Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

My colleagues say that I''''m nut...

Which one should I adopt?

  • Number 1

    Votes: 1 100.0%

  • Number 2

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Total voters
    1
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
#1 gets my vote.
3.gif

i''m not so much a size gal, but *drool* *drool* *drool*, i think the 2.5 is just amazing
18.gif

you have divine taste in diamonds!
 
Stephan, you are such a card!! That asscher is amazing! Send it over my way willya?!

I voted for 1 of course? Why? Size.
9.gif
 
Yup, I looove #1, and size gets me every time!!!
30.gif
 
31.gif
Thank you Belle !
Am I wrong to say that number 1 is a classic ACA and number 2 a new line ACA?
Which one will make my colleagues jalous under halogene lighting?
31.gif
 
Hi Mara!
Long time!
Did you vote for number one because you are planning to buy number 2?
3.gif
 
Had to add that I voted for #2 ACCIDENTLY!!!! I meant to vote for #1, so just FYI re: the numbers. They both look amazing, and I know you like warmer colors, so go for that yummy BIG J!!!
 
Date: 8/30/2005 4:58:24 PM
Author: QueenMum
31.gif
Thank you Belle !
Am I wrong to say that number 1 is a classic ACA and number 2 a new line ACA?
Which one will make my colleagues jalous under halogene lighting?
31.gif
Click to expand...
from what i understand about the differences between the two lines, you are correct.
36.gif


either one would make *anyone* jealous, but i guarantee that #1 is going to be a showstopper!
30.gif
especially under the halogens
3.gif
 
Some people vote for number 2 without explaining why!
Don''t cheat!
face5.gif
 
I voted for 2 (but 1 would get my vote just on size alone)

What are the white marks in the idealscope of #1 in between the arrow points. Is that intentional light leakage... or not?

#2 idealscope looked better.

Anyone know..?
 
For the leakage, I think it won''t kill me.
I''m not into 100% light return, but I''m a "bold flashes of intense fire under halogene lighting" addict.
1.gif
 
How will this one be set? Can you use that beautiful setting????
Or do you keep that one, too?????
 
About the setting, we will decide on Monday in Houston.
I don''t know what to do with the old one.
 
I like that #1 is bigger. You''ll love the J. (you know you will) Also I think the old line is cut to have that pop in direct lighting, while the #2 is cut more for a balance (does quite well in direct, kills in ambient and diffuse) I think that''s the difference. (#1 kills in direct, and is quite lovely in ambient and diffuse) If I''m wrong, don''t shoot me. (I am not an expert, just a diamond nut)

Shay
 
Date: 8/30/2005 5:22:58 PM
Author: laney
I voted for 2 (but 1 would get my vote just on size alone)

What are the white marks in the idealscope of #1 in between the arrow points. Is that intentional light leakage... or not?

#2 idealscope looked better.

Anyone know..?
Click to expand...
Laney, those symmetrical points are intentional ''pinpoint leakage'' and are a result of the style of cutting Classic ACA. They enhance qualities of contrast brilliance in a slightly different way than in New Line. The distinctions are very slight, so a casual observer may not immediately pick them out.

Josh Rioux, a gem enthusiast and client, did a fun write up on the nuances, here.
 
Date: 8/30/2005 4:59:40 PM
Author: QueenMum
Hi Mara!
Long time!
Did you vote for number one because you are planning to buy number 2?
3.gif
Click to expand...

Hah ! No...that 'I' is too high-brow for me. You know I love a good 'J'.
31.gif
 
Hi Stephen,

I am sorry to see that your Assher wasn''t all that you wanted, it still remains one of the most memorable rings I have seen here to date.
emsmile.gif


While both stones will offer a major presence... I think the increase in contrast briliance of #1 coupled with the added size (and ability to say 2.5cts+) would edge it to the winner circle. The VS1 is also an added plus if you care for "mind clean" stones, which I happen to appreciate. Good luck and can''t wait to see how you set your choice.

Best regards,
Scott
 
I voted for #1.

I''ll give you one guess why...........
41.gif
 
I voted for the second ring because I like the cut/idealscope better and like the better grade of color. The clarity seems to be a near wash and both rings should look huge. Slightly larger size vs. Better cut and color = me liking the second option better.
 
Size is obviously a major difference, but does JohnQuixote or anyone else have a comment on the significant difference in crown height/angle between the two stones (14.7/34.1 vs. 15.7/34.9) and how that may effect their appearances?
 
I prefer 34.1 over 34.9...

Also keep in mind Stephan likes the warmer stones!
 
Date: 8/30/2005 5:27:48 PM
Author: QueenMum
For the leakage, I think it won't kill me.
I'm not into 100% light return, but I'm a 'bold flashes of intense fire under halogene lighting' addict.
1.gif
Click to expand...
QM
i like #1. i prefer leakage along the edge for better contrast and it's a tighter cut stone.

#2....with a smaller table + more crown height = more fire? maybe?
 
Hi Stephan!
9.gif
Long time no talk!

I voted for no.1 as well. I know you like warmer stones, and size does make a difference
9.gif
.
Now the Q is: how are you gonna set it? If I recall correctly, your stone is currently in a tension setting, isnt it?
 
I voted for one as well, it''s beautiful :-) Did you make a choice??
 
I vote for 1
30.gif



What will you do with your asscher???
 
Date: 8/30/2005 5:08:22 PM
Author: blueroses
Had to add that I voted for #2 ACCIDENTLY!!!! I meant to vote for #1, so just FYI re: the numbers. They both look amazing, and I know you like warmer colors, so go for that yummy BIG J!!!
Click to expand...
Okay, I prefer #2 but I voted for #1 to balance out blueroses mistake. Now the voting should be accurate!
31.gif


I like the I better than a J and I like the idea of a "new line" with the bolder flashes even though I''ve never seen one!
 
Thanks Patty!!
 
Date: 8/30/2005 7:12:55 PM
Author: Thegroom
Size is obviously a major difference, but does JohnQuixote or anyone else have a comment on the significant difference in crown height/angle between the two stones (14.7/34.1 vs. 15.7/34.9) and how that may effect their appearances?
Click to expand...
Coupled with those pavilion angles both fall in the ''sweet'' zone of overall high performance. Those configurations surround Tolkowsky and if you run them on the HCA I suspect they both land close to 1.0. The static ASETs look very similar with both 30 and 40 degrees of obscuration (the ideal-scope images tell that story).

Thanks for asking.
 
Oh noooo! Your asscher ring Stephan is such a beauty....
2.gif
And so are these, of course. You had a H&A before and changed, no ?
38.gif
 
Anyone have a pic of that ring handy??? Wasn''t it a nice two tone gold?????
2.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top