Cushion Cut Help!

[olydan1]

Hello all, as many others have written I am quite confused with the lack of "ideal" preferences for the cushion cut diamonds. I''m looking to put a 1.3-1.5c cushion diamond in this setting and have a few questions. I''m trying to choose between the two following diamonds and am not sure which, without viewing them, would be better. Also, given the enclosed nature of the setting, should I put more preference on color of clarity. (I''m more of a quality over quantity guy so I''m staying at VS1 or above and G or above for quality) My main question is these seem like great diamonds on paper, but the depth seems quite thick. Given that the depth is so great doesn''t this add carats without adding true reflective surface area. Any help would be appreciated.

#1 -
GIA 1.51c
Cushion modified brilliant
6.43x6.03x4.44
Depth: 73.1
Table: 56
Girdle Slightly Thick to Very Thick Faceted
Cutlet: Large
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Clarity: VS1
Color: F
Fluorescence: None
Comments: CROWN ANGLES >40

#2 -
GIA 1.31
Cushion Modified Brilliant
6.86x5.87x4.19
Depth: 71.4
Table: 63
Girdle: Thin to Thick, Faceted
Cutlet: None
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Clarity: VS1
Color: G
Fluorescence: None

Thanks,
Dan

 

[chrono]

Your guess is as good as mine without pictures. What I DO know is that with depths of over 70%, I'd pass on both stones. They are so deep as to appear much smaller than expected for their carat weights. Look for stones with smaller depths around the mid 60s range. Keep the polish and symmetry at least VG/VG for both.

 

[Lorelei]

Welcome!

Photographs both magnified and usual distance are needed and also ASET images, it is hard to tell by numbers so see if your vendor can supply these.

 

[diagem]

Date: 1/22/2008 1:00:06 PM
Author: Chrono
Your guess is as good as mine without pictures. What I DO know is that with depths of over 70%, I'd pass on both stones. They are so deep as to appear much smaller than expected for their carat weights. Look for stones with smaller depths around the mid 60s range. Keep the polish and symmetry at least VG/VG for both.

Chrono..., I wouldnt suggest passing automatically on every 70+ % TD Cushion...

The majority of great Cushions I have seen were over 70% total depth...
It mainly depends on the crown height and angle in the right harmony with the pavilion height and angle!

I would much rather have a 74% TD with a 25%+/- crown height vs. a 65% TD with a 10% crown height...,


But its just me...

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 1/22/2008 1:42:53 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 1/22/2008 1:00:06 PM
Author: Chrono
Your guess is as good as mine without pictures. What I DO know is that with depths of over 70%, I'd pass on both stones. They are so deep as to appear much smaller than expected for their carat weights. Look for stones with smaller depths around the mid 60s range. Keep the polish and symmetry at least VG/VG for both.

Chrono..., I wouldnt suggest passing automatically on every 70+ % TD Cushion...

The majority of great Cushions I have seen were over 70% total depth...
It mainly depends on the crown height and angle in the right harmony with the pavilion height and angle!

I would much rather have a 74% TD with a 25%+/- crown height vs. a 65% TD with a 10% crown height...,


But its just me...

I think #1 could have potential, even though it will face up small-- depends on how it is modified-- really can't give you much advice without pictures.

Also, no reason not to consider VS2 stones, which are almost always completely eye-clean, and you might want to consider H color as well, but that's more up to you.