shape
carat
color
clarity

CUSHION MANIA! Help me pick . . .

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

reena

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
2,531
Hi all,

Below are specs for five cushion cut diamonds that a vendor has suggested to me. I'm trying to narrow it down based on specs alone to three or four diamonds to look at in person . . . and of course, to ultimately narrow that down to one! And who better to help me with that than you all? So let me have it. . .

Oh, a little necessary background: I'm not a clarity nut, so as long as the stone is eyeclean, VS2 v. SI1 isn't really a big deal to me. I don't know for sure yet whether all of the SI1s are eyeclean (except the last, which is). Color is probably more important, but I doubt I'll be able to tell much difference between a G and an H. I'd obviously like a diamond that looks as big as possible for its size without sacrificing brilliance. And of course, cut is MOST important (although this will be tough to judge, i know, before seeing the stones.)

If it matters, the setting I am planning is a very fine three sided micropave with a micropave bezel (think Michael B-esque). ANY advice is appreciated! Here goes:

(1) 2.00 G SI1 (GIA) 62.1(d) 66(t) M-ETK, M Cul, VG Pol, F Symm, SB Flr. 7.58*7.41*4.60, Ratio 1.02:1.00. $11,080.80

(2) 2.00H VS2 (GIA) 61(d) 61(t), TN-ETK, SL Cul, G Pol, F Symm, N Flr. 7.56*7.41*4.52, Ratio 1.02:1.00. $11,115.00.

(3) 2.01 H VS2 (GIA) 65.6(d), 60(t), TK-VTK,F, N Cul, VG Pol, G Symm, N Flr., 7.63*7.58*4.97, Ratio 1.01:1.00. $13,060.98.

(4) 2.03 H VS2 (GIA) 75.8(d) 65(t), TN-TK, N Cul, VG Pol, G Symm, N Flr., 7.16*6.86*5.2, Ratio 1.04:1.00 (comment: Add'l clouds not shown) $12,901.67.

(5) 2.00 H SI1 (GIA) 62.5(d), 62(t), TN-VTK, M Cul, VG Pol, G Symm, N Flr., 7.79*7.47*4.67, Ratio 1.04:1.00 (comment: 100% eyeclean), $11,317.92.

I'm tentatively thinking that #4 looks too deep, and that #2 might be questionable due to SL culet and only F symm. But, I'm dying to hear your opinions . . .
1.gif
 

moremoremore

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Messages
6,825
I vote #3 and #5!!! I'm not a fan of fair symmetry either. The slight culet is no biggie...

Hey- keep in mind that eye clean is subjective. It does not mean you won't be able to see the inclusions through the side of the stone or when you closely examine the stone...eye clean is really to a casual observer at a distance...
 

reena

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
2,531
Oh, I wasn't sure if "SL" meant "slight" or "slightly large"! LOL.

As for the eyeclean issue--I know that's the case, but hopefully I will have a little more leeway since I'm planning to bezel set (and thus I imagine much of the stone won't be visible from the side). Does that make sense?
 

alexah

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Messages
1,230
I agree w MMM - 3 & 5 seem the most promising, tho i'm no cushion expert... i have heard they're difficult to judge thru numbers alone so seeing them would be best...
1.gif

ps, since you're looking for something as big as possible, #4's out cuz it's so deep - it's measurements are so much smaller than the others
 

moremoremore

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Messages
6,825
OMG lol...I don't know about the culet...I don't know if there is such a thing as Slight...I know there is small...dunno...experts? I just assumed that's what it meant...

HEY- I know you want a square stone...Isn't the cushion KINDA like a radiant in terms of that crushed icy look? (or maybe a cushion doesn't look like that...never seen in person)...It might be a lot easier to find a square radiant and still have that antiquie look you like. Just a though!
 

reena

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
2,531
At this point I'll take just about anything square and sparkly and stick it into a ring!
3.gif


Just kidding . . . but wow, this decisionmaking is tricky!
 

reena

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
2,531
Me too!!!! I'm just hoping it looks good in person . . .
 

diamondsbylauren

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 18, 2003
Messages
1,128
Reena- because cushion shapes can take so many different personalities, it's really impossible to give an opinion looking at statistics.
Even round diamonds, which are far more...standardizable- even RBC's must be seen to be properly evaluated.

Here's a few photos which give you the idea:

Let's start with one which has a generally oval profile- with some very large facets giving an almost antique personality

402a.JPG


Below is one with a similar profile- but an entirely different personality due to the facets

304a.JPG


And here's yet another which is almost round in profile
658a.JPG


I would suggest getting at least a digiphoto to give you some idea of what you might be having sent in.

Best of luck!
 

KBerly

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Apr 21, 2004
Messages
999
Reena, I like #5!!
 

reena

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
2,531
Thanks everyone for the input! So, the consensus seems to be #3 and #5. . . do any of the others even look worth calling in? My instinct is no . . .
 

moremoremore

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Messages
6,825
What about this one...too shallow? Maybe ask J...


http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=2328397
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top