Help Please! Which 1.5ct To Choose? Narrowed Down.

[justintoday]

Hi! I'm new here, so first time poster, but have been reading here for a few weeks. I'm hoping to get informed opinions on these stones before I pull the trigger on a diamond!

I'm hesitating only because some parts of the images seem to be off.

Option #1
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/d...ls/1.528-e-vs2-round-diamond-ags-104078700015

Option #2
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/d.../1.544-e-vs1-round-diamond-bkags-104089113002

Option #3
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/d...-bkags-104093051002#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/4/

Thanks in advance everyone. Hope to hear some advice.

 

[bmfang]

Looking at the ASETs for all three of them, I'd prefer the two larger stones.

My understanding with Black by Brian Gavin was that they were trying to aim at minimising as much leakage under the table and also trying to maximise light return even more. Looking at the smaller Black, there is a lot of contrast in between the arrow shafts that isn't there on the other two larger stones. But with that one, you aren't paying the premium for a 1.5ct stone (which is like an extra $10k).

If you are willing to spend up around the $25k mark, I'm not sure whether the $3-4K premium is really worth is between the 1.528 BGS H&A and the 1.544 BGB. Both of them are cut well, but I'd rather keep the extra $3-4K and go with the 1.528 (or use that towards a setting).

 

[justintoday]

My understanding with Black by Brian Gavin was that they were trying to aim at minimising as much leakage under the table and also trying to maximise light return even more. Looking at the smaller Black, there is a lot of contrast in between the arrow shafts that isn't there on the other two larger stones. But with that one, you aren't paying the premium for a 1.5ct stone (which is like an extra $10k).

To my understanding more contrast = great diamond? Curious why you would prefer the 1.5ct, is it just for the size?

Their black line is supposedly the best of what they carry, surprised why the contrast doesn't show much.

 

[justintoday]

Looking at the ASETs for all three of them, I'd prefer the two larger stones.

My understanding with Black by Brian Gavin was that they were trying to aim at minimising as much leakage under the table and also trying to maximise light return even more. Looking at the smaller Black, there is a lot of contrast in between the arrow shafts that isn't there on the other two larger stones. But with that one, you aren't paying the premium for a 1.5ct stone (which is like an extra $10k).

If you are willing to spend up around the $25k mark, I'm not sure whether the $3-4K premium is really worth is between the 1.528 BGS H&A and the 1.544 BGB. Both of them are cut well, but I'd rather keep the extra $3-4K and go with the 1.528 (or use that towards a setting).

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/d...nd-ags-104078383001#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/3/

Just came across this if you don't mind taking a look. Seems like a good choice too.

 

[bmfang]

I'd expect to see contrast showing up in IS/ASET imagery for the arrow shafts and the arrow heads. In between those shafts, not so much. I would be wanting to see more saturated reds there indicating more light return. Then again, I'm continually learning about how to read and interpret ASET/IS images.

It really depends on your budget. Ignore it doesn't stretch up to the 1.5 stones, then the 1.3 Blacknis best.

 

[flyingpig]

While I can understand you want cleaner looking contrast patterns, in this case, those extra blue/black contrast between the shafts are a non issue for me.
This particular area is extremly sensitive to viewing distance and obstruction angle. Sometime you will be more blue/black and sometimes more red. Open the AGS reports and you will see alot more blue than the actual ASET images for all diamonds.. This is because the obstruction angle is 33.5 instead of 30.

This is similar to the table relection (inner circle in ASET) can appear red or green or both, and it does not matter what color it is.

 

[bmfang]

Thanks for the clarification flyingpig. Always happy to be corrected by the more experienced members on reading ASET and IS images.

 

[flyingpig]

The over simplication that red is light return, green is less bright and blue is contrast and darkness often misleads consumers. If you look at some bluenile signature stones and gcal optical symmetry images (which use different light structure with additional zones), the area we talk about is never red.

Going back to OP's question, these are all great stones.
Normally people will ask you if you really need such high clarity and color.
22-25k can easily get you a super ideal 2.0c G VS.
But, it is your preference that is the most important. Again, all stones look amazing.

 

[justintoday]

The over simplication that red is light return, green is less bright and blue is contrast and darkness often misleads consumers. If you look at some bluenile signature stones and gcal optical symmetry images (which use different light structure with additional zones), the area we talk about is never red.

Going back to OP's question, these are all great stones.
Normally people will ask you if you really need such high clarity and color.
22-25k can easily get you a super ideal 2.0c G VS.
But, it is your preference that is the most important. Again, all stones look amazing.

Thank you flyingpig. Just getting started on ASET so my knowledge is limited.

Hope you wouldn't mind taking a look at this one in comparison to the other few. Want to make sure I pull the trigger on the 'right' stone haha.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3770047.htm

 

[flyingpig]

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3770047.htm

I like this. It is still colorless and significantly cheaper than BG's 1.5 E VS2. Dropping to G color will not get you much more carat weight at $18k, maybe 0.1c+. I think it is a really good compromise.

WF's upgrade policy is much more flexible.

If you are selecting a stone from BG Signature/Black, WF ACA, CBI, GOG Ascendancy, you don't need to worry about the cut quality. That's the whole point of going with a super ideal stone. Focus on balancing the other three Cs, your budget and read all fine prints and each vendor's upgrade policy.

 

[bmfang]

What flyingpig has said is bang on the money. If you feel that you will upgrade in the future, then WF is the sanest option financially. If not, then have the pick at any of the vendors that specialise in super-ideal stones.