Thoughts on three 1.5 round- which is best?

[BA02]

#1. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2115542007&weight=1.52

#2. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2115545874&weight=1.53

#3. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2106593833&weight=1.51

Which one is the best diamond??

 

[texirish]

It looks like all do well on the HCA tests, but only the 2nd is Excellent on all four measures. Have you seen the diamonds, and do you know if the H/SI2 is eye clean?

I think based on nothing but their stats I''d pick the 2nd I/SI1, but it it would be good to see the Idealscope images to compare them.

 

[BA02]

Date: 2/4/2010 11:06:00 PM
Author: texirish
It looks like all do well on the HCA tests, but only the 2nd is Excellent on all four measures. Have you seen the diamonds, and do you know if the H/SI2 is eye clean?


I think based on nothing but their stats I''d pick the 2nd I/SI1, but it it would be good to see the Idealscope images to compare them.

I have not seen any. THey are online. They are all deemed "eye clean" - Does a 1.0 HCA mean that it will still show lots of fire?

 

[texirish]

Date: 2/4/2010 11:09:25 PM
Author: BA02

I have not seen any. THey are online. They are all deemed ''eye clean'' - Does a 1.0 HCA mean that it will still show lots of fire?

I''m no expert, I''m just learning more and more myself! But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is an exceptional diamond, and really you can''t say a 0.5 is any better than a 1.8 without seeing them. The stats are just used to help eliminate some diamonds that will NOT be good performers. After using the HCA, it would be good to see some images of the diamond and how it performs on an Idealscope and/or ASET so you can check for light leaks.

Who is the online vendor?

 

[yssie]

Date: 2/4/2010 10:58:49 PM
Author:BA02
#1. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2115542007&weight=1.52

#2. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2115545874&weight=1.53

#3. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2106593833&weight=1.51

Which one is the best diamond??

Numbers on all are good. You may see the size difference between 1 and 2.


For the SIs with cloud inclusions, if they are the grade-setting inclusion type check with the vendor to make sure no problems.

ISs would confirm performance if you can get them.

 

[yssie]

Date: 2/4/2010 11:15:31 PM
Author: texirish

Date: 2/4/2010 11:09:25 PM
Author: BA02

I have not seen any. THey are online. They are all deemed ''eye clean'' - Does a 1.0 HCA mean that it will still show lots of fire?

I''m no expert, I''m just learning more and more myself! But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is an exceptional diamond, and really you can''t say a 0.5 is any better than a 1.8 without seeing them. The stats are just used to help eliminate some diamonds that will NOT be good performers. After using the HCA, it would be good to see some images of the diamond and how it performs on an Idealscope and/or ASET so you can check for light leaks.

Who is the online vendor?

yes, this.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/4/2010 11:26:24 PM
Author: yssie

Date: 2/4/2010 11:15:31 PM

Author: texirish

Date: 2/4/2010 11:09:25 PM

Author: BA02

I have not seen any. THey are online. They are all deemed ''eye clean'' - Does a 1.0 HCA mean that it will still show lots of fire?

I''m no expert, I''m just learning more and more myself! But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is an exceptional diamond, and really you can''t say a 0.5 is any better than a 1.8 without seeing them. The stats are just used to help eliminate some diamonds that will NOT be good performers. After using the HCA, it would be good to see some images of the diamond and how it performs on an Idealscope and/or ASET so you can check for light leaks.

Who is the online vendor?

yes, this.

Ditto, it is a rejection tool, not a selection tool.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 2/4/2010 11:15:31 PM
Author: texirish

Date: 2/4/2010 11:09:25 PM
Author: BA02

I have not seen any. THey are online. They are all deemed ''eye clean'' - Does a 1.0 HCA mean that it will still show lots of fire?

I''m no expert, I''m just learning more and more myself! But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is an exceptional diamond, and really you can''t say a 0.5 is any better than a 1.8 without seeing them. The stats are just used to help eliminate some diamonds that will NOT be good performers. After using the HCA, it would be good to see some images of the diamond and how it performs on an Idealscope and/or ASET so you can check for light leaks.

Who is the online vendor?

You are correctly explaining the value of HCA as a rejection-tool, but may I suggest re-wording the highlighted part:

"But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is a POTENTIALLY exceptional diamond"

All in all, the HCA is based upon a few averages only, allowing for its use as a rejection-tool, but without a definite guarantee of a great diamond.

Live long,

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/5/2010 9:29:51 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 2/4/2010 11:15:31 PM
Author: texirish

Date: 2/4/2010 11:09:25 PM
Author: BA02

I have not seen any. THey are online. They are all deemed ''eye clean'' - Does a 1.0 HCA mean that it will still show lots of fire?

I''m no expert, I''m just learning more and more myself! But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is an exceptional diamond, and really you can''t say a 0.5 is any better than a 1.8 without seeing them. The stats are just used to help eliminate some diamonds that will NOT be good performers. After using the HCA, it would be good to see some images of the diamond and how it performs on an Idealscope and/or ASET so you can check for light leaks.

Who is the online vendor?

You are correctly explaining the value of HCA as a rejection-tool, but may I suggest re-wording the highlighted part:

''But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is a POTENTIALLY exceptional diamond''

All in all, the HCA is based upon a few averages only, allowing for its use as a rejection-tool, but without a definite guarantee of a great diamond.

Live long,

Definitely. Tex you are definitely on the right track but just to note scores under 2 mean that the diamond is worth further consideration which is then done with images.

 

[texirish]

Date: 2/5/2010 9:33:18 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 2/5/2010 9:29:51 AM

Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 2/4/2010 11:15:31 PM

Author: texirish

Date: 2/4/2010 11:09:25 PM

Author: BA02


I have not seen any. THey are online. They are all deemed ''eye clean'' - Does a 1.0 HCA mean that it will still show lots of fire?

I''m no expert, I''m just learning more and more myself! But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is an exceptional diamond, and really you can''t say a 0.5 is any better than a 1.8 without seeing them. The stats are just used to help eliminate some diamonds that will NOT be good performers. After using the HCA, it would be good to see some images of the diamond and how it performs on an Idealscope and/or ASET so you can check for light leaks.


Who is the online vendor?

You are correctly explaining the value of HCA as a rejection-tool, but may I suggest re-wording the highlighted part:


''But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is a POTENTIALLY exceptional diamond''


All in all, the HCA is based upon a few averages only, allowing for its use as a rejection-tool, but without a definite guarantee of a great diamond.


Live long,

Definitely. Tex you are definitely on the right track but just to note scores under 2 mean that the diamond is worth further consideration which is then done with images.

Ahh yes, that makes more sense! And that''s exactly why you wouldn''t want to buy a diamond strictly on the HCA score, the Idealscope and/or ASET images will be a big factor as well, right? Glad to know I''m getting it partially right, I''d like to help out some of the other posters like I have been helped, but I certainly don''t want to lead them in the wrong direction!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/5/2010 10:23:41 AM
Author: texirish

Date: 2/5/2010 9:33:18 AM
Author: Lorelei




Definitely. Tex you are definitely on the right track but just to note scores under 2 mean that the diamond is worth further consideration which is then done with images.

Ahh yes, that makes more sense! And that's exactly why you wouldn't want to buy a diamond strictly on the HCA score, the Idealscope and/or ASET images will be a big factor as well, right? Glad to know I'm getting it partially right, I'd like to help out some of the other posters like I have been helped, but I certainly don't want to lead them in the wrong direction!

Tex, thats great and you are getting a real handle on this stuff and understand exactly how it works here. We would be glad to have you join us and help, it can be a lot of fun and very rewarding so stick around, muck in and if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask!

And thats absolutely right with the HCA. Basically the HCA was developed by Garry Holloway to help buyers weed through the tremendous amount of diamonds available using 4 measurements to determine which were worth concentrating on in the first instance - those that score below 2. The next stage is to evaluate with images such as Idealscope, ASET and trusted vendor or appraiser input. If you have images then the use of the HCA is limited as images always trump the HCA score.

I don't know if you have come across this link yet for the HCA but it makes good reading,

HCA Usage Warnings and Limitations

 

[BA02]

Do you think #1 or #2 would be more sparkly, firey- ONLY based on the #''s. ??? I want LOTS of sparkle.

 

[BA02]

Date: 2/4/2010 11:25:27 PM
Author: yssie

Date: 2/4/2010 10:58:49 PM

Author:BA02

#1. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2115542007&weight=1.52


#2. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2115545874&weight=1.53


#3. http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2106593833&weight=1.51


Which one is the best diamond??

Numbers on all are good. You may see the size difference between 1 and 2.



For the SIs with cloud inclusions, if they are the grade-setting inclusion type check with the vendor to make sure no problems.


ISs would confirm performance if you can get them.

I ruled out the SI2 Simply b/c I don''t feel comfortable.

The 1.53 has a knot, and the 1.52 has lots of teeny crystals and a feather. Thoughts? I have been told both are 100% eye clean, and the knot/feather DOES not compromise the integrity, and it is hard to find with loupe.

Thanks for any help....

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 2/5/2010 10:23:41 AM
Author: texirish

Date: 2/5/2010 9:33:18 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 2/5/2010 9:29:51 AM

Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 2/4/2010 11:15:31 PM

Author: texirish

I''m no expert, I''m just learning more and more myself! But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is an exceptional diamond, and really you can''t say a 0.5 is any better than a 1.8 without seeing them. The stats are just used to help eliminate some diamonds that will NOT be good performers. After using the HCA, it would be good to see some images of the diamond and how it performs on an Idealscope and/or ASET so you can check for light leaks.

Who is the online vendor?

You are correctly explaining the value of HCA as a rejection-tool, but may I suggest re-wording the highlighted part:

''But from how I understand it, anything under a 2.0 on the HCA is a POTENTIALLY exceptional diamond''

All in all, the HCA is based upon a few averages only, allowing for its use as a rejection-tool, but without a definite guarantee of a great diamond.

Live long,

Definitely. Tex you are definitely on the right track but just to note scores under 2 mean that the diamond is worth further consideration which is then done with images.

Ahh yes, that makes more sense! And that''s exactly why you wouldn''t want to buy a diamond strictly on the HCA score, the Idealscope and/or ASET images will be a big factor as well, right? Glad to know I''m getting it partially right, I''d like to help out some of the other posters like I have been helped, but I certainly don''t want to lead them in the wrong direction!

Tex, like Lorelei said, you are on the right track, but I would like to qualify this again, for the benefit of the entire PS-community, although it is slightly off-topic.

Like you correctly deduced, after assessing the HCA-score of a round, the next big factors will be idealscope and/or ASET-images. Beware however, also these tools are essentially rejection-tools. Especially in this case, with the OP asking specifically about fire, it is important to understand that HCA, idealscope, ASET primarily assess the potential brightness of the stone. Essentially, even other assessment-tools, including the cut-grades of labs if we consider these as such, are mainly rejection-tools on the basis of brightness.

This realisation at the same time highlights the limitations of online-assessment and of a forum like this. Yes, it can steer consumers towards stones that are clearly above-average in cut-quality, using only the rejection-tools available. But above a certain level, where the consumer might still want to make a choice for the best of the better, the tools to assess this online simply do not exist.

I have often seen consumers express a clear preference when viewing stones in-real-life, where there was no discernable difference between the stones in average numbers, idealscope, ASET, and so on. To some extent, this also depends on personal taste of the consumer, since some will be happy with better-than-average good-enough, while others will appreciate the better quality, which is not really distinguishable online.

All in all, I would say that you are correct, when moving to idealscope and/or ASET after the HCA, but it is important to be aware that at some point in time, only real-life-observation can be the final decider.

Live long,

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/8/2010 5:22:38 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp



This realisation at the same time highlights the limitations of online-assessment and of a forum like this. Yes, it can steer consumers towards stones that are clearly above-average in cut-quality, using only the rejection-tools available. But above a certain level, where the consumer might still want to make a choice for the best of the better, the tools to assess this online simply do not exist.

This is a very important point concerning the limitations we have as consumer posters working online, we can point buyers towards what appears to be a well cut diamond but we lack the tools, skill and expertise to go much further than this.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Great to be on the same page, Lorelei.

Where these limitations are probably frustrating for you, since it essentially limits the scope of your advice to consumers, it is also frustrating for us, since we are faced with limitations of visualizing a certain cut-quality that is clear in real-life-observations.

Live long,

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/9/2010 6:34:27 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp
Great to be on the same page, Lorelei.

Where these limitations are probably frustrating for you, since it essentially limits the scope of your advice to consumers, it is also frustrating for us, since we are faced with limitations of visualizing a certain cut-quality that is clear in real-life-observations.

Live long,

I quite agree Paul! Its good to bring this up on the boards so that those reading can gain an understanding of what is and isn''t possible when working online.