Jump to content

Need help judging two ASET for emerald cut


emeraldforolivia
 Share

Recommended Posts

Two emerald cuts. Both E VVS2 ex ex.

#1 is  2.04ct

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/2.04-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-3661458

#2 is 2.09ct

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/2.09-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-3506451

I guess #2's ASET looks more comprehensive and better looking? I already asked for opinions on pricescope and the responses I got are in favor of #2. However, many of the PS people also like and really praise another stone without looking at its ASET, but that one has a really really bad ASET (huge white, barely any red), even I could tell. So I don't know... #1 does have an unreal amount of red. I asked the JA chat rep, and they like #1.

The setting for my diamond has big prongs crawling over so they cover the corners of the diamond, which makes #1's white corners a less concern for me (maybe?), I think.

Please kindly offer your opinions and let me know if there is any reason I should abandon #1 and switch to #2 in regards to light performance. Thank you, thank you, and thank you.

Top image is #1, bottom image is #2.

3661458 (2).jpg

3506451 (1).jpg

Edited by emeraldforolivia
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Throw these ASETs outta window. 

Get your supplier to make a video of these diamonds held between tweazers rocking back and forth. Or vuew them personally and decide for yourself.

ASETs don't describe Emeralds very well. It's all obstruction that's being shown as strong light return on the ASET map. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Furqan Shafi said:

Yup. Saw the video. You see it's all black up front ? That's obstruction. ASET says it's strong light return. 

Oh no... Yeah I noticed that. So is the other one any better?

If you don't see the videos, just judging from the ASETs (given that the images represent true light performance), which one would you go for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Light performance is a buzz word. For Round diamonds it's applicable, not so much on fancy shapes. You can't understand light performance unless you have seen two diamonds side by side, both excellent cut, one with perfect ASET another without.

With fancy shapes the romance is in the outline and the actual shape of it. I like shape of the first one. I like smaller head emerald with longer shoulders. But you may like the other. I'll not select on the basis of ASET image. I'll want to see the diamond with my eye. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Furqan says, ASET is not a particularly good tool for judging asymmetrical cuts. FWIW, based on the video, #1 is "on" or "off" (which the ASET also suggests...); #2 has a nice alternance of bright and dark. On the other hand, #1 is larger and has a nicer outline. In all, it really comes down to what you (she) like most (not forgetting price - which is no longer displayed for #1).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, davidelevi said:

As Furqan says, ASET is not a particularly good tool for judging asymmetrical cuts. FWIW, based on the video, #1 is "on" or "off" (which the ASET also suggests...); #2 has a nice alternance of bright and dark. On the other hand, #1 is larger and has a nicer outline. In all, it really comes down to what you (she) like most (not forgetting price - which is no longer displayed for #1).

Hi David,

Thank you for the reply. May I ask what you meant by the ASET is also suggesting that #1 diamond is “on and off”? Would you elaborate for me? What I really want is one with nice light return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Define "light return"... one of the most common definitions is % of light reflected back. If that's what you want, buy a round. ;)

(Snappiness aside: it's a serious suggestion. If what you want is the ultimate in brightness and sparkle, a brilliant cut - and most of all a round - does much better than a step cut. Step cuts are about other things: contrast, pattern and shape. Of course they'll reflect back light, and of course there are duds and nice stones, but don't try to assess them using the same criteria as rounds.)

The fact that the centre of #1 is all red - independent of whether this is suggestive of obstruction or not: all it takes is to shift the stone 0.5 mm deeper into the ASET viewer and lo! blue is red and red is blue - tells you that it's getting light from predominantly the same "angular spectrum" (the AS in ASET), i.e. that it will tend to look all very bright (or dark) until the angle between the light and your eye reaches a certain point, when it will tend to go all dark (or bright). #2 has alternating blue and red "rectangles", suggesting alternating bands of brightness and contrast that will switch places as the angle of lighting/observation changes. The videos seem to bear those indications out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Light return is a tricky concept in diamonds.  Obviously you want it, it’s even the whole point, but the trick is in the details.

Imagine the ASET image for a rhinestone, a piece of mirrored glass.  100% light return, right?  Zero leakage. They have perfect light performance.  Why then are they not the best?  Even kind of a mediocre diamond looks better.  Brighter.  More life.  More interesting. More scintillation. More fire.  These are all things that aren’t very visible in an ASET and doubly so in a static photograph in an ASET.  Indeed, from every viewing angle except the one that reflects the light source directly into your eye, diamonds are better.  It turns out that that is exactly the angle that ASETs are designed to simulate.

That said, I suspect they’re both lovely stones.  I further suspect I would prefer #2 because of the variations.  As the stone moves, which it does in ‘normal’ viewing conditions, I think you’ll see more life with less of the on/off feel that Davide references above.   From the right angle it’ll be bright as hell, and from every other angle less so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Bowtie' is another word that gets thrown around imprecisely when talking about emerald cuts.  They aren't all bad for example, but from any viewing angle other than 90 degrees to the table with the light directly over your head, that giant red band across the center of #1 is going to be a textbook bowtie.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...