Great Info Re: ASET/Ideal Scope Images on WF’s Website

[Matthews1127]

I have an ASET/Ideal Scope and Loupe kit, and was toying around with it this evening.
I wanted to compare my findings to images of ASETs posted by experts in the field.
I stumbled across this information at Whiteflash, and thought others may benefit from it, as well.

A Complete Guide to Emerald Cut Diamonds | Whiteflash

Discover how to buy a high performing and beautiful emerald cut diamond along with guidance on settings, where to buy and more.

www.whiteflash.com

I know many have inquired about ASET images, and how to interpret them, so sharing this information should assist those seeking answers to such inquiries.

Side note: I was excited to learn that my own findings confirmed the diamond I was “scoping” falls in the “Excellent” range of ASETs.

 

[Nigel Haworth]

That’s awesome—Out of curiosity, what kind of lighting setup were you using when you scoped your diamond? And did you find any differences when comparing Ideal Scope vs. ASET images?

 

[Alistair Stillwell]

Thanks for sharing this! I’ve been thinking about getting an ASET/Ideal Scope kit myself—do you think it’s worth it for someone who’s still learning? Also, was your diamond an emerald cut? I’ve heard those can be trickier to read with ASET compared to rounds.

 

[Matthews1127]

That’s awesome—Out of curiosity, what kind of lighting setup were you using when you scoped your diamond? And did you find any differences when comparing Ideal Scope vs. ASET images?

Indoor, bright light and my iPhone flash light. I put a white paper over the flash light and used that as the back to scope the ASET. I didn’t take any photos, as that is very difficult to do with just two hands.
The diamond is already set, which isn’t ideal, but I was still able to get a great image each time. I’ll continue to play with it and try to get photos next time.
This was more to satisfy my curiosity more than anything.
It’s been ages since I used this kit, and to refresh my memory, I searched for comparisons, and what I found was not only helpful, but intriguing, which is why I wanted to share it here.
My diamond is an Emerald Cut Diamond, and those are more tricky. Not only were the still images impressive, but it passed the tilt test.

 

[Matthews1127]

Thanks for sharing this! I’ve been thinking about getting an ASET/Ideal Scope kit myself—do you think it’s worth it for someone who’s still learning? Also, was your diamond an emerald cut? I’ve heard those can be trickier to read with ASET compared to rounds.

There are kits that are reasonably priced for beginners, and *I* believe anything is worth something, ESPECIALLY if you’re learning.
My diamond is, indeed, an Emerald Cut Diamond; they are much trickier than rounds. Fancy cuts should pass the “tilt test” while using the ASET scope. My diamond was impressive while still and tilted, so it passed the “tilt test”, and by comparison, falls into the “Excellent” range.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I have an ASET/Ideal Scope and Loupe kit, and was toying around with it this evening.
I wanted to compare my findings to images of ASETs posted by experts in the field.
I stumbled across this information at Whiteflash, and thought others may benefit from it, as well.

A Complete Guide to Emerald Cut Diamonds | Whiteflash

Discover how to buy a high performing and beautiful emerald cut diamond along with guidance on settings, where to buy and more.

www.whiteflash.com

I know many have inquired about ASET images, and how to interpret them, so sharing this information should assist those seeking answers to such inquiries.

Side note: I was excited to learn that my own findings confirmed the diamond I was “scoping” falls in the “Excellent” range of ASETs.

@Matthews1127 ,Thank you for reading!

That article can probably use some updating. Shortly after the acquiring the AGSL light performance grading technology, GIA rolled out the AGS Ideal addendum report which is offerred on any qualifying diamond being graded at the lab. Many have seen the round addendum reports but not everyone knows that other shapes are available as well, including emerald cut. By "qualifying" they mean any stone submitted that passes the AGS ray tracer as Ideal. So, currently they are not issuing cut reports any stones lower than AGS0, which is a a very high bar, especially fancy shapes.

The fact that GIA was quick to launch the addendum reports seems to be a signal that they intend to use the light performance based technology to more broadly develop their fancy cut grading system. They published a research paper last year that indicates that aligns with that assumption but GIA is notoriously conservative, so when we will see cut grades for fancies on GIA reports is anyone's guess!

Meanwhile, ASET is a useful tool for evaluating fancies, but it is not as straight-forward as using it to look at rounds. Even in rounds it's only one piece of the light performance puzzle (though a big one), but with fancies you need more inputs to make an accurate assessment.

 

[Matthews1127]

@Matthews1127 ,Thank you for reading!

That article can probably use some updating. Shortly after the acquiring the AGSL light performance grading technology, GIA rolled out the AGS Ideal addendum report which is offerred on any qualifying diamond being graded at the lab. Many have seen the round addendum reports but not everyone knows that other shapes are available as well, including emerald cut. By "qualifying" they mean any stone submitted that passes the AGS ray tracer as Ideal. So, currently they are not issuing cut reports any stones lower than AGS0, which is a a very high bar, especially fancy shapes.

The fact that GIA was quick to launch the addendum reports seems to be a signal that they intend to use the light performance based technology to more broadly develop their fancy cut grading system. They published a research paper last year that indicates that aligns with that assumption but GIA is notoriously conservative, so when we will see cut grades for fancies on GIA reports is anyone's guess!

Meanwhile, ASET is a useful tool for evaluating fancies, but it is not as straight-forward as using it to look at rounds. Even in rounds it's only one piece of the light performance puzzle (though a big one), but with fancies you need more inputs to make an accurate assessment.

I appreciate your valuable input and the additional info!
I was able to see video, IRL different lighting environment performance, etc before we purchased this gorgeous EC.
The ASET exploration was more for fun and to satisfy my curiosity.