Help me choose the ''I survived a surgery and a diamond theft'' diamond!

[Stephan]

Number 1 (Thank you Karl!)

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Premium-Cut-Round-Diamond-1254342.asp

Number 2

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1249151.asp

(no IS picture requested at yet, I don''t know if it''s necessary)

Number 3

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VVS1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1249152.asp

My favorite clarity/color combo (yes I know I''m nuts) and my favorite pattern.
Is this too much leakage or not?

 

[Stephan]

(sorry for that: picture below the poll is nr 3)

 

[bright&shiny]

I voted for 1 - b/c it has slightly (and it''s a tiny amount) less light leakage. I can''t really compare #2, so I didn''t include it in my vote.

Your last message on the other thread was so disheartening. Can you go enjoy a little of the summer? It''s waiting for you

 

[Stephan]

Date: 8/14/2009 4:35:54 PM
Author: bright&shiny
I voted for 1 - b/c it has slightly (and it''s a tiny amount) less light leakage. I can''t really compare #2, so I didn''t include it in my vote.

I love them all, also nr 2.
I don''t dare to request any IS picture more, I''ve already requested 4 pictures and rejected 2 (the 1.05 and 1.02 I VS2 for those who followed the other topic (how sad they were cheaper!)). Darin at JA is great and very patient!

Date: 8/14/2009 4:35:54 PM
Author: bright&shiny
Your last message on the other thread was so disheartening. Can you go enjoy a little of the summer? It''s waiting for you

That''s so friendly! I''ll try to enjoy, thank you!

 

[Amethyste]

I voted for #1 - great image.

 

[Stephan]

Thanks!
Would the leakage of nr 3 be visible to my unique eye?
Experts (Karl, John, Garry, Jonathan and others): What would be the fire performance difference between nr 1 and nr 3?

 

[Stephan]

Thank you for voting!
I''ll buy the number 1, 1.21 H VS2.
Once again, thanks to Karl (strmrdr) who found this diamond for me!

 

[strmrdr]

your welcome!

 

[AGBF]

I guess the reason that the first diamond was shown as unavailable as I was examining the three was because you had already made your decision! Not knowing that, I studied all of them and was getting ready to vote! I really liked the first one and liked the third one as well (but I cannot see light leakage on my computer). I didn''t care for the second one. I think you got yourself an absolutely fabulous stone there!!! Hearty congratulations, Stephan!

Hugs,
AGBF

 

[risingsun]

I''m going to defer to Strm on this one!! I think he knows what will work best for you

 

[ckrickett]

number 1

 

[Stephan]

Date: 8/14/2009 7:24:14 PM
Author: AGBF
I guess the reason that the first diamond was shown as unavailable as I was examining the three was because you had already made your decision!

Hi AGBF!
The reason that the first diamond is unavailable is that I've requested an IS picture.
I will wait till Monday to order it.

I really liked the first one and liked the third one as well (but I cannot see light leakage on my computer). I didn't care for the second one. I think you got yourself an absolutely fabulous stone there!!! Hearty congratulations, Stephan!

Hugs,
AGBF

Thank you!
Nr 3 has some pale pink in the table, but I don't know if it's pale enough to be called leakage. If there is no leakage, it is perhaps very slightly painted but Karl will correct me.

 

[Stephan]

Now the more I look at IS pictures of nr 1 and nr 3, the more I like nr 1, especially when I re-size it (when I make it smaller).
The black/red balance looks perfect.
I wish I could tilt the stone to see how it reacts...
I guess I have to wait till it is in my hands!

 

[Lula]

Yes, I agree, the red-black balance looks wonderful, and the stone appears to have very crisp and precise patterning.

Not too many of us can say we''ve had a stone personally selected for us by Storm -- which is an added bonus!!

I know you have some doubts about the pavilion numbers, but I know you also know that JA does have a great return policy if in person it''s not what you had hoped for.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 8/15/2009 12:25:34 PM
Author: sarap333
I know you have some doubts about the pavilion numbers, but I know you also know that JA does have a great return policy if in person it''s not what you had hoped for.

IS picture says it all!
Wish I had a 3D scan to play with it in GemAdviser, but I think that JA doesn''t do that.

I just remember this stone I finally bought for a friend 5 years ago:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/first-time-i-see-this-on-hrd-certificate.14845/
It was gorgeous!
Its proportions sound similar to the one I''m buying, it was just a little shallower with broader arrows.

 

[Lula]

It is one hot IS!

 

[Stephan]

In the inclusion plot, I can''t see which one is the feather.
But nothing seems to be near the edge of the diamond, so no durability risk, right?
In fact, when looking at the real diamond image, I can''t see the inclusions, I guess they are all hidden in a black arrow. Hope the inclusions still will be discrete once the fire makes the arrows bright.

I don''t worry, I will order it on Monday!

 

[AGBF]

It has been a lot of fun watching you get to know your diamond and falling in love with it as you do so, Stephan. These are the moments on Pricescope that I most enjoy: participating in a friend''s heartfelt quest for a stone...particularly if that person shares his feelings with us as you have done!


Hugs,
AGBF

 

[John P]

Date: 8/14/2009 5:06:53 PM
Author: QueenMum
Thanks!
Would the leakage of nr 3 be visible to my unique eye?
Experts (Karl, John, Garry, Jonathan and others): What would be the fire performance difference between nr 1 and nr 3?

Number three has a table & crown configuration more conducive to fire but with the steepness of the CA & LH length it takes a small brightness hit in normal to soft lighting. Knowing what I do about your vision I think the very bright appearance of number 1 will be more pleasing for you. My inner-geek would like to know precise angles & minors on that one (GIA rounded them) but it''s only a point of personal curiosity only. It doesn''t influence my notions.

PS: No issues with either ideal-scope image.

 

[John P]

Date: 8/15/2009 7:25:30 PM
Author: AGBF

It has been a lot of fun watching you get to know your diamond and falling in love with it as you do so, Stephan. These are the moments on Pricescope that I most enjoy: participating in a friend''s heartfelt quest for a stone...particularly if that person shares his feelings with us as you have done!

This is why I love AGBF.

 

[strmrdr]

I have been trying to find the time to say why I picked that one.
This week was patch week from MS so I have either been busy or tired... long geeky story....

ok the basics....
He has been buying the wrong diamonds.
8* is one of the worst choices being cut for high obstruction.
Infinity is a step in the right direction being well balanced.
But what I wanted to do was tip the balance towards directional brightness with the steep pavilion combined with min obstruction from the long lgf% and no under table leakage. Doing that and leaving good fire is the challenged.
Under table leakage and anything but low obstruction is not going to look that great to him as it will be over dark and not balanced to his needs.
There is no 2 eyed view reducing obstruction and leakage for him.
I have a lot of respect for him, how he has not let it hold him back and how open he is about it.

It is my hope that this diamond will allow him to enjoy the diamonds brightness and not just the fire.
In theory and technology it does that and that same type of theory and technology has been proven to work.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 8/15/2009 7:25:30 PM
Author: AGBF
It has been a lot of fun watching you get to know your diamond and falling in love with it as you do so, Stephan. These are the moments on Pricescope that I most enjoy: participating in a friend''s heartfelt quest for a stone...particularly if that person shares his feelings with us as you have done!

Hi AGBF!
This was a terrible week, and I''m happy I had Pricescope to share what happened!
I have to thank you and all the others who helped me through all this.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 8/15/2009 11:18:59 PM
Author: John Pollard
Number three has a table & crown configuration more conducive to fire but with the steepness of the CA & LH length it takes a small brightness hit in normal to soft lighting. Knowing what I do about your vision I think the very bright appearance of number 1 will be more pleasing for you. My inner-geek would like to know precise angles & minors on that one (GIA rounded them) but it's only a point of personal curiosity only. It doesn't influence my notions.

PS: No issues with either ideal-scope image.

Thank you John.
I'm happy you chime in too, and it's nice that you and Karl agree!
I can't imagine how I would feel if you had different viewpoints!

 

[Stephan]

Hey Karl, I won't say it enough: thank you for all the time you did put in this diamond quest!

He has been buying the wrong diamonds.
8* is one of the worst choices being cut for high obstruction.
Infinity is a step in the right direction being well balanced.
But what I wanted to do was tip the balance towards directional brightness with the steep pavilion combined with min obstruction from the long lgf% and no under table leakage. Doing that and leaving good fire is the challenged.
Under table leakage and anything but low obstruction is not going to look that great to him as it will be over dark and not balanced to his needs.
There is no 2 eyed view reducing obstruction and leakage for him.
I have a lot of respect for him, how he has not let it hold him back and how open he is about it.

It is my hope that this diamond will allow him to enjoy the diamonds brightness and not just the fire.
In theory and technology it does that and that same type of theory and technology has been proven to work.

I'm moved by your detailed, scientific and sincere answer.

Before I knew this forum, I bought some diamonds in Antwerp, with no angles knowledge, but only percentages. My little experience then was (don't correct me, I know I'm wrong but that was the way I worked):
~ the crown had to be at least 12% (more was better), the table maximum 60% (less was better). I did notice that it would help the fire. If a diamond didn't respect this rule, it could be very white, but without fire.
~ the pavilion had to be 43.5 maximum. My conception was than deeper pavilions made the table look dark and the scintillation slow.
~ my eye did the rest, and I often did choose diamond with longer stars.

After that, I found the forum and H&A diamonds. I never had any issue of brightness with Infinity or ACA New Line (the painted one). In fact, both brands were very bright. But 8* had too much obstruction in diffuse daylight (not in the arrows but it was like 1/2 of the diamond looked dark when viewed outside, just like the moon).

It is true that I appreciate longer LGF, but I can appreciate bold arrows too.
It is also true that I prefer long star facets.

I never saw a diamond with 44% pavilion that pleased me (in Antwerp), but I'm confident this one will. In the best case it has a 41.19 pavilion, in the worst case 41.3.

Will it be nice when tilted?

I hope that in a near future, fire will be something predictable.

 

[strmrdr]

~ the pavilion had to be 43.5 maximum. My conception was than deeper pavilions made the table look dark and the scintillation slow.

Under table leakage will do that, this one wont have that problem.


It will look great tilted.

 

[Stephan]

Thank you Karl!
I hope I''ll receive the new ring soon!

 

[John P]

Date: 8/16/2009 4:01:41 AM
Author: QueenMum

Thank you John.

I'm happy you chime in too, and it's nice that you and Karl agree!
I can't imagine how I would feel if you had different viewpoints!

Happy to help Stephan.
For your eyesight I agree with the thresholds he cited 100%.

Now if he just wouldn't be so wordy...

 

[Lula]

Date: 8/16/2009 3:17:27 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 8/16/2009 4:01:41 AM

Author: QueenMum


Thank you John.


I''m happy you chime in too, and it''s nice that you and Karl agree!

I can''t imagine how I would feel if you had different viewpoints!

Happy to help Stephan.

For your eyesight I agree with the thresholds he cited 100%.


Now if he just wouldn''t be so wordy...

LOL! Wordy! I detect irony!

I appreciate Karl''s haiku-like posts.

 

[John P]

Date: 8/16/2009 3:33:50 PM
Author: sarap333

LOL! Wordy! I detect irony!
I appreciate Karl''s haiku-like posts.

Your detector works
Many years have we jested
I am long of post

Karl was short at first
But he is all published now
So I give him grief

 

[Lula]

Yes, I am long of post as well -- is there a PS award for that?

I have wondered how Karl managed to string enough words together to make full sentences and publish several full-length articles! He must have a ghost writer

we don''t know about!