Cushion choice, please help

[Diamondseeker0102]

Hi all,

I have been a long time lurker, but this will be my first post. I need help!!!!

I have narrowed my choice of diamond to two cushion modified brilliants and would appreciate any comments people might have.

Cushion 2.01 H SI1 STK-VTK M EX EX GD N 60.5 65 7.95x7.08x4.28 Ratio 1.12:1

Cushion 2.04 H VS2 TN N VG VG F 62.0 63 8.19x7.37x4.57 Ratio 1.11:1
I live in Europe so will have no opportunity to view the diamond first hand so am trying to learn as much as I can before purchase.

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

I forgot to add the aset? images.

This is the 2.04 H VS2

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Sorry!!!!!

The last post was for the aset image detailing the 2.01 H SI1

This post is the aset 2.04 H VS2

 

[Addlepated]

The H VS2 looks like it has a nicer spread and sparkle than the other. Less crushed icey, too.

 

[urseberry]

I'm no expert, but the 2.04 looks much better to my eye. It has a nicely shaped outline, large, orderly facets, and the ASET shows greater light return.

Edited for better wording.

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Have also managed to locate the Ideal Scope images to complete the picture. Thinking about having one of these stones set in a classic solitaire by Leon, single or double claw.....any opinions?

This is the IS for the 2.01 H SI1

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

And this is the 2.04 H VS2. Please keep the replies coming. Believe me they are very very much appreciated!!!

 

[BriBee]

I personally prefer the 2.04 H VS2 because I like the chunkier facets and I do not like the "crushed ice" look in a cushion. If you prefer the crushed ice look though, I would suggest radiants. The reason I don't like this look in a cushion is because it looks less "cushion-y" to me, if that makes sense. I figure just go for a radiant if that is the look you'd want.

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Thanks for the replies...thats 3 votes for the 2.04 H VS2 and 0 for the 2.01 H SI1 !
Keep the opinions coming, I''m on tenderhooks!!

Has anyone got a preferrence for the single or double claw classic solitaire by Leon?

 

[kcoursolle]

The 2.04 looks quite a bit bigger to me!! I also like the larger facets, but I don''t really know much about cushions...

I love your idea of sending it to leon. Claw prongs and some light (not overwhelming) micropave would be beautiful. So would a split shank!

 

[CDNinNYC]

Not a fan of the crushed ice look; saw a few of them in person when I was doing my search. The 2.04 gets my vote! Leon has also done my ring; while I went with single claws, I think the double claws would look lovely on this size of stone.

Good luck!

 

[indypitty]

I also prefer the chunkier facets on the 2.04. Are you sure that they are both modified brilliants? The other one appears much more crushed-ice to me.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 1/17/2008 7:46:44 PM
Author: Diamondseeker0102
Has anyone got a preferrence for the single or double claw classic solitaire by Leon?

1 more for the fabulous ---- 2.04 H VS2

I don''t know anything about cushions, however, that one just "looks" more appealingto me.

With regards to the setting --- Double claws! I love, love, love the way that Leon makes those look.

 

[pinkprincessnovo]

definetly the 2.4
it has a better carat weight and clarity

 

[Deelight]

I have very little knowledge about cushions but visually I find the 2.04 more appealing it is more structured then crushed ice

I terms of setting I would do a double claw pave halo with a split shank or a double claw moon shaped side stones with or without pave

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

As far as both being a modified brilliant I am not 100% sure. I have been very sneeky and not mentioned the 2.04 is an EGL!!! The 2.01 being GIA

I am told by the vendor WF that both face up the same colour and are eyeclean. Both are retailing for similiar money.

Does the fact that the 2.04 stone is a EGL change anyones opinion. I have also managed to dig out the sarin report on both of them.

This is the 2.04

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

and this one is the 2.01.

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Looking again at the IS images the 2.01 looks better (at least to me) but in the aset image the 2.04 looks better??? Are the any fancy experts out their that can help me muddle through this. Unfortunately I have to purchase online so will not have the chance to view in person

 

[chrono]

Both cushions are so different it's like asking if a person likes chocolate or ice cream. The H VS2 stone has chunkier modern faceting with slightly less depth while the H SI1 is the crushed ice type. Which type do you like?

For fancy cuts, ASETs (light performance) tell more than Idealscopes (light leakage) so I'll put more emphasis on the ASET. My pick is the H VS2 modern cushion.

ETA
I don't know what's your budget or specs but humour me and take a look at this:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/3825/

 

[BriBee]

This is a vote for the double claws from Leon. Also, although all the numbers and reports are important, you really need to go with what your eye prefers. So the fact that the 2.04 is EGL doesn''t change my vote, I still like the look of it better. And I think you can really trust WF to pick a great stone for you too.

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Wow! The 2.04 H VS2 is getting everybodies vote. Thanks Guys, you''re making this alot easier for me. I got some more photos today

!

I think maybe the 2.04 looks better in these photos too! Does anyone out there prefer the 2.01 ? Should I be at all bothered by the fact the 2.04 is EGL not GIA?

I think I have decided on the double claw classic solitaire by LEON. Sorry Boston_jeff think I might be pinching your entire ring design here

, but I really haven''t seen anything else that beautiful! Cushion cuts are not very common in the UK and I just know my GF will be bowled over by it!

Anyhow, further comments on these photos would be appreciated....plus any insight that could decode the ASET images would be really great


P.S. Chrono, I had a look at that diamond link you posted. Wow thats a great find, ticks all the right boxes, but a little over my budget!

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

and.......

 

[mercoledi]

The 2.04 just looks so much cleaner, I prefer the facet pattern to the busyness of the 2.01.

(and the spread doesn''t hurt either)

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 1/18/2008 2:14:04 PM
Author: Diamondseeker0102
orry Boston_jeff think I might be pinching your entire ring design here

, but I really haven't seen anything else that beautiful! Cushion cuts are not very common in the UK and I just know my GF will be bowled over by it!

Hey DS0102,

There is no doubt in my mind that the 2.04 H/VS2 is the better stone. Subjectively nicer faceting (to me), and objectively better light return based on the ASET. It looks like it has a little bit of a bow-tie (see the blue in the ASET), but that could just be the way the stone is tilted-- you could ask WF what it is like without magnification. I wouldn't worry about the EGL cert, either, as long as the stone is cheaper than a GIA H/VS2. The stone appears to face up quite white. Hope that helps-- you are well on your way!

Edit: One more thing-- I don't know much about SARIN, but it lists the Girdle Thickness on the 2.04 as 0.05mm, which I think would be Extremely Thin. If so, that would be a bit of a red flag for me. What does the cert say about the Girdle?

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Thanks Boston_jeff you give sage advice as always. Although I confess I somewhat worried now that I may have made a poor choice and that the girdle may be too thin.

I found this posted by the ps admin some time ago:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/girdle-thin-or-thick.1622/

- based on the sarin report my cushion seems to reside in three different categories depending on would lab grades them.

Sarin report girdle thinckness - 0.05mm or 0.06%

On the EGL cert the girdle is listed as thin.

GIA
Extremely thin 0.00 - 0.08 mm
Very thin 0.08 - 0.12 mm
Thin 0.12 - 0.15 mm
Medium 0.15 - 0.20 mm
Slightly thick 0.20 - 0.23 mm
Thick 0.23 - 0.33 mm
Very thick 0.33 - 0.40 mm
Extremely Thick: greater than 0.40 millimeters
AGS
Very thin 0.091 - 0.50%
Thin 0.51 - 1.2%
Medium 1.21 - 1.7%
Slightly thick 1.71 - 2.95%
Thick 2.96 - 4.2%
Very thick 4.21 - 5.7%
Extremely Thick: >= 5.71 %
HRD
Ex.Thin 0.0 - 0.5%
Very Thin 0.5 - 1.5%
Thin 1.5 - 2.5%
Medium 2.5 - 4.5%
Sl.Thick 4.5 - 6.0%
Thick 6.0 - 7.5%
Very Thick 7.5 - 8.0%
Ex. Thick 8.0 - 100%

I intended to have the diamond sent in a Leon Mege double prong but now am not even sure I should buy the diamond....confused.

 

[Lorelei]

Ask the experts at WF regarding your concerns on the girdle, they will tell you if it is likely to be an issue or not.

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Given the girdle concerns with this diamond. Does anyone know whether cushion cuts tend to be more susceptible to chipping. Has anyone bought a diamond with a girdle thinner than this and had no problems? Is this girdle really so thin as to be a problem?

 

[Diamondseeker0102]

Perhaps looking to buy tomorrow, bump for a reponse...........

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/20/2008 6:19:24 PM
Author: Diamondseeker0102
Perhaps looking to buy tomorrow, bump for a reponse...........

Lorelei gave you the best advice about the girdle in her last post.

 

[urseberry]

Since cushions have rounded edges, they are not as susceptible to chipping as sharp-cornered princesses. However, in any sort of exposed setting, a very thin girdle is a concern. I would definitely defer to the experts at Whiteflash. They can look at the diamond and see where the thinnest portions are and make suggestions. Very thin girdles are also common in antique stones. I believe Surfgirl''s diamond has a very thin girdle, so she removes her ring for any sort of manual labor where the stone might be at risk.