Question on H&A scope

[sindiamonds1]

Hi PS!

This is just for educational purposes and my curious mind.

Was viewing h&a scope and saw this unique photo. It looks very different because:
- there's a tiny star center piece right in the middle
- cant see any separation between the heart and the cheveron

I read on whiteflash that the separation gets smaller as lower half % increases but this diamond has 80% lh. I find it difficult to believe this is not an ideal diamond considering its ASET (black background though) and dimensions.

Is this caused by a different scope being used? And would this be a SIC H&A diamond?

 

[sindiamonds1]

Update:

Vendor provided new images with the desktop face down tool - what do you all think?

 

[tyty333]

Is this your stone? It looks very good IMO! You did your homework. I'll leave it up to @Karl_K to identify any of the small
nuances that might affect the stone.

 

[sindiamonds1]

Is this your stone? It looks very good IMO! You did your homework. I'll leave it up to @Karl_K to identify any of the small
nuances that might affect the stone.

Thank you! I took a photo using the portable h&a scope but its very difficult.

Was wondering whether the images sent to me are really this diamond haha

 

[tyty333]

Hmmm...they do look quite different dont they? Does not seem like the same diamond IMO.

 

[sindiamonds1]

Hmmm...they do look quite different dont they? Does not seem like the same diamond IMO.

Haha yea but the seller is pretty reputable so doesn't make sense they would do the switcharoo :/

 

[sindiamonds1]

Decided to stay away from this vendor as the h&a seems sus. Not sure if they are from the same diamond...

 

[tyty333]

Haha yea but the seller is pretty reputable so doesn't make sense they would do the switcharoo :/

Probably not on purpose but sometimes things do happen by accident. We've seen it happen here on Pricescope where
a very reputable company sent the wrong stone. It had the same weight and color, just a different clarity, and the
report number on the stone was only off by one number I believe. It was an incredible number of coincidences that broke
down their process. They humbly apologized and straightened out the situation.

 

[tyty333]

So, I'm confused. Have you bought a stone (or not)? Are you still looking?

 

[sindiamonds1]

So, I'm confused. Have you bought a stone (or not)? Are you still looking?

I decided last night verbally but was swayed by the superior pictures of the above diamond.

Regardless, i decided to give the above a miss and stick to my original choice! The diamond may not be a SIC but its pretty close. Personally i like the 60.4% which gives me a diamond that looks like a 0.73 carat

Most importantly, i am definitely 1000% more educated and confident of my purchase after learniny from all of you in the forums!

 

[Karl_K]

Im confused because there are potentially images for 3 different stones in this thread.
Edit now 4.
Just my opinion.

 

[Karl_K]

When looking at h&a images depending on scope the center parts will change appearance and separation however the clefts in the hearts should be reasonably constant compared to the overall heart shape in all the scopes if everything is properly aligned.

 

[sindiamonds1]

Decided to stay away from this vendor as the h&a seems sus. Not sure if they are from the same diamond...

hey @Karl_K @lovedogs @tyty333 , thanks for hopping in!

These 3 hearts images were sent to me from the seller for the same diamond. The one in the middle was taken by myself through the scope using my phone camera.

These H&A pictures belong to the diamond mentioned at the start of this thread! The clefts seem to have disappeared in the red H&A photo, hence, I had a belief that this do not belong to the same diamond. Either that, or the red H&A photo has been digitally enhanced.

Let me know your thoughts! thank you

P.S: Regardless, I have decided not to go with this seller as they were cases in the past years where they were reported for bad practices (e.g. showing different cert to buyers/ defaming competitors).

 

[sindiamonds1]

I decided last night verbally but was swayed by the superior pictures of the above diamond.

Regardless, i decided to give the above a miss and stick to my original choice! The diamond may not be a SIC but its pretty close. Personally i like the 60.4% which gives me a diamond that looks like a 0.73 carat

Most importantly, i am definitely 1000% more educated and confident of my purchase after learniny from all of you in the forums!

Meanwhile @Karl_K @tyty333 , this is the diamond I selected in the end. How did I do? (:

Personally, I don't think this would qualify as a true H&A but I like how crisp the hearts are (though the sizes are close but not the same). Aset scope shows that the diamond would have good brightness with sufficient contrast.

Was initially concerned about the 60+ depth (saw that some articles recommended > 61), larger 58 table (again, <57 seems ideal) and 34.5 degree slightly shallow crown (14% crown height) - but I believe they are okay?

Thank you!

 

[Karl_K]

The numbers work.
You called it, really nice near h&a stone.

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

Nothing sweeter than hearing those words from Karl.

 

[sindiamonds1]

The numbers work.
You called it, really nice near h&a stone.

That's all i needed to hear - was concerned about potential obstruction or low fire issues due to the above dimension, but glad it would work!

3 weeks worth of intensive research and searching finally paid off - thanks again everyone on pricescope that provided your opinion

 

[sindiamonds1]

Hey PS! Just wanted to show yall some videos of the diamond.

What would you call a diamond like that? Seems to me that it's a rather bright diamond with smaller, flashes of fire!

Sometimes, the diamond looks a little dull from certain angles, and it seems that I can see a little bit of the background through the table (or am i imagining things..) especially when the diamond is tilted slightly. Is that normal? I tried checking for that in the first video by moving the diamond across the white and black background.
>> I am a little concerned because the previous aset I took seems to be on a dimmer yellow backlight. When i change to a white backlight via my phone, there seems to be some slight leakage at the table area :/

Just want to be 100% mind clean before they set it! Thank you again

 

[sindiamonds1]

And to learn more about diamonds, how does the following affect diamond performance:

Table - 58% instead of recommended 55-57%
Depth - 60.4% instead of recommended 61 to 62%
Crown height- 14% instead of recommended 15-16%
Pav angle - 40.6 instead of ideal 40.8

Overall, i do like the spread of this 0.7ct, size wise, i believe it averages out to a 0.72-0.73ct. But if possible, i would like to understand better what I am "sacrificing"

I am most confused regarding depth and crown height - why is 61% a good minimum depth instead of 60%? And why must crown height be >15%?

I spent hours searching within PA but can't seem to find an answer specially regarding crown height :/

 

[Karl_K]

The black your seeing in the first video is not leakage, its drawing light from the area of the camera. Perfectly normal.
2nd video same thing.

Yes if have a bright back light it will lighten the center in ASET this is because a MRB no matter how well cut has some minor leakage.
The reference point is the lightest area under the table that isn't a culet is used as a baseline for leakage.
Here is a image of a perfectly cut virtual diamond with a back light.

 

[sindiamonds1]

Thanks so much @Karl_K !! Very insightful- guess seeing a little black is normal especially if we are taking videos of diamond. I believe the only way to circumvent that is to cover everything but the camera lens in white (?) - think I saw a post like that on PS as i was browsing.

Based on your experience, what do you think of the diamond in terms of brilliance and fire? Few days back before purchasing this diamond, i went to different stores to see the diamonds myself but there are just too many envirommental factors affecting the diamond for me to judge >< (e.g. distance of diamond to spotlights)

Also, do you have any thoughts regarding the question below? Specifically the table size, diamond depth and crown height.

I have already purchased the diamond so it is purely for educational purposes, really appreciate learning from you so far and sorry for my many questions I'm just so invested in learning more about diamonds in general

And to learn more about diamonds, how does the following affect diamond performance:

Table - 58% instead of recommended 55-57%
Depth - 60.4% instead of recommended 61 to 62%
Crown height- 14% instead of recommended 15-16%
Pav angle - 40.6 instead of ideal 40.8

Overall, i do like the spread of this 0.7ct, size wise, i believe it averages out to a 0.72-0.73ct. But if possible, i would like to understand better what I am "sacrificing"

I am most confused regarding depth and crown height - why is 61% a good minimum depth instead of 60%? And why must crown height be >15%?

I spent hours searching within PA but can't seem to find an answer specially regarding crown height :/

 

[Karl_K]

Yes to everything white that you can. But why? in the real world its you the diamond is drawing light from, its part of its charm.
I think the diamond is overall well balanced and in the right lighting should do very well on fire.
Fire is super lighting dependent.

The really short answer is the combo just works which is more important than any one number.
The rest is to much to type tonight, the long answer would take a book LOL.

 

[sindiamonds1]

Yes to everything white that you can. But why? in the real world its you the diamond is drawing light from, its part of its charm.
I think the diamond is overall well balanced and in the right lighting should do very well on fire.
Fire is super lighting dependent.

The really short answer is the combo just works which is more important than any one number.
The rest is to much to type tonight, the long answer would take a book LOL.

100% agree with you Karl! Was just confirming whether my understanding of camera reflection is correct.

In summary, seems like this is a high performing balanced diamond, and I would be hard-pressed to find something better unless I up my budget and pay the price of a Super Ideal Cut / True H&A.

------
Regarding the individual diamond dimensions, I am guessing personal preference has a part to play and those numbers serve as a good guide to follow.

For instance, smaller table means more crown surface area from a top down view = more fire (especially for larger carat diamonds but mine is only 0.7ct).
>> Higher crown depth and diamond depth to lower the chance of leaky diamonds or bright diamond with little contrast/ fire.

Overall, since the numbers for my diamond work well, guess it's good that the diamond is on the shallower side (60.4% depth) since I get more spread!

Thanks again for your valuable inputs @Karl_K !!

 

[sindiamonds1]

Sorry for being selfish @Karl_K but can I ask one final question (': (again... I already purchase my diamond but just wanted the reassurance)

Comparing the H&A pictures taken by phone camera (Slightly different H&A scope was used...), which one would you prefer? Would any of them qualify as a true H&A?



In my opinion:
- The one on the left is more proportionate with nicer hearts, chevron and equal separation
- However, the clefts are more severe compared to the one on the right (not sure if it's alignment issue)

Overall, none of them are true H&A but left one is slightly better... but the difference between them is miniscule and is unlikely to be noticed in a 0.7ct diamond without a loupe.

 

[Karl_K]

Sorry for being selfish @Karl_K but can I ask one final question (': (again... I already purchase my diamond but just wanted the reassurance)

Comparing the H&A pictures taken by phone camera (Slightly different H&A scope was used...), which one would you prefer? Would any of them qualify as a true H&A?



In my opinion:
- The one on the left is more proportionate with nicer hearts, chevron and equal separation
- However, the clefts are more severe compared to the one on the right (not sure if it's alignment issue)

Overall, none of them are true H&A but left one is slightly better... but the difference between them is miniscule and is unlikely to be noticed in a 0.7ct diamond without a loupe.

The one on the left could have some serious twist issues that may cause visible issues.
Notice how the bottom heart it looks like one side has slipped down, the one next to it also but not as bad.
The one on the right is much better without from the top visible issues that might be visible outside a scope.

 

[Karl_K]

And to learn more about diamonds, how does the following affect diamond performance:

Table - 58% instead of recommended 55-57%
Depth - 60.4% instead of recommended 61 to 62%
Crown height- 14% instead of recommended 15-16%
Pav angle - 40.6 instead of ideal 40.8

Overall, i do like the spread of this 0.7ct, size wise, i believe it averages out to a 0.72-0.73ct. But if possible, i would like to understand better what I am "sacrificing"

I am most confused regarding depth and crown height - why is 61% a good minimum depth instead of 60%? And why must crown height be >15%?

I spent hours searching within PA but can't seem to find an answer specially regarding crown height :/

First thing is those lists are not designed nor capable of covering all good combinations and different people use different cut off points.
There are a lot of good combos with 58% tables.
Depth - free spread in an RB so its not a bad thing. In fancies depth does not equal spread but its close to doing so in RB.
Crown height of 14 can work just fine in the right combo.
Who ever says the best PA angle is 40.8 is just wrong, even saying there is one best PA is wrong.
Its all about the combo.

 

[sindiamonds1]

The one on the left could have some serious twist issues that may cause visible issues.
Notice how the bottom heart it looks like one side has slipped down, the one next to it also but not as bad.
The one on the right is much better without from the top visible issues that might be visible outside a scope.

That's nice to know! I was under the impression that left is better as the hearts are more evenly sized. But just read your thread on twisted hearts here: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-is-this-ideal-scope-image.247367/

Got your point regarding combo! The 40.8 PA is in combination with 34.5 CA but understand that there're multiple combos that work.

I think I am all good here, thanks so much @Karl_K !!!!

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

How does Karl keep track of all those combinations?
Great thread, thank you.

 

[Karl_K]

How does Karl keep track of all those combinations?
Great thread, thank you.

That book is to small. lol

 

[sindiamonds1]

Hi @Karl_K ! Happy new year - hope you have been well (: Didn't mean to revive an old thread so forgive me.

I am currently in the process of finalizing my ring design and the ring would be in production very soon - this means moving forward, there won't be any further exchange of main diamond.

I place the original diamond into the black 3D model to get a rough sensing of the size, while reviewing the video I took here, it seems that there's a black triangle that is consistently there in the middle of the table.

I believe it is obstruction? Should it be something to be concerned about and would it go away?

• Is this the same as what you were saying above regarding camera obstruction? But weirdly when I move the diamond away, the black triangle remains. Or is it my head/ body that is obstructing
• With this clearer video under good lighting, is the diamond performance still excellent like you mentioned above? I personally don't see much leakages and diamond has good edge to edge brightness

Thank you!

Video: