Hit me up! I love the hunt!!!
Bear is the real gem!(Bear says "Hi!)
Currently aluminum finished in black sharpie and dog slobber (Bear says "Hi!)
*AHEM* Back on task!
Here's a comparison of ASET images from the Royal Asscher (RA) with a 5-step pavilion & a 57% table vs. this Antique Asscher (AA) with a 3-step pavilion & 39% table. It illuminates a few differences I noticed in person:
(1) In diffuse lighting, the RA had a very crisp hall-of-mirrors effect, gorgeous & consistent patterning, uniform brightness and beautifully coordinated play-of light across the entire face of the stone. Lots of tiny but distinct "laser lines" in concentric rings flowed across the stone across a wide array of tilt angles.
(2) In diffuse lighting, the AA is similar but not quite as crisp or refined. It also has a chunkier pattern.
(3) In bright lighting however, the RA's crown & the area under the table displayed totally different intensities, fire, patterning and play -of-light. Under these conditions, it felt like 2 totally different (and independent) stones fused together. The patterned play-of-light in the crown seemed quite different from and moved independently of the play-of-light under the table. The crown felt a bit "stiff" or "mechanical" under these conditions.
(4) In bright lighting, the AA shows much more consistent brightness, fire and play-of light across the face of the stone. The movement is very fluid, organic and coordinated across a wide range of tilt angles. It is very much a singular, coordinated entity.
*Most of these differences, IMO, are likely due to the very small table. If we considered the table to be a 2-dimensional square, then the crown would represent 85% of the AA's surface area vs 67.5% of the RA's surface area. In reality however, the differences are more extreme since the crown actually exists in 3 dimensions and is higher in the AA.
Without further ado:
I'm reading through this and I have had the same types of thoughts when comparing different asschers.*AHEM* Back on task!
Here's a comparison of ASET images from the Royal Asscher (RA) with a 5-step pavilion & a 57% table vs. this Antique Asscher (AA) with a 3-step pavilion & 39% table. It illuminates a few differences I noticed in person:
(1) In diffuse lighting, the RA had a very crisp hall-of-mirrors effect, gorgeous & consistent patterning, uniform brightness and beautifully coordinated play-of light across the entire face of the stone. Lots of tiny but distinct "laser lines" in concentric rings flowed across the stone across a wide array of tilt angles.
(2) In diffuse lighting, the AA is similar but not quite as crisp or refined. It also has a chunkier pattern.
(3) In bright lighting however, the RA's crown & the area under the table displayed totally different intensities, fire, patterning and play -of-light. Under these conditions, it felt like 2 totally different (and independent) stones fused together. The patterned play-of-light in the crown seemed quite different from and moved independently of the play-of-light under the table. The crown felt a bit "stiff" or "mechanical" under these conditions.
(4) In bright lighting, the AA shows much more consistent brightness, fire and play-of light across the face of the stone. The movement is very fluid, organic and coordinated across a wide range of tilt angles. It is very much a singular, coordinated entity.
(5) In certain conditions, the RA’s crown would become VERY bright and fiery, making the area under the table appear dim in comparison. This is never an issue with the AA
*Most of these differences, IMO, are likely due to the very small table. If we considered the table to be a 2-dimensional square, then the crown would represent 85% of the AA's surface area vs 67.5% of the RA's surface area. In reality however, the differences are more extreme since the crown actually exists in 3 dimensions and is higher in the AA.
Without further ado:
Oh! I must have missed that you sold the RA. Yes this bad boy is definitely a keeper, and it’s stunning! Thanks for making such a good comparison, that’s really helpful
*AHEM* Back on task!
Here's a comparison of ASET images from the Royal Asscher (RA) with a 5-step pavilion & a 57% table vs. this Antique Asscher (AA) with a 3-step pavilion & 39% table. It illuminates a few differences I noticed in person:
(1) In diffuse lighting, the RA had a very deep & crisp hall-of-mirrors effect, gorgeous & consistent patterning, uniform brightness and beautifully coordinated play-of light across the entire face of the stone. Lots of tiny but distinct "laser lines" in concentric rings flowed across the stone across a wide array of tilt angles.
(2) In diffuse lighting, the AA is similar but not quite as crisp or refined. It also has a chunkier pattern.
(3) In bright lighting however, the RA's crown & the area under the table displayed totally different intensities, fire, patterning and play -of-light. Under these conditions, it felt like 2 totally different (and independent) stones fused together. The patterned play-of-light in the crown seemed quite different from and moved independently of the play-of-light under the table. The crown felt a bit "stiff" or "mechanical" under these conditions.
(4) In bright lighting, the AA shows much more consistent brightness, fire and play-of light across the face of the stone. The movement is very fluid, organic and coordinated across a wide range of tilt angles. It is very much a singular, coordinated entity.
(5) In certain conditions, the RA’s crown would become VERY bright and fiery, making the area under the table appear dim in comparison. Sort of a thin, ultra-bright & flashy "ring" around a more subdued square. This is never an issue with the AA
*Most of these differences, IMO, are likely due to the very small table. If we considered the table to be a 2-dimensional square, then the crown would represent 85% of the AA's surface area vs 67.5% of the RA's surface area. In reality however, the differences are more extreme since the crown actually exists in 3 dimensions and is higher in the AA.
Without further ado:
300x240.png)
