Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Cushion for Harry Winston-inspired halo

And one more question... I am still finding the idea of open culet confusing. Why exactly do some stones have an open culet? One article I read talked about color not being 'trapped' inside since older diamonds came from different mines and were thus not as white. that makes sense to me for true antique stones but am not sure what to think of open culet on newly cut antiques.

would love to get your thoughts on why they exist, and what to look for - larger? smaller? what 'function' is it supposed to fulfill? how does that change once the stone is in a setting?
 
So we're back from ERD and interestingly enough, 1.55 E to our eyes was much better than 1.70 G, so 1.70 G is no longer in the running.

We are now down to two stones with ERD,
1.55 E VS2 and 2.01 G VS2.

http://www.engagementringsdirect.com/1.55-carat-e-vs2-royal-t-cushion-cut-diamond-gid-130658.html
http://www.engagementringsdirect.com/2.01-carat-g-vs2-royal-t-cushion-cut-diamond-gid-91511.html

after looking at 7 stones, we chose those with our eyes. the trade off is this:
2.01 is nice and chunky and i really like how much life is has but it seems to be slightly darker than 1.55 which is of course an E but i think the difference isn't necessarily the color grade. can't explain it well but curious... any strong opinions as to one stone or another?
 
I like both. And normally I'd say get the bigger one. But you are haloing the stone, and when I opened up the 1.55 I said "oh wow, what a lovely diamond" out loud, and I think it's probably a stronger performer and likely brighter. The stone is slightly smaller, but in a halo it isn't going to be really noticeable. And I'm not seeing 7K difference between the two stones. I'd save the money, go for the higher color better performer, personally.
 
PS. I forgot to mention that we did a 'blind' test today, meaning we didn't know any of the information about which stones we were looking at and were just purely picking them out with our eyes. Very interesting experience but gives me a lot more confidence now in buying with my eyes vs going with an ASET or other tests
 
Seems like you found a winner today! I would go for the smaller, sparkly one and save 7000 $
Did you have a good time. Did they take time to explain well?

Thnks for sharing your experience!
 
Yes, Chris is very patient and takes all the time in the world without rushing you.

Btw - 2.01 is still very very full of life and sparkle, it gives off chunkier lights which i actually prefer. But it is very slightly darker when compared side by side with 1.55. Both 1.55 and 2.01 were the winners out of selection of 7-8 stones, ranging from 1.5 to 2.3 carats. We were only picking with our eyes and comparing them in different lights.
 
Yssie|1377957137|3512845 said:
https://www.pricescope.com/forum/rockytalky/which-of-these-two-cushions-would-you-choose-t145292-30.html

Don't know if anyone cares, but since it came up earlier thought I'd mention it - the above is a great discussion on white vs. black background ASET photos, spotlights on CCL's posts (as usual) and ignore the drama on the side (as usual).
Click to expand...

Well, I will have to chime in on this note because I do not like ASET's on black backgrounds because they are deceiving. I can deal with it on rounds better when there is also an idealscope image showing the stone on a white background so you can best assess leakage.

The thing is, we shouldn't select a stone solely by an ASET image, however, the ASET is there as a tool to let you know if you are getting a very well cut stone. And a stone that has a lot of leakage in the center or on the edges is not a stone I would choose. You were choosing between several stones with your eyes, which is absolutely great, but I wonder if any of those stones had outstanding ASET images indicating better light return than these two. For example, if we lined up 7 rounds that were good versus very good cut, I am sure you'd pick out one that you like best. But what if some ideal cut and H&A stones were included in the mix? Unless you had cushions with excellent light return in that mix, I'd be worried about you making a choice between these two.

Here is the image from the thread Yssie linked that shows the same stone's ASETs on a white and black background. The white background reveals a LOT more leakage. If you really want one of these two stones, I would request new ASET images taken on a white background. You are paying for the stone and need to be fully informed as to the amount of leakage your stone will have so you can make the best possible decision. Jewelry store lighting is great for almost every stone, but in real life, you want the best cut you can get so the stone will look good in the most lighting environments.

asetblackandwhite.jpg
 
Yssie and DiamondSeeker - thank you for the helpful perspectives on white vs black ASET backgrounds. I started off wanting all the tools and image reassurances that I was picking out the right stone, but now, after 3 weeks worth of 'practice' of looking at a variety of stones, I am feeling more and more confident that I can trust my eyes to pick out the best one (and then, if I still want it, I can get the re-assurance of ASET image). Having said that, I completely agree that black ASET is misleading. But from what I understand, there are other things that can be done to make ASET image look more or less favorable (adjusting colors of the cone, etc.) I would really hope most reputable sellers wouldn't go near manipulating the images, but it is possible.
 
On Saturday, we took a trip to Long Island to check out Good Old Gold in person. It's a 1 hr train from Penn station + 10 minute walk from the train station. I found Jon's youtube videos quite helpful and educational when we first started our cushion research, and was looking forward to seeing some AVCs.
We ended up spending almost 3 hrs primarily with David (David could not have been any nicer, we really enjoyed working with him!) and then Jon joined in for a portion of the time.

We did a bunch of blind tests - i.e. where we looked at diamonds only with our eyes and didn't know anything about them. David started off showing us 3 diamonds to check out our color sensitivity and we immediately ruled 2 of them out (one turned out to be K colored). What we were left with was what they call 'Premium' cushion, 2.01 G VS2 at $21K. It is a very lovely stone, the only thing we didn't love was how large the culet was. Premium cushions at GOG aren't cushions that are cut by them (like AVCs) but are rather selected from the same cutter as ERD and Perry/Leon get theirs, so it's not terribly surprising we liked it.
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond.php?d=10488&shape=16&ctMin=2.01&ctMax=2.01&color=8&resultsColumns=268435471&singleResult=1

If you're curious about a price premium that AVC demands, it's well illustrated with this stone, AVC 1.81 G VS2 at $29K. http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond.php?d=24306&shape=16&ctMin=1.81&ctMax=1.81&color=8&resultsColumns=268435471&singleResult=1

If we calculate the area of Premium vs AVC, we get 7.39*7.09=52.4 vs 7.07*6.97=49.2. We need to recognize that the two stones aren't the same but.... Premium costs $21K and gets you a larger viewing area than AVC at $29K and 49.2. We actually preferred Premium cut vs AVC for this particular stone (thankfully for our pocket books!) What is odd though is that this AVC was rated as G color and yet it was obviously darker than the Premium G. Perhaps it is because AGS labs are a bit more 'loose' in their rating of the color. We all (David and Jon included) agreed that the G AVC was actually closer to an H, which would have lowered the price by about $3K.

Next David showed us a beautiful smaller AVC, 1.62 H SI1 at $16K. What is interesting about this stone is that we both strongly preferred the cut of this AVC both to Premium and 1.81 AVC. Even though AVC cuts are supposed to be more uniform than your typical cushion cuts, this stone really stood out for us. http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond.php?d=24522&shape=16&ctMin=1.61&ctMax=1.63&color=16&resultsColumns=268435471&singleResult=1

I LOVED that stone and didn't mind the inclusion (I had to search for it with a loupe and only once i found it, i could only then pick it out with my eyes and only in certain positions). This stone to me was cut more beautifully than all the others we saw at GOG that day in a line up. We came very close to buying it but ultimately didn't because when we put it into a setting, the color of the center stone was darker than that of the surrounding halo.... We had never observed this effect before, so that's something for us to pay attention to when we go back to ERD and Perry. Except for the color, to me this was nearly a perfect stone - it's priced at $16K and gets me 46.9 viewing area while presenting a really beautiful cut (to my eyes), that I preferred over 2 larger stones.

Jon promised to get in touch with his cutter to see whether there is a similar stone but with higher color grade. So for now, the search continues.

In a nutshell, for us coming out to GOG was completely worth it. In addition to learning more about cushions, Jon also showed us a stunning octagonal asscher (wow is all i can say! at $35K I have to add it to my 'dream' list) and a perfect round. Jon and David really took the time to answer all of our inquisitive questions and patiently conducted various tests on the stones (indoor light, street light, setting, no setting, blind, color rating, etc. etc.).

Just one last point I want to make is this: I am now completely in the camp of needing to choose with your eyes. I cannot imagine buying a stone sight unseen because as demonstrated both by our experience at ERD and GOG, we've disqualified with our eyes some stones with excellent reports.
 
One question for you, the experts: have you noticed that H or G color stone can look noticeably darker when placed into a halo setting (relative to the halo/setting)? As I mentioned above, this was the first time that we've observed this effect.
 
It sounds like you had a wonderful and educational trip to GOG. You are visiting all the best of the best vendors which is making your experience all the much better. I am glad you figured out which camp you belong to because I am in the same camp after much exploration and self searching. I saw all my big diamond purchases in person first (unless they are ebay ones with really simple return policies) ... I simply can't buy a diamond with just a piece of paper and an asset / idealscope image.

It's interesting that you are describing dark for lower colored diamonds. I usually would associate dark with not as well cut. Yellow / warmer tones with color. I have heard there are diamonds from an India that have a grey cast making them look a bit darker. But I am not sure what you are seeing here.

My OEC is an H and it is not dark at all. It is a real sparkler and super white most of the time. It picks up color from surroundings like crazy so a lot of times it looks pink, green, blue or even yellow. I have a few friends with H rounds from T&CO .. they are very white but I have found T&CO to be stricter on color. AGS in my opinion is loose on color (but no recent studies to prove it) ... which is one reason I don't personally like AGS but many people like it. I just stick with GIA and even EGL-US (my local Toronto branch) because the results are so predictable at usually on par with GIA-NYC with the exception of being one color grade softer.
 
This is my G colored diamond in a halo. It doesn't look darker to me.

CharmyPoo-MaytalHannah-Rocks-Closeup1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top