with GIA because I dislike the watery scintillation look.
Others may like it or not even tell the difference.
My stand is that as long as the consumer is making an educated decision it is up to them to decide once they have the information then if they wish to let their eyes decide.

 

[John P]

That AGS and GIA disagree on it is an indication that there is no consensus about them one way or the other. I tend to agree with GIA because I dislike the watery scintillation look.

It may interest people to know that this "disagreement" is not visual. GIA's limit was established to stop the historic digging/painting intended to sneakily hold weight or fool visual estimates of girdle thickness (the old-school term is "cheating"). It was unrelated to the crown-only painting style of Eightstar or the old WF "New Line." But Karl is right; when introduced in 2006 this hard limit caught diamonds painted over a certain point (close to 5 degrees ACP) and penalized them... As a result that style really isn't found much now.

In contrast to GIA's limit, which is a 2D physical barrier, AGS penalizes painting if the diamond's brightness values fall-off in their 3D ray-trace. But neither GIA nor AGSL judge scintillation.

I wrote an article on this topic, with many illustrations, for anyone interested in graduated examples (thanks pfunk).
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/visible_effects_painting_digging_superideal_diamonds

 

[RandG]

Very interesting thread.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Upon detailed review, the diamond does have crown only painting. I am including the Visual Proportion Analyzer (VPA) report that shows in a color coded way differences in facet direction.

Karl and John have already given good background on this technique and the differences in the way the labs view it. GIA does not grade diamonds individually for light performance. The penalty they apply is across the board, so it will catch diamonds that are "swindled" as well as those that have been intentionally fine tuned for certain performance aspects. In this case the intent is to remove leakage around the perimeter and maximize brightness.

Karl's point about it representing a trade-off for some scintillation on the perimeter is valid. Small amounts of leakage in the right amounts and distribution can contribute to positive contrast. So, by removing that leakage you increase brightness at a price. To what extent it impacts beauty is an open question and one that is likely a "taste" issue.

We are going to produce a short video comparing the stone in the thread with another A CUT ABOVE with no appreciable painting for educational purposes. Hopefully I can post that later today or tomorrow.

 

[tyty333]

A video...great! I'm really interested in seeing the difference painting (slight) makes.

 

[John P]

It is likely enough that gia would give that level a VG but not enough that it would not make ags0.

That's in line with the VPA, showing ACP of 6.5 degrees on the upper breaks.

The lower half readings seem odd Bryan. Perhaps the basis is 3 clicks off (?) Rather than min-max of 10.74 and 11.56, which would be severe, -0.51 and 0.31 seem more likely, given the actual ASET image.

 

[John P]

A video...great! I'm really interested in seeing the difference painting (slight) makes.

It will be cool if the WF team can capture it. All-else equal in a high performer, it's scintillation nuance.

This was succinctly put:

The trade off with that level of painting is slightly watery scintillation vs sharp on/off scintillation from the upper girdle area.

The USP of Eightstar - specifically painted to eliminate (what we now call) contrast-leakage - was big visible dispersion. This is because scintillation events "rolled" across the upper girdles, unbroken. The trade-off, as Karl describes, was less sharpness and contrast. When painting out to 7/8 degrees, brightness values also become somewhat reduced.

 

[JL321]

Thank you for examining it further. That's really informative and it is a little bit more painting than what I had anticipated. That's a shame, I thought I had finally found the perfect diamond for the e-ring.

Thanks to everyone who provided insight into the painting/digging process, it really allowed me to learn a lot of new things.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The videos are being made now. The comparison diamond was the closest other A CUT ABOVE® in stock with no significant painting.
You can find the details of the two stones at this link:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=3328831,3273925

Below are side by side Ideal Scope and ASET images (the diamond that is the subject of the thread is on the left). Notice that the small amount of leakage (white) in the IS has been minimized. The VPA's of both stones are at the bottom.
I will post the videos as soon as I have them. Not sure what we will be able to see in video, but an informal poll in the office, looking at the stones visually, shows a split between the two looks and some that cannot see the difference.

 

[pfunk]

Very good info being shared! Thanks TL for taking the time to post this up.

To the OP, I don't think you should be giving up on the stone because it has too much painting. If it meets a lot of your requirements be sure to check back and use all of the great info you are getting here. It isn't typical to get so much extra information on a diamond you are considering, so I would definitely use this info to help guide you. I am sure TL will share some of the comments from the WF staff who have viewed the comparison stones. Between that and the videos that are yet to come, you should be able to gauge what "flavor" of look you might prefer. And that look may indeed be the painted one.

Looking forward to seeing if the videos can capture the differences between the two!

 

[KobiD]

Great work TL. The way you have taken a genuine question/concern and gone above and beyond to not only explain and educate, but also demonstrate speaks volumes of your character, as well as that of White Flash. Very much looking forward to the video.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Great work TL. The way you have taken a genuine question/concern and gone above and beyond to not only explain and educate, but also demonstrate speaks volumes of your character, as well as that of White Flash. Very much looking forward to the video.

Thank you Kobi! You too pfunk.

It is a learning opportunity for all of us, I can assure you. I have discovered some things already in this process and our staff are refreshing their technical understanding.

That is really the greatest thing about pricescope - we share and learn together here.

 

[JL321]

Very good info being shared! Thanks TL for taking the time to post this up.

To the OP, I don't think you should be giving up on the stone because it has too much painting. If it meets a lot of your requirements be sure to check back and use all of the great info you are getting here. It isn't typical to get so much extra information on a diamond you are considering, so I would definitely use this info to help guide you. I am sure TL will share some of the comments from the WF staff who have viewed the comparison stones. Between that and the videos that are yet to come, you should be able to gauge what "flavor" of look you might prefer. And that look may indeed be the painted one.

Looking forward to seeing if the videos can capture the differences between the two!

Absolutely. I put it off reserve right now because I don't want them to actually lose the sale to someone else who doesn't care at all about the painting and then I decide not to purchase it. I'm very curious to see the video and see if I can notice the difference for myself

Great work TL. The way you have taken a genuine question/concern and gone above and beyond to not only explain and educate, but also demonstrate speaks volumes of your character, as well as that of White Flash. Very much looking forward to the video.

Thank you Kobi! You too pfunk.

It is a learning opportunity for all of us, I can assure you. I have discovered some things already in this process and our staff are refreshing their technical understanding.

That is really the greatest thing about pricescope - we share and learn together here.

Thanks TL, it really does speak about the integrity of the company and the commitment of service to the customer. This has been a fantastic learning curve.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I can't wait to see the video, either. I still am betting it is an outstanding diamond. Hard to find a superideal cut F color diamond just under a carat.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The videos have been produced and are available for viewing here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLIAkbuOh0s&feature=youtu.be

You may find it difficult to see the differences between the two diamonds in terms of the painting. As our informal office poll suggests, some people can see no difference in real life, others state a visual preference for one or the other. It is also consistent with the pricescope article referenced in this thread that shows crown-only painting to be very hard to discern in this range of 6-7dgrees.

To a certain extent, it is like differences in other cutting specs within the superideal category. You could have a 34 crown or a 35 crown, a 55 table or 57 table, 76 or 80 LGFs, etc and some might have a preference for one or the other. Many won’t be able to see these small differences. Once you are at the level of Ideal light performance and super ideal faceting precision, further differences get extremely nuanced.

One way to look at the issue is through the lens of craftsmanship. There are only a few factories in the world specializing in ultra precision diamond cutting. In these factories there are extremely talented cutters – elite artisans if you will. Each of them has developed their skills and specialties and each may have a preferred way to approach a given rough and each may use personal judgment in the way a given diamond is fine tuned.

Another way to look at it is through a lens of ranges and tastes. Every polished diamond is unique in some way or ways. GIA EX represents a wide range of well cut diamonds, allowing for many different looks. AGS Ideal is a narrower range of cut quality. A “super ideal” is a subset of AGS0 within a narrower range still. Yet, it is still a range and on some level still offers different tastes for different buyers.

As the pricescope article on painting and digging out points out (and demonstrates), crown only painting should be evaluated on its own merits on a stone by stone basis, and not lumped in with other painting and digging out techniques intended to accomplish other purposes.

Not only can some additional brightness be brought out of the stone, but as the article suggests possibly some additional fire as well. “Relative to crown-only painting: To acquire desirable visual properties. A measure of crown-only painting on 'superideal' diamonds can improve the diamond's brightness and increase the amount of visible broadfire dispersion.”

The question becomes, if there is some scintillation lost by eliminating the leakage, is that more detrimental visually than the increased brightness is a benefit? Our internal poll has been inconclusive, with some having a preference for one or the other and some seeing no appreciable difference.

What do you think?