Thoughts on this Diamond- 1.21 G VS1 Medium Blue Fluorescence

[mugatu300]

Only interested in CanadaMark diamonds due to sentimental value. Found this one. Looks nice just a bit wary of the medium blue fluorescence. Also not sure why the ASET looks way better than the IdealScope (way more leakage showing in the IS). Would love to know your thoughts: http://diadna.com/DiamondView.aspx?pid=1502011600

 

[Karl_K]

The back lighting on the IS is blazing bright rendering the image useless.
The short 45% stars are a good call but the moderate uneven painting is not.
It's not h&A due to uneven hearts.
Overall a fairly well cut stone that misses being top end by more than a bit.

 

[mugatu300]

The back lighting on the IS is blazing bright rendering the image useless.
The short 45% stars are a good call but the moderate uneven painting is not.
It's not h&A due to uneven hearts.
Overall a fairly well cut stone that misses being top end by more than a bit.

Thank you Karl for the insight. Makes sense. Finding a top end CanadaMark has proven difficult but she is dead set on it being Canadian. How would you consider the two below in comparison? On par/better/worse? These are the only other two I was potentially considering. Otherwise I keep waiting and try to be patient.

Option B: https://site.kapugems.com/#/dna/18034590?key=7tRvkp#UUxy1sXx0GZhTQX5GmY4@k5pr








Option C: https://site.kapugems.com/#/dna/13948740?key=7tRvkp#UUxy1sXx0GZhTQX5GmY4@k5pr

 

[Karl_K]

a best cut, b close to a, c worst cut
not a fan of grade setting clouds, b & c need to be eyeballed for issues.

 

[mugatu300]

a best cut, b close to a, c worst cut
not a fan of grade setting clouds, b & c need to be eyeballed for issues.

Thank you again for the insight!

Ok, sounds like if A is the best of this bunch but misses top end by quite a bit, then I should pass on all, especially if I am looking for ideal or near-ideal.

Also, forgot one final option D below. A bit outside my price range but I'm assuming this qualifies as top-end/near-ideal correct?

Kwebg

site.kapugems.com

 

[Karl_K]

Thank you again for the insight!

Ok, sounds like if A is the best of this bunch but misses top end by quite a bit, then I should pass on all, especially if I am looking for ideal or near-ideal.

Also, forgot one final option D below. A bit outside my price range but I'm assuming this qualifies as top-end/near-ideal correct?

Kwebg

site.kapugems.com

more of the same.
no advanced images
not much chance its close to top end.
Probably cut by the same cutter as the others.

 

[mugatu300]

more of the same.
no advanced images
not much chance its close to top end.
Probably cut by the same cutter as the others.

Ok. In your opinion, do you think I will be able to find a better cut CanadaMark diamond in future if I continue to try and wait? Or is this generally about the best I am going to get? Unfortunately my girlfriend is insistent on CanadaMark diamond so its quite limited inventory.

 

[Karl_K]

Ok. In your opinion, do you think I will be able to find a better cut CanadaMark diamond in future if I continue to try and wait? Or is this generally about the best I am going to get? Unfortunately my girlfriend is insistent on CanadaMark diamond so its quite limited inventory.

It looks like they are being cut by one cutter so far based on the example you have shown and an educated guess on my part.
To expect that cutter to start producing ideal cuts isn't likely at all.
The first diamond is better cut than many steep deep gia ex stones that many people buy.
So by PS standards it does not stand out but the rest of the world its better than many.

 

[headlight]

I want to add that for the first stone, the medium blue fluorescence paired with G color will yield a really “white” looking stone

 

[mugatu300]

I want to add that for the first stone, the medium blue fluorescence paired with G color will yield a really “white” looking stone

Is that your favorite of the above 4 options? What would be your 2nd favorite? Thanks!

 

[mugatu300]

more of the same.
no advanced images
not much chance its close to top end.
Probably cut by the same cutter as the others.

Found some advance pics for that 1.3. They dont look that great correct? Still think option A & B are best right?

 

[Karl_K]

Found some advance pics for that 1.3. They dont look that great correct? Still think option A & B are best right?

yes this is the worst cut by far.
See the dark zone between the arrows face up and the tiny heart. That means the pavilion is messed up and twisted.

 

[mugatu300]

yes this is the worst cut by far.
See the dark zone between the arrows face up and the tiny heart. That means the pavilion is messed up and twisted.

Understood. Thus far, you have said these two are your favorites of the one's Ive sent:

Diamond DNA

DNA View

diadna.com

Kwebg

site.kapugems.com

I recently found another. How would you say this one stacks up against those two? Is it white enough with good optical/light performance?

 

[Karl_K]

Understood. Thus far, you have said these two are your favorites of the one's Ive sent:

Diamond DNA

DNA View

diadna.com

Kwebg

site.kapugems.com

I recently found another. How would you say this one stacks up against those two? Is it white enough with good optical/light performance?

more of the same, another by the same cutter.
Its in the same range as the first 2.
White enough is personal preference.

 

[Joel C]

more of the same, another by the same cutter.
Its in the same range as the first 2.
White enough is personal preference.

Hi Karl, if not too much trouble can I ask your advice on these two diamonds? Would they perform well? To me it seems there is a bit of light color in the middle rings. Is this something to watch for? Measurements seem to be in the sweet spot, except for #2 that has a Pav depth of 62.6. Thanks so much!!

 

[Karl_K]

Hi Karl, if not too much trouble can I ask your advice on these two diamonds? Would they perform well? To me it seems there is a bit of light color in the middle rings. Is this something to watch for?

The distortion seen in the heart images is also causing some artifacts face up but unlike the 1.3 a few posts up its not eye visible face up.
#1 in the quoted post is better cut than the second.

 

[Joel C]

Thanks Karl! Can I ask, on a scale of 1-5, 5 being super ideal, how would 1 & 2 perform? (This is the easiest that my untrained mind can picture the technicals!)

 

[Karl_K]

Thanks Karl! Can I ask, on a scale of 1-5, 5 being super ideal, how would 1 & 2 perform? (This is the easiest that my untrained mind can picture the technicals!)

it will greatly vary based on lighting, in easy lighting 5(anything looks good) in not so good lighting 4ish and in bad lighting 5( they all look bad).

 

[Karl_K]

it will greatly vary based on lighting, in easy lighting 5(anything looks good) in not so good lighting 4ish and in bad lighting 5( they all look bad).

I am not happy with that answer while its a decent opinion it does not tell the real story.
Let look at it from the other direction.
They have better light performance than the bunch of steep/deep GIA EX cuts on the market.

 

[Joel C]

Thanks Karl. Can I ask if there is a noticible difference in 4 prong earrings measuring 6.62 x 6.58 and earring measuring 6.82 x 6.79? Basically can someone tell the later at a meer .2mm smaller is actually smaller or is .2mm size difference negligible?

 

[Karl_K]

Thanks Karl. Can I ask if there is a noticible difference in 4 prong earrings measuring 6.62 x 6.58 and earring measuring 6.82 x 6.79? Basically can someone tell the later at a meer .2mm smaller is actually smaller or is .2mm size difference negligible?

In this size range .2mm is not a significant difference.

 

[Joel C]

Thanks Karl!

 

[mugatu300]

more of the same, another by the same cutter.
Its in the same range as the first 2.
White enough is personal preference.

Hey Karl, found another stone with nice ASET/H&A. Any chance this is eye-clean tho? Have concerns about that and cannot easily view in person. Video in link below as well. Really would just love to know your opinion on eye-cleanliness. Thank you so much!

https://d6z2uq3gvx7kk.cloudfront.net/videos/5341011/5341011.html

Kwebg

site.kapugems.com

 

[Karl_K]

It can go either way. Someone with very good eyesight may be able to see it. Talk to the vendor and see if someone can eyeball it.

 

[mugatu300]

It can go either way. Someone with very good eyesight may be able to see it. Talk to the vendor and see if someone can eyeball it.

Hi Karl, seems like I've finally found a cutter that produces CanadaMarks that are a a bit better than most of the others (still not perfect but it seems like there are no perfect Canadian diamonds these days). Below is a table with my three favorites. I have two questions:

1) Is any more superior or are they all pretty equal?
2) More importantly, comparing the two H colors, does one appear more white than the other? I know the 1.22H has better proportions than the 1.21H, but the 1.21H looks less yellow to me when viewed from the side profile. I could also be imagining this though. There are links below for several different video views like Light, Dark, and Consumer below.

Lab

Shape

Carats

Color

Clarity

Cut

Pol

Sym

Polished

Light Video

Dark Video

Plotting

Consumer Video

ASET

Hearts & Arrows

GIA

RO

1.18

G

VS2

EX

EX

EX

Polished

Light Video

Dark Video

Plotting

Consumer Video

ASET

Hearts & Arrows

GIA-5221558788

RO

1.21​

H

VVS2

EX

EX

EX

Image

Video

Video

Image

Video

Image

Image

GIA

RO

1.22

H

VVS2

EX

EX

EX

Polished

Light Video

Dark Video

Plotting

Consumer Video

ASET

Hearts & Arrows

 

[Karl_K]

gia 5221558788 is a no go.
cut wise the other 2 are a tie.
Same class as the others cut wise.

 

[Karl_K]

Who ever is doing those last 3 videos needs to remove the yellow/gold colors from the environment and wear consistent colors, like a lab coat.

 

[mugatu300]

Who ever is doing those last 3 videos needs to remove the yellow/gold colors from the environment and wear consistent colors, like a lab coat.

Understood and thank you! OK the 1.21 is out for me then.

One last option from this cutter if it isn't too much trouble. 36 crown and ASET has some green, but this is the definitely the nicest H&A plot I've seen in a CanadaMark thus far (been searching 4 months). How does it compare to the 1.18 and 1.22 in table above? What's more important in your opinion (not taking price into account), the 1.22 which has misshapen hearts, H color, but nicer ASET or this 1.26 which has better H&A and E color but worse proportions and ASET?

1.26​

E

VVS1

EX

EX

EX

Polished

Light Video

Dark Video

Plotting

Consumer Video

ASET

Hearts & Arrows

 

[Karl_K]

Understood and thank you! OK the 1.21 is out for me then.

One last option from this cutter if it isn't too much trouble. 36 crown and ASET has some green, but this is the definitely the nicest H&A plot I've seen in a CanadaMark thus far (been searching 4 months). How does it compare to the 1.18 and 1.22 in table above? What's more important in your opinion (not taking price into account), the 1.22 which has misshapen hearts, H color, but nicer ASET or this 1.26 which has better H&A and E color but worse proportions and ASET?

1.26​

E

VVS1

EX

EX

EX

Polished

Light Video

Dark Video

Plotting

Consumer Video

ASET

Hearts & Arrows

report link?
Can you get a real ASET image?
The computer generated ASET looks worse than expected based on the other images so it might have scan problems rather than actual problems in ASET.

 

[mugatu300]

report link?
Can you get a real ASET image?
The computer generated ASET looks worse than expected based on the other images so it might have scan problems rather than actual problems in ASET.

Below is the report link for the 1.26. Most of the ASET/H&A images I've seen for all these CanadaMarks look computer generated. Is that something I should be concerned about or can I trust them? I'm dealing with a bunch of different cutters in India so I kind of doubt they will be able to provide me with real ASET/ID/H&A if I ask for them. Already a bit hard enough for them to give me the computer-generated ones since it doesn't always seem standard practice and they have to special-request them sometimes for me.

GIA