Ring of Life/Death pt 3: Enter the Diamond

[Avatar345]

It feels like forever since I was focused on my own diamond hunt, but yes I'm back with new updates for collective interpretation lol

Ok so that third diamond came in, I brought my new IdealScope along to the viewing, and I took the following image:



The only problem(?) is that the contrast is showing up as grey as opposed to black, so it's a little more difficult to discern/distinguish from the surrounding red, and under the table I can't tell whether those off-red slivers are off-red minor leakage or off-red dynamic contrast.

And maybe no one will be able to tell.. but I welcome your thoughts!

To reiterate the specs, they're located HERE

I'm not looking for H&A perfection either by any stretch, but here's a shot of those aspects as well just to see if they help in expert interpretation (yup I'm looking at you Sledge!!)



The arrows we already knew what they looked like... the hearts run into their corresponding 'darts.' Not sure the extent to which not having the stone flat/centered optically might have contributed to this effect, but I'm taking it at face value. If we can relate it back to hints on light performance, so much the better!

 

[musicloveranthony]

That has a nice arrows pattern. It isn’t perfect and has some slight asymmetry, but it’s well above average. The hearts pattern has some asymmetry and some notable imperfections but it isn’t abysmal like some stones I see sold as ideal cut. It is also above average.

How does it look in real life to your eyes? Does it look like it will make you happy to look at when you wear it? Does it look like it’s going to seem a good value for what it costs? Those will tell you your answer

 

[sledge]

The hearts pattern has some asymmetry and some notable imperfections but it isn’t abysmal like some stones I see sold as ideal cut. It is also above average.

I disagree. Hearts image is not typical of a true ideal stone and would not be considered “above average”.

How Hearts and Arrows Diamonds are Graded | Whiteflash

Hearts and arrows diamond grading is key to understanding the level of a quality craftsmanship and light performance. Learn about this here.

www.whiteflash.com

In regards to the idealscope it appears to me you have overly bright backlighting. I think with proper backlighting you may see something similar to the following picture.

You can see how the ASET is more revealing than the idealscope in this case.

FYI this pic is from the article linked above.

 

[musicloveranthony]

I disagree. Hearts image is not typical of a true ideal stone and would not be considered “above average”

I didn’t say it was ideal. I said it is above average. It is above average. Perfection is not average, so to claim it as the only definition of above average is disingenuous.

 

[lovedogs]

I agree that it seems above average, but definitely not in super ideal territory. How does it look to you IRL?

 

[John Pollard]

Keeping the source of obstruction (the camera) static, slightly shallower pavilion mains will obstruct for longer as the stone is turned, compared to slightly steeper pavilion mains. This is because obstruction itself is a function of those facets returning light that’s incident from directly and almost-directly faceup - a facet will cease to darken as soon as it’s angled too far from the normal to reflect what’s “directly” or “almost directly” above.

Great info from the great @yssie . Here's some additional information on obstruction and contrast pattern.



https://www.pricescope.com/education/diamond-cut/diamond-performance#pattern

You can scroll up from that section see how humans provide contrast.
You can scroll down to see examples of different round brilliant subsets.

 

[John Pollard]

The arrows we already knew what they looked like... the hearts run into their corresponding 'darts.' Not sure the extent to which not having the stone flat/centered optically might have contributed to this effect, but I'm taking it at face value.

Hi @Avatar345 . Perfectly logical. Generally speaking, diamonds with specs in the traditional ideal range have patterns that go from Hearts and Arrows to "Darts" and Arrows as the lower half lengths get shorter.

There is no official Hearts and Arrows standard but for those interested in the topic we have posted a variety of graduated examples on our Hearts and Arrows page (desktop users can open in a new tab for more detail). Hope it's helpful.

https://www.pricescope.com/education/diamond-cut/hearts-and-arrows-diamonds

 

[Avatar345]

I disagree. Hearts image is not typical of a true ideal stone and would not be considered “above average”.

How Hearts and Arrows Diamonds are Graded | Whiteflash

Hearts and arrows diamond grading is key to understanding the level of a quality craftsmanship and light performance. Learn about this here.

www.whiteflash.com

In regards to the idealscope it appears to me you have overly bright backlighting. I think with proper backlighting you may see something similar to the following picture.

You can see how the ASET is more revealing than the idealscope in this case.

FYI this pic is from the article linked above.

Haha well I'm happy to say it didn't look as bad as all that... I used the IdealScope with the diamond held in some tweezers(?) as well, but couldn't photograph it unfortunately from that position - didn't see any areas of immediate light loss. That said, yeah that photo of the scope image is definitely over-exposed... I had forgotten to bring my second phone so I asked to use the jewelers cell phone as the backlight for the diamond holder. He had the brightness turned up too high I guess...

 

[Avatar345]

I agree that it seems above average, but definitely not in super ideal territory. How does it look to you IRL?

Yeah so great question - with the store lighting it's really hard to discern. It seemed to exhibit more fire than the other/existing diamond (which is currently set), and at 34.5/40.8 vs 33.5/41 I figure that's what I should be seeing probably anyway. It seemed to be darker in a sense, but hard to sort of explain that. I don't know how apparent the difference in "brightness" should be and how much of it was the one diamond being angled this way in tweezers while the other one was angles that way in a ring

 

[Avatar345]

Hi @Avatar345 . Perfectly logical. Generally speaking, diamonds with specs in the traditional ideal range have patterns that go from Hearts and Arrows to "Darts" and Arrows as the lower half lengths get shorter.

There is no official Hearts and Arrows standard but for those interested in the topic we have posted a variety of graduated examples on our Hearts and Arrows page (desktop users can open in a new tab for more detail). Hope it's helpful.

https://www.pricescope.com/education/diamond-cut/hearts-and-arrows-diamonds

John these articles you've been linking lately... I gotta say I don't know why these things weren't popping up when I was originally searching for diamond info! Are they all new for the most part? Beyond4C's treated me right though lol

So, if this one with the images above were to be say... kind of like an A2 on the arrows, and a C1 in the hearts... from the GIA cert would I infer something like a 73 depth pavilion rounded up to 75, or how what you interpret that heart pattern?

 

[sledge]

from the GIA cert would I infer something like a 73 depth pavilion rounded up to 75, or how what you interpret that heart pattern?

Maybe just a typo but it’s the lower girdle facets (LGF’s) that would be reported as 75% on the GIA report. Because of GIA rounding, actual values would fall between 73-77. Guess I should say averaged values would fall in that 73-77 range. Actuals might hit below or above. Not looking at cert as I’m on mobile but pavilion depth would be 43ish.

That said, I agree the thinness of the V lines up with a 73 or thereabouts.

What I would like @John Pollard or @Karl_K to further explain is why we are seeing 73ish on the V’s but larger separation on the clefts indicting an 82ish LGF.

Camera tilt may be contributing but I feel yaw may be a factor as well. Perhaps I misinterpreted upon initial review?

Yaw:


Camera Tilt:

 

[John Pollard]

So, if this one with the images above were to be say... kind of like an A2 on the arrows, and a C1 in the hearts... from the GIA cert would I infer something like a 73 depth pavilion rounded up to 75, or how what you interpret that heart pattern?

Let's take a step back: Unlike a standardized instrument like Ideal Scope, the wide, wild world of Hearts and Arrows viewers has a lot of variability.

I prefer to interpret the grading report.

Requisite CGI disclaimer: What you see below are computer generated images. They are cool, but come from CAD using lazy manual input of a few data points (not a 3Dscan of a diamond). These are "perfect" looking approximations made out of air, not photos of a stubborn object with Mohs 10 hardness.

Example 1: As reported. The green arrows point to solid numbers (GIA does not round these on reports). I used a 3.5% girdle and 75% lower halves. Note the carat weight.



Example 2: Postulating the deepest "could be" measurements if the report wasn't rounded with 73% lower halves. Carat weight increases, but so does total depth in mm, which should not be rounded.



Example 3: Postulating the shallowest "could be" measurements if the report wasn't rounded with 73% lower halves. If the girdle is 3.8ish we arrive to the correct weight and correct depth in mm. That thickness also conforms with the medium - slightly-thick description.



In my nerd speculation world #3 is close to reality - understanding that scanners (used by laboratories to establish report data) also have a small margin of error.

In my opinion it also brings the hearts more in line with what you observed in the viewer - cleft phantoms notwithstanding.

 

[John Pollard]

John these articles you've been linking lately... I gotta say I don't know why these things weren't popping up when I was originally searching for diamond info! Are they all new for the most part?

PriceScope has been guiding consumers for 20 years. The knowledge base here is deep, rich and robust - but our website predates affiliate marketing and modern SEO strategies.

Yes: The pages are new. We are using compositional strategies to help them rank and be found better, as long as those strategies remain educationally sound. We hope our veteran community members (like @sledge here) will find them useful when helping newcomers.

Thank you for noticing and - by all means - click over and read them to your heart's delight.

 

[John Pollard]

That said, I agree the thinness of the V lines up with a 73 or thereabouts.

What I would like @John Pollard or @Karl_K to further explain is why we are seeing 73ish on the V’s but larger separation on the clefts indicting an 82ish LGF.

Thanks @sledge . Based on my in-store experience, I'd wager that it's a combination of viewer optics and the position of the diamond (stage relative to lens). @Karl_K may have a different hypothesis.

 

[Karl_K]

looks like a pocket h&a viewer was used and they are known to give odd images with some combos.
They are also near impossible to line up right.