Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Has anyone had issues with Brian Gavin diamonds? Whiteflash

Thanks Aprilbaby.
One important point though. This discussion is interesting and I think, important
But it's in a bad place because nothing I've said is "against" WF
I have nothing but respect for Bryan and his company. We don't agree on some issues regarding details of cut, but nothing having to do with integrity. They are one of the "good guys" from what I see.
In terms of playing a martyr. Likely you're right. Something about a lopsided fight where I'm pretty much standing alone against a bunch of others is attractive to me- but only because I feel strongly that my convictions are correct.
Plus it's so much better arguing about LP than joining the massive argument going on all around us that has far more gravity.
 
Rockdiamond said:
Thanks Aprilbaby.
Something about a lopsided fight where I'm pretty much standing alone against a bunch of others is attractive to me- but only because I feel strongly that my convictions are correct.
Click to expand...
How many times have you been convicted David :appl::appl::appl::appl:
No murders I trust
:wink2:
 
flyingpig said:
Another thing. WF ACA and GOG ASC (maybe CBI as well) don't include any diamond with medium blue or stronger. Brian Gavin, however, has a separate product line called "Brian Signature Blue". It is equally well cut, inspected, cool, comes with the same upgrade policy, and people buy, while other vendors stay away from this.
Click to expand...

I, for example, bought my first ever diamond studs from Brian Gavin rather than any of the other ideal-cut vendors for exactly that reason. They're from his regular Signature line because the Blue line starts at 0.5 carats/stone, but I wanted to have the option of upgrading to diamonds from the Blue line (which I will hopefully be doing in the next year or so).

If Whiteflash offered ACAs with very strong fluorescence, I would probably have gone with them, because both their settings and their diamonds tend to be cheaper, and their upgrade policy is more generous. But one of their choices for their brand is "not too much fluorescence", which is just as valid for distinguishing the brand as "only these cut specifications".

So I agree that every vendor has a niche, and it's good that we have that diversity.
 
gm89uk said:
I, like you, also love the idea of crown top heavy diamonds and if I ever convince the wife that she needs an upgrade, it would be my choice! However we have nice reflection images, and H&A as reassurance as online consumers.

Lots of 60:60 diamonds will have amazing IS, but if the stone you're trying to promote will look inferior to other stones with current implementations that are implied to correlate with beauty (H&A, ASET), then you're starting an uphill struggle against competitors and I fail to see how it would be easy.
Click to expand...

If the issue is capturing the beauty of stones that can't be captured through what are (on here, at least) the traditional tools of HCA/IS/ASET, is it just the case that increased use of video listings needs to take place?

JA has used them for a while, with GOG, WF and BGD (and HPD sometimes) also doing so now (I think?) and they are very helpful in assessing fire/sparkle/tilt-windowing/dead facets, of both round and non-round cuts. Emerald cuts in particular, despite the limitations of them having to lay on their side, are much easier to assess when one can see how the facets are or aren't working!


Related to that, I was thinking that it would be possible to create a 3D video effect to capture scintillation, through the use of two cameras and the viewer using the same technique as with those 'hidden' images in what looks like pictures of static.

One would have to experiment with how far apart to place the cameras (eye width? narrower? wider?) but one could create a video with each camera's output sync'd and side-by-side, make it not too large on a computer screen (as the eyes can only focus so far in each direction), then the viewer can 'look through' the screen or go 'cross-eyed' until the images from each video superimpose on top of each other, which would give that 3D effect and also capture the scintillation events that are impossible to capture with just one camera (because (IIRC?) scintillation is where one eye sees an 'off' facet but the other eye sees an 'on' facet).

I think it was @Serg who was lamenting the lack of ability to capture scintillation, but if the above works, it would seem that it could be overcome with some kit and technological wizardry (noting that not all viewers can see the 'hidden images'), which would hopefully capture the beauty of those diamonds cut for scintillation over other aspects and increase their sales potential.
 
Last edited:
PLEASE NEW THREAD
I'll start one soon but a bit busy now
 
@Rockdiamond I will start one by EOD with an example of a stone that I think is a great example of a superior 60:60 diamond!
 
Thing is at some point after ideal cutting or even at the very good cut stage, then taste comes into it. The old saying 'beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder'. We all see different things beautiful or to our preference in different ways. We don't all like the same music or paintings, so why should we all like the same diamond look.
 
pyramid said:
Thing is at some point after ideal cutting or even at the very good cut stage, then taste comes into it. The old saying 'beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder'. We all see different things beautiful or to our preference in different ways. We don't all like the same music or paintings, so why should we all like the same diamond look.
Click to expand...
This.
The argument that we can use science to calibrate how beautiful a stone is misses this point entirely.
Of course most folks don't want a diamond that looks black in the middle.
But if light return is the goal , let's wear mirrors.
SimoneDi- thanks!!'
It will be great starting with a nice 60/60 to begin. The discussion is actually bigger than 60/60 alone. Once you start the thread I'll paste over some points from this one that relate to fancy shapes as well
 
Before this thread closes I would like to make one thing clear. I took no offense from anything Rockdiamond said in this thread.

As David says, we have 'sparred' many times here through the years. And while we always seem to return to our corners, unconvinced by our opponent, we nevertheless always seem to answer the bell for another round.

While this can get frustrating for those that have heard the same arguments repeated time and time again, for newcomers it can provide good opportunities to see different 'facets' of opinion which can help them decide what is right for them.

I have come to see David as someone with a sincere passion for diamonds, and a passion for the pricescope community. Yes, we have had major dissagreements in both substance and style over the years, and I expect will continue to have our run-ins. But I do very much respect David for what he brings to the forum.

Ok. So, as a famous President once said "if he says nice things about me, I'll say nice things about him." :)
 
Last edited:
My post was not David against WF, it was David against other than 60/60 cut using WF as an example. Some day I would love to buy a colored diamond from David. I agree, he loves the fight! :eek:
 
SimoneDi said:
@Rockdiamond I will start one by EOD with an example of a stone that I think is a great example of a superior 60:60 diamond!
Click to expand...

Oooohhhhh, can't wait for the 60/60 thread -- I love 'em!
 
drk14 said:
EOD is here... :D
(well, on the east coast, at least)
Click to expand...
lol..currently stuck in traffic :eek: give me like another couple of hours :shifty:

P.S. In the meantime, I welcome title proposals :)
Ex. 60:60 stones to rival "Ideal" proportions - Noo way!? Yes way! Lol
 
SimoneDi said:
lol..currently stuck in traffic :eek: give me like another couple of hours :shifty:

P.S. In the meantime, I welcome title proposals :)
Ex. 60:60 stones to rival "Ideal" proportions - Noo way!? Yes way! Lol
Click to expand...

How about:
"60/60 FTW... when performance and SIZE matters" HA!
 
OoohShiny said:
If the issue is capturing the beauty of stones that can't be captured through what are (on here, at least) the traditional tools of HCA/IS/ASET, is it just the case that increased use of video listings needs to take place?

JA has used them for a while, with GOG, WF and BGD (and HPD sometimes) also doing so now (I think?) and they are very helpful in assessing fire/sparkle/tilt-windowing/dead facets, of both round and non-round cuts. Emerald cuts in particular, despite the limitations of them having to lay on their side, are much easier to assess when one can see how the facets are or aren't working!


Related to that, I was thinking that it would be possible to create a 3D video effect to capture scintillation, through the use of two cameras and the viewer using the same technique as with those 'hidden' images in what looks like pictures of static.

One would have to experiment with how far apart to place the cameras (eye width? narrower? wider?) but one could create a video with each camera's output sync'd and side-by-side, make it not too large on a computer screen (as the eyes can only focus so far in each direction), then the viewer can 'look through' the screen or go 'cross-eyed' until the images from each video superimpose on top of each other, which would give that 3D effect and also capture the scintillation events that are impossible to capture with just one camera (because (IIRC?) scintillation is where one eye sees an 'off' facet but the other eye sees an 'on' facet).

I think it was @Serg who was lamenting the lack of ability to capture scintillation, but if the above works, it would seem that it could be overcome with some kit and technological wizardry (noting that not all viewers can see the 'hidden images'), which would hopefully capture the beauty of those diamonds cut for scintillation over other aspects and increase their sales potential.
Click to expand...
ViBox has been designed and made to perform this function Shiny. I am writing a little summary article of a 39 page article Serg and other inc me published in 2013. Here is part of it:
Scintillation is quick bright flashes that appear and disappear quickly. It can only be seen as a diamond moves when lit by relatively small bright lights. Brilliance (and fire) can be seen in diamonds illuminated by large dim lights, and small bright ones.

Scintillating flashes (‘bloom’ and ‘star’ effects) can extend beyond facet edges or even past the edges of a diamond. Nearly twice as much scintillation is seen with both eyes than one, and in a 3D stereo diamond video rather than mono.
http://www.lexusindia.in/products/gb-ViBOX.aspx is a link to Vibox. Very few of the many buyers and users have used the 3D option, sadly.
Box A: ViBox and Diamond Stereo Videos

Different observers see the same diamond differently because of lighting, clothing, distance, motion and eyesight etc. ViBox video’s enable experts and consumers to compare diamonds in identical conditions, at different times and places. Anyone can discuss cut, clarity, colour and diamond beauty, run polls and statistical analysis of comparison videos of diamonds for study or purchase. Realistic 3D movies of diamonds have advantages over personal examination.
Not sure if the pic's will come out here, but if anyone is interested the link covers all.

clip_image002.jpg
clip_image004.jpg


Left: ViBox with the doors open, the Canon DSLR camera and the figure of eight gimbal for holding diamonds. Right: doors are partly closed; stereo splitter and the 360 degree rotating stage are in place.


Software controls the flood and spot lighting creating reproducible videos. Hundreds of still images are made into a movie as the diamond moves on a gimbal through a defined motion; figure-of-eight, swinging to and fro or 360° rotation.


A stereo adapter captures two images and 3D movies can be shown with a free stereo viewer or be shared with auto uploading to the internet. Independent grading analysis metrics have been developed and more are coming.


Side-by-side comparisons movies can encourage cutters to produce better cuts reducing commoditization and building brands for better cutters.

clip_image006.jpg
clip_image008.jpg


Left is the stereo splitter. On the right is a stereo pair of diamonds captured in ViBox with OctoNus and Lexus watermark logos.
 
Garry H (Cut Nut) said:
Hundreds of still images
Click to expand...

How is the f-stop configured (i.e., how deep is the depth-of-field)?

Unfortunately, the images in your post did not display properly, and I could not find them on the LexusIndia site.
 
upload_2017-7-18_10-39-43.png
This is the only photo that is not on the Lexus site. Lexus Chairman, Janak Mistry, is one of the authors and manufacturers and services ViBox (and DiBox which you can find on the Lexus site too. Note the clients tab.
The focus and the f-stops are high dynamic range in the truest sense. Still photo's with multiple focus position/depths and multiple light settings are analyzed and the best parts of each image are merged into the two 'eye' images. The still images are then stitched into a movie.
www.cutwise.com shows many such movies including those from the Master Stone Set.
 
JerryEspenson said:
I find it rather comical that vendors in this thread are singing Cumbaya and implicitly censuring a sales associate at BGD (and Bryan and Leslie no long post here so they won't come to defend themself or their associate) with only a vague hearsay comment from some unknown consumer who hasn't even responded to all the speculation posts with more detail.

On top of that Bryan at WF has taken this thread as another opportunity to promote the ACA brand and WF and expound on its virtues, of course this was not a solicited question or requested of him.

All I read from OP is the sales associate said that if its not engraved and called an ACA that it isn't an ACA and the cut quality is different from one that is. This would be my speculation and may not even be the truth either. But I certainly find it in very poor taste for competing vendors to disparage BGD for such a vague story. Other uninformed CS agents at WF or JA have done far far worse in the past. Especially since Brian at Brian Gavin Diamonds(BGD) invented the ACA!



If there is a backstory or more info feel free to correct.
Click to expand...

I have not responded back to this thread because I thought the topic totally changed to talk about different merits between different diamond cuts and didn't want to change the topic back as I have found reading the thread to be very informative. But maybe a lot of the thread has been going over my head as there is still jargon I don't totally get.

My original post was probably in haste - I just transferred $50K to an online vendor and I heard diamond is not engraved. Being a novice when it comes to diamonds hearing that it was not engraved set up panic alarms in my head. Once I got clarity on situation I wanted to take down thread - but didn't realize threads stay out there (total newbie). Even still I was a little hesitant that how would I identify my stone if it got swapped out etc. without my knowledge.

Upon further research and discussion with Leslie (who is very nice! and reached out to me) she cleared up the distinction that they were referencing ACA inscription and not AGS and defended the sales associate saying that she was helping advise them at the time. To be fair going back to the conversation the salesperson was clear and only said true facts but for me the sales/marketing pitch wasn't to my liking. But that is probably because a lot of the jargon and abbreviations are french to me and while a knowledgable person might know exactly what they are referencing me as a partially educated (from what I've read on blogs) consumer was totally lost/confused.

I think both WF and BG diamonds that I was looking at were fabulous and don't think you can go wrong with either choice; I am sure there are some subtle differences on quality but nothing a non-professional like myself can notice. So on an apples-to-apples comparison I would be buying the cheaper of the two options myself as they are interchangeable to myself. But on a comparable basis which these two stones were I have decided to stick with my WF purchase as I enjoyed my interaction with the staff more.
There was one point where they talked to be to the lower priced option of two comparable stones which I appreciated but I guess to be devils advocate this could be a marketing tactic as well - regardless it went a long way with me.

Anyway didn't want to post as I thought that topic had moved on and been put to rest but I thought I'd clear this up. Sorry for bringing up the post originally as I mentioned it was in haste - looking forward to the new 60/60 thread coming soon!
 
Garry H (Cut Nut) said:
upload_2017-7-18_10-39-43.png
This is the only photo that is not on the Lexus site. Lexus Chairman, Janak Mistry, is one of the authors and manufacturers and services ViBox (and DiBox which you can find on the Lexus site too. Note the clients tab.
The focus and the f-stops are high dynamic range in the truest sense. Still photo's with multiple focus position/depths and multiple light settings are analyzed and the best parts of each image are merged into the two 'eye' images. The still images are then stitched into a movie.
www.cutwise.com shows many such movies including those from the Master Stone Set.
Click to expand...

Hi Garry,

few updates:
1) Stereo adapter is not necessary more for 8-fig types movies. It is significantly reduce a cost of such movies( you do not need spend times to change adapter,..)
2) also a soon Vibox will not necessary to take such stereo movies. it will possible in Dibox2.0 which is more faster and cheaper
for example for our current cut survey we create movies without stereo adapter.
You may find samples here
https://cutwise.com/~7vT0
 
Last edited:
Although I know Serg and Garry are on the pioneering front always, is it still true that AGS and GIA do not grade scintillation? If this is true, lots of new posters would not know this side of the story.

Therefore scintillation is the same as the type of things Rockdiamond is looking at, such as more ways to see a diamond beautiful than what is the law at present.
 
What I think all these discussions miss is that ideal cut diamonds are a safe buy for those buying online. There may be many other combinations outside the ones I recommend that are acceptable. But the whole point is, people are coming here and we are helping them buy diamonds, mostly online, and I still say that I'd rather recommend stones with ideal cut proportions because they most likely will end up with a top cut quality stone. If one has the luxury of going to a vendor who specializes in well cut diamonds and can be shown an outstanding 60/60 with the light return images to prove it next to ideal cut stones, then that's the best case scenario. But I know I would have zero opportunity to do that because even the nicest jewelers don't worry about carrying the best of GIA XXX and AGS Ideal cut would be hard to find, period. So even those buying locally and are viewing all stones in jewelry store lighting are better off asking for stones within certain measurements, because it is hard to see variations in cut in that lighting.
 
Garry H (Cut Nut) said:
The focus and the f-stops are high dynamic range in the truest sense. Still photo's with multiple focus position/depths and multiple light settings are analyzed and the best parts of each image are merged
Click to expand...

Last time this was discussed, I was informed that MLF-FHDR couldn't be applied to transparent objects like diamonds -- has this changed recently?
 
diamondseeker2006 said:
What I think all these discussions miss is that ideal cut diamonds are a safe buy for those buying online. There may be many other combinations outside the ones I recommend that are acceptable. But the whole point is, people are coming here and we are helping them buy diamonds, mostly online, and I still say that I'd rather recommend stones with ideal cut proportions because they most likely will end up with a top cut quality stone. If one has the luxury of going to a vendor who specializes in well cut diamonds and can be shown an outstanding 60/60 with the light return images to prove it next to ideal cut stones, then that's the best case scenario. But I know I would have zero opportunity to do that because even the nicest jewelers don't worry about carrying the best of GIA XXX and AGS Ideal cut would be hard to find, period. So even those buying locally and are viewing all stones in jewelry store lighting are better off asking for stones within certain measurements, because it is hard to see variations in cut in that lighting.
Click to expand...
DS- I can totally understand why you wrote that.
All I ask is that once we do get a new thread started that you post again, and please keep an open mind.
 
Garry H (Cut Nut) said:
The focus and the f-stops are high dynamic range in the truest sense. Still photo's with multiple focus position/depths and multiple light settings are analyzed and the best parts of each image are merged into the two 'eye' images.
Click to expand...

@Garry H (Cut Nut) -- Before this thread falls off the front page, I would appreciate a clarification of your statement. I went back and found the post from 2015 by @Serg that I had alluded to above:

Serg said:
Vibox has multifocus ( Focus stacking), but it does not work well for diamonds( any transparent objects).
I do not know any Focus Staking software which work well with transparent objects.
usually Focus Stacking algorithm uses best photo for each pixel( a photo which has maximum sharpness for the pixel). but in diamond case a pixel can be sharp on quite different photos( front surface, inclusion, back surface, secondary reflections,...)
Click to expand...

Are you talking about different things, or has the technology advanced since 2015 to the point that focus stacking is now used on diamonds?

P.S. I think your answer will have relevance to the new 60/60 thread.
 
Photography/video is an important component to the discussion.
We will get to on the 60/60 thread
 
drk14 said:
@Garry H (Cut Nut) -- Before this thread falls off the front page, I would appreciate a clarification of your statement. I went back and found the post from 2015 by @Serg that I had alluded to above:
My understanding is that the focus chooces were set to table girdle and culet. But Serg knows more than me.


Are you talking about different things, or has the technology advanced since 2015 to the point that focus stacking is now used on diamonds?

P.S. I think your answer will have relevance to the new 60/60 thread.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top