Please help choose-3 radiants w/ ASET, Sarin, etc

[cal12bears]

Hi everyone. I would really appreciate your thoughts on these three radiants. I know radiants aren''t necessarily the most popular choice here, but I''ve also seen lots of great ones posted. Although I understand that I''m not going to get the performance of a RB from a rectangular radiant, I would nonetheless appreciate input on how you think these look. Thanks in advance!

The 3 stones are:

1.51ct G VS1 with thin to medium girdle, very good polish and symmetry, faint fluorescence

1.23ct E VS2 with STK - VTK girdle, excellent polish and very good symmetry, no fluorescence

1.20ct G VSI with STK - VTK girdle, very good polish and symmetry, no fluorescence

Will be posting sarin reports, ASET images, IdealScope images and photos (all 1 at a time I guess...sorry about that).

First attachment: Picture of 1.51ct

 

[cal12bears]

Photo of 1.23ct

 

[cal12bears]

Photo of 1.20ct

 

[cal12bears]

1.51ct sarin

 

[cal12bears]

1.23ct sarin

 

[cal12bears]

1.20ct sarin

 

[cal12bears]

1.51ct ASET

 

[cal12bears]

1.23 ASET

 

[JoeNewbie11]

I like the 1.20 carat stone.

 

[cal12bears]

1.20ct ASET

 

[cal12bears]

1.51ct IdealScope

 

[cal12bears]

1.23ct IdealScope

 

[cal12bears]

1.20ct IdealScope

 

[JulieN]

Yeah, I think I''ll throw my hat in with the 1.20 as well.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I like the constrast pattern in the first one, but the images of the third one the best. What does WF say about them? I think radiants can be judged best in motion.

 

[Lorelei]

I like one and three best, the crown height could be higher on the first though...What does WF say about these?

 

[cal12bears]

Thanks for your input all. I was only able to speak to Bob at Whiteflash very briefly yesterday. I hope to pick his brain a bit more on Monday, but he did give me some feedback. Bob felt like the 1.51ct was the nicest one. He said the other two looked very good too, but they had slight bowtie effect and the 1.51 did not. He said (and I would agree based on my very amateurish impression) that the images for the 1.20ct looked better than the 1.23ct''s images, but that the E color on the 1.23 made it look good in real life. So he basically said the 1.51ct would be his first choice but the other two were good as well.

Compared to others you''ve seen (and I know it''s tough not to see them in real life), do these look great, good or average? Lots of thinking for me to do this weekend. Thanks again for any help you can provide.

 

[greenspoon]

I am going to chime in here, I am also considering purchasing a radiant from WF. I have a thread going here https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/would-love-opinion-of-this-stone.135529/

I have also been working with Bob and Chris G. at WF and following this thread to get some more information so I can make a decision about the stone I am considering.

I am becoming very confused. The ASET image of #3 is clearly showing more even and larger amounts of red, yet Bob is recommending #1. Might totally be stirring the pot here, but it seems like one of two things is going on. 1. The ASET report does not represent a direct correlation for how well a diamond performs. 2. WF is trying to sell the larger stone, which I am assuming has a higher price tag. Please correct me if I am wrong about that.

I have other questions directly related to my choice, but I will post them on my link. Thank you.