For the Love of Asschers

[widget]

Date: 10/21/2005 8:34:53 AM
Author: strmrdr
example of patterns with little too no head shadow.

Storm...regarding this picture you posted and referrence to "head shadow"... (I do hope my questions aren't too stupid...

)

Does 'lack of a head shadow' mean disappearance, or at least obscurring of the table? The example above seems to have four crown facets making for a very small table. I almost imagine it being "pointy" in profile and reminescent of a Mayan pyramid. Am I off base here?

widget

PS: Regarding your question on terminology for the pavillion steps: I like "wide/narrow" better than "big/small". The term "Drop off", to me anyway, evoked an image of uneven steps: three narrow ones and one big one, for instance....is that what you meant?

 

[strmrdr]

Im sorry Val and I were talking diamond techie speak.

Head shadow is the effect of an object close to the diamond blocking the light from some angles and being reflected in the diamond.
It causes the arrows in an h&a diamond to stand out and to a lesser extent the patterns in asschers to stand out.
In one of the tutorials Im sure there is a more technical definition but for our purpases it causes the pattern to become white/black and provides contrast to the pattern making it stand out more.


I like the term drop because when looking at them in person it looks like there is a large drop off instead of a gradual stepping down.
I think im going to go with narrow and wide steps instead of small and large for the others. other opinions?

Thank you for the feedback :}

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/21/2005 10:20:25 AM
Author: widget

Date: 10/21/2005 8:34:53 AM

Author: strmrdr

example of patterns with little too no head shadow.

Storm...regarding this picture you posted and referrence to 'head shadow'... (I do hope my questions aren't too stupid...

)


Does 'lack of a head shadow' mean disappearance, or at least obscurring of the table? The example above seems to have four crown facets making for a very small table. I almost imagine it being 'pointy' in profile and reminescent of a Mayan pyramid. Am I off base here?


widget

I missed something here:
I see what your are saying the windmills look like they are coming up in that lighting.
That is a combination of where the camera is focused and the lighting.
They can look like that is person and it is one of the kewl things about asschers they have so many different personalities all in one diamond depending on the lighting.
RB's are boring in comparison :}

btw that diamond is a 4 crown facet /4 palivion facet cut.
perfect for its size.

 

[valeria101]

Head shadow or not... those balck specs or lines do not have to be there. A very, very high crown like some old cuts have prevent that. And it is a good thing, IMO. I can''t claim to guess the exact proportions of that Cartier marvel - but it surely has a table - 50-ish or so, I''d guess.

As much as I can tell, the ''piramid'' is the effect of both the photography and the arrangement of the facets that go down in even steps.

This is what I had in mind when saying ''high crown'' above:

 

[diamondlil]

Date: 10/21/2005 8:31:56 AM
Author: strmrdr
question for everyone:
Does wide step or big step better discribe them?
narrow vs small?

Im going to turn this into an article eventualy I think so want to settle on names.

For me, "wide step" and "narrow step" is easier to comprehend.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/21/2005 11:04:39 AM
Author: valeria101
Head shadow or not... those balck specs or lines do not have to be there. A very, very high crown like some old cuts have prevent that. And it is a good thing, IMO. I can''t claim to guess the exact proportions of that Cartier marvel - but it surely has a table - 50-ish or so, I''d guess.


As much as I can tell, the ''piramid'' is the effect of both the photography and the arrangement of the facets that go down in even steps.


This is what I had in mind when saying ''high crown'' above:

You have a top view of that diamond?
Its a very interesting asscher.
It will still show black around around the steps under the table even as small as the table is.
It will also show shadow/leakage in the crown facets and because of the size of them it will be even more noticable.
bottom line contrast causes the patterns without the patterns its not an asscher.
The kewl thing about asschers is that different things stand out to different people when looking at them under the same conditions.
The very best asschers all the features will look good while not over shadowing each other.

 

[cymbrie]

Date: 10/21/2005 8:37:43 AM
Author: strmrdr
About the RA''s iv seen a couple of them and they ranged from very nice to awesome.
To my eye they look a little too busy in the smaller sizes.
3ct and up I think they will come into there own a little more.

It''s funny that you mentioned the "busy-ness" of the smaller RAs. I couldn''t quite put my finger on exactly what it was about them that bothered me but that''s exactly it. When you view the larger stones 5+ carats they are exquisite (waaaaay out of the budget though LOL), I like somewhere in btw the classic and the RA if that makes any sense. In any case the fiance will probably be relieved he doesn''t have to budget for an RA...at least not yet LOL. I spoke with an RA rep a few months ago she quoted me 16K for a 1.51, G, VS2, noting that RA''s cost 25% more than a non-branded Asscher.

I do like the look of the NiceIce Asschers. Todd said he has both Daniel K (similar to RA) and generics don''t know which this is...they used to have better pix:

http://www.niceice.com/jewelry/solitaire_images/cross_cathedral/crosscatplat_asscher.jpg

Ahh yes that wondrous Cartier...pretty much the pan-ultimate asscher...I wonder if that''s the same piece I saw on Antiques Roadshow. A woman brought in a 5ct Asscher from the 40''s or 50''s it was valued at around 50K+. Just Stunning! Sigh...us plebians will have to dream a little longer...

I agree wide/narrow sounds better...I am very much looking forward to your article! SO much more to learn going to have to pore over this string again see if I can digest/decipher everything.

 

[Kaleigh]

I love that setting cymbrie. Is that what you are going for?? Very nice!!

 

[cymbrie]

That''s the closest aproximation yes. The cross cathedral is a little more raised than I''d like so I''m leaning more towards the D-Vatche X-Prong: http://dvatche.com/eclipse/new_catalouge.htm (click solitaire) it''s the closest I can get to Tiffany''s Lucida with an Asscher center stone. I''ve read other strings on PS that say D-Vatche actually makes Tiffany''s Lucida so that made the decision.

It''s simple, elegant and low-profile. I don''t want anything (side stones) detracting from the center stone. Although having seen some of the PSer''s rocks and settings I could re-think that. One concern is strength of the setting. I''m extremely tough on things...translation kind of a clutz

. I originally wanted a square cut emerald (my birthstone) with side trilliant diamonds, but I could just see myself shattering it and I''m not the biggest fan of bevel settings. Many PSers say that 6 prongs are best (outside of bevel) for protecting stones, but I prefer the look of the 4 prong X. I''m gonna have to start a new string on this now aren''t I?

 

[widget]

(I thought I''d bump this thread a bit in case RichardAlex is looking for it

)

Also....to share this picture. Ana''s pic of the old asscher with the high (deep?) crown inspired me to go out and play with my camera..

Here''s a shot of mine...also old (c.1930).

Not quite a Mayan pyramid...but getting there!

widget

 

[mrssalvo]

wow widget, what an amazing picture...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/22/2005 8:37:12 PM
Author: widget
(I thought I''d bump this thread a bit in case RichardAlex is looking for it

)


Also....to share this picture. Ana''s pic of the old asscher with the high (deep?) crown inspired me to go out and play with my camera..


Here''s a shot of mine...also old (c.1930).


Not quite a Mayan pyramid...but getting there!

widget

way kewl
You have been holding out on us

Can you get a pic face up under flourecent lighting?

 

[widget]

Author: strmrdr

You have been holding out on us

Nah...you've seen this before!

Can you get a pic face up under flourecent lighting?

This is the best closeup I have of it face up...I notice that the black "box" immediately surrounding the culet is out of whack. I can't see that in real life...does it look this way because the stone is tilted? Or because it IS out of whack?

...

Edited to add: Eek! Now I notice the two bottom windmills look narrower than the top ones...maybe it's not such a good idea to look at these guys TOO closely!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/23/2005 9:01:31 AM
Author: widget

Author: strmrdr


You have been holding out on us


Nah...you''ve seen this before!


Can you get a pic face up under flourecent lighting?


This is the best closeup I have of it face up...I notice that the black ''box'' immediately surrounding the culet is out of whack. I can''t see that in real life...does it look this way because the stone is tilted? Or because it IS out of whack?

its not out of wack its literaly a emerald cut thats cut square its very common in the older ones.
the difference is that an asscher has egual angled facets on all 4 pavilian sides and a pointy culet where an emerald cut has different angled facets on the side giving a keel culet.
In this case its small enought you dont notice it without magnification.

 

[strmrdr]

btw to an asscher collector the square emerald cut is often the more valuable cut if the age of the diamond can be proved.
That one was likely cut during the great depression and sold shortly after.

Iv seen your diamonds twin in a local collector's collection.
he wont allow photo's to be taken for security reasons.
Its awesome!

 

[cymbrie]

Wow Widget that SE is just gorgeous. I love seeing antique stones, I''ve read a lot of historical accounts on the old Asscher (SEs) but it''s such a priviledge to see those from private collections. I should really post a cocktail ring my mom inherited from my grandmother. It has I think 40+ round stones all set in an 18kt dome pattern (from the 40''s or 50''s), it''s quite novel. I also wear a round pendant which a friend told me is an old Rose cut. It was my other grandmother''s She gave it to me 12 years ago before she passed on. It''s not large about .30 but it''s still in the original setting probably fabricated around the same time 40''s, 50''s. Thanks again for sharing!

 

[widget]

Thanks, Cym!

You simply MUST do a search for the thread in the "Show Me The Ring" forum entitled:
"Show me your Family Heirlooms!"...great stuff, along with wonderful stories!

(Sorry...I don''t know how to post links...)

Sounds to me like you have a lot to contribute! I''d love to see your old pieces..

widget

 

[mrssalvo]

Here''s the link to Widget''s amazing family heirloom thread,,

 

[cymbrie]

Wow thanks guys that thread is amazin! I will definitely have to grab the digicam when I visit mom next I''ve got some real fun pieces to show y''all!

 

[RichardAlex]

Thanks so much. Definitely looking at it!