That is why it is so helpful to shop with an online vendor who has a great rep, who also has in house stones. This way besides them being able to ' talk you through' each diamond, they can send you pics of the stone, and very often the cut analysis has been done for you, so you know what you are buying.Date: 5/26/2008 8:27:48 AM
Author: corkstone
Thanks for the response. The clarity is important, but I didn't need to goto IF - this one stone kind of popped up and after weighing out the options, I went for it.
I understand that without all of the needed angles it is hard to cast judgement on a stone, but the only thing that freaked me out was the inability to find a stone anywhere on the internet that shared its general dimensions...I don't know if that makes it a good rare or a bad rare.
I see the loose diamond in the next week, other than the white paper test, what is a good way to see how brilliant a cushion cut is?
And if anyone else has some insight about the shallowness of the stone then please chime in!
Date: 5/26/2008 8:27:48 AM
Author: corkstone
I see the loose diamond in the next week, other than the white paper test, what is a good way to see how brilliant a cushion cut is?
Date: 5/26/2008 6:12:05 PM
Author: corkstone
Thanks Pixely!
Those pictures are very reassuring, especially the 2nd ones...
That diamond is stunning and its has a 70% table. Very very encouraging. Other than carat, my diamond has hers ''beat'' in every category.
Fingers crossed!
Hey corkstone!Date: 6/11/2008 10:08:01 AM
Author: corkstone
Many thanks!
Ok. So here is the picture. The jeweler has it loosely placed in a setting just to give it a relative size...so ignore the hideous hideous setting!
Remember the diamond is a .91 carat so I think it looks pretty damn big, but like I said, alittle more ''crushed ice'' than I would have liked.
Opinions people (oh, and please don''t lie to me, but positive reinforcement is always nice).
Hi cork,Date: 6/11/2008 11:20:32 AM
Author: corkstone
I appreciate the quick response - especially from someone as knowledgable as you - afterall, I first heard the ''crushed ice'' term from your educational videos.
In all honesty, I don''t think has any idea that there is a difference between a crushed ice look or a fuller-chucky look.
The picture is not the greatest, you are right. However, I must follow this up by saying that I have seen/held the diamond, both outside and in the store lighting. And I was concerned about the dimensions myself, but looking at the stone under the microscope and in various conditions, it looked brilliant.
May I ask why, as a jeweler, you would be concerned about the depth?
For the record...it costs just under $5000 CAD.
I certainly hope not! Thought I must say that I did not see that undershading when I was looking at the diamond in person - so perhaps it could be the terrible setting that they have holding it?Date: 6/11/2008 3:21:14 PM
Author: JulieN
Jon, is that or is that not an example of a fisheye? I have yet to really see a good picture of a stone with one.
Actually the photo does a good job of blending the reflection of the girdle under the table but yes, it is a good example of a fish eye. A careful look (good observation btw) does reveal a pretty notable reflection of the girdle under the table. It plainly appears to be a bruted girdle too.Date: 6/11/2008 3:21:14 PM
Author: JulieN
Jon, is that or is that not an example of a fisheye? I have yet to really see a good picture of a stone with one.
Hey cork. Yea it does seem like it. BTW you are not at anyones mercy unless you choose to be at their mercy. You are the one holding the key to making the decision one way or the other. One of the empowering features of this website and others that are geared towards education is to arm you so that you are at noones mercy. You are the client and you are the one who calls the shots. I''m not suggesting you abandon your local dealer but in Canada I''m sure you''re paying a bit of a premium from a local B&M. Don''t settle. You''re in the drivers seat and whether you are spending $1000 or $50,000 it is a purchase decision that will endure and and that you will live with and reflect upon all the years of your life. My suggestion is if you do decide to pull the trigger on this one is that you at least owe it to yourself to view it alongside *one* other one of comparable value but try at least seeing something radically different in the #''s. Ie. ... reverse the table/depth % for starters. Request to see one with a depth in the mid 60''s with a table in the mid 50''s. Quite honestly that''s not conclusive and it may appear very similar but you''d stand a better chance of seeing something *different* that your eyes may enjoy more notably. View some videos I''ve done and familiarize yourself with the different appearances of cushion and *ask* for the one that appeals most to your eyes. Perhaps your local can find you one.Date: 6/11/2008 3:33:28 PM
Author: corkstone
I certainly hope not! Thought I must say that I did not see that undershading when I was looking at the diamond in person - so perhaps it could be the terrible setting that they have holding it?Date: 6/11/2008 3:21:14 PM
Author: JulieN
Jon, is that or is that not an example of a fisheye? I have yet to really see a good picture of a stone with one.
Rhino - thanks for your help. That was my concern too, a shallow/watery look. But this one doesn''t seem ''too'' bad. I don''t know if I am just settling, or maybe I have to make do with what I have. I am in Ottawa, Canada, and our diamond selection is weak. Nowhere in the city am I able to goto a store and see a selection of diamonds side by side...so I am at the mercy of the dealer to hopefully find me diamonds that meet my parameters and price range.
Thanks Jon. I can actually see it now, but to the plain eye I didn''t see it in the store. It WILL bug me now...Date: 6/12/2008 12:26:58 AM
Author: Rhino
Actually the photo does a good job of blending the reflection of the girdle under the table but yes, it is a good example of a fish eye. A careful look (good observation btw) does reveal a pretty notable reflection of the girdle under the table. It plainly appears to be a bruted girdle too.Date: 6/11/2008 3:21:14 PM
Author: JulieN
Jon, is that or is that not an example of a fisheye? I have yet to really see a good picture of a stone with one.
"Unfortunately, after alot of research and opinions I must admit that I am not pleased with the stone that we have selected. I''m not sure what action we can take together - but in our mutual policy of being honest, I thought I HAD to tell you. I think you could tell that I was somewhat cautious on Tuesday.
My concerns are as follows:
The spread diamond, in principal is a great idea, but in practice has some major undesirable qualities. Firstly, it creates large pockets of "dead area", where there is little flash or brilliance. I noticed this when we met though it didn''t register until I reviewed the picture. Secondly, the diamond has what is called a "fish eye" - where the girdle causes a black circular reflection which is more visible because of the extra large table.
Obviously you and I don''t have the benefit of having multiple diamonds laid out to compare against, but I must admit that our diamond seems to have one of the lesser desired qualities - the "crushed ice/watery" look. This creates tiny flashes of reflection, but has very little symmetry and few big chunks of light.
Though cut is hard to measure with a cushion, the spread style means that a there are less compact angles for light to bounce off of - my gut feeling was, and still is, that we picked a stone with too shallow of a depth - and that an ideal cut would have the table/depth numbers reversed.
This is absolutely 100% in no way your fault - you are a tremendous asset and obviously ordering diamonds sight unseen means that we are both relying on the numbers. But I must admit, I don''t love this diamond.
What can we do here?