Cushion Help please

[jeff123456]

Trying to choose between 3 stones.. Please help..

1) 2.1 H SI2 7.72-6.73-4.76 D- 70.7 T - 71 Polish - G Sym - GD Flor - None GIA Cert $13500.00 w/ platinum setting pave.

2) 2.01 G SI2 7.43-7.08 D- 72.5 T-59 Polish - VG Sym - GD, flor - none GIA Cert $13750 w/ platinum setting pave

3) 2.01 G SI2 7.84-6.80-4.70 D69.1 T- 58 Polish - EX Sym - GD Flor - none GIA Cert $12320.00 stone only


Any suggestions or advice much appreciated.. Also if you feel i'm getting ripped off, let me know. Thanks everyone..

 

[dani13]

Hello, and welcome!

Just by eyeballing, stone # 3 looks the most promising- have you seen any of these in person? Are they eye-clean?

 

[jeff123456]

Thanks for the reply.
I saw the first and the third. I''m supposed to see the 2nd tommorrow.
They look pretty good, i''m just unsure b/c i''ve been reading so many posts recently and it totally makes
you think even more about it..

Still trying to figure out which Table/Depth ratios are the best and what will give the best sparkle with a cushion..

 

[Cehrabehra]

I am a huge cushion lover and have learned quite a bit about them but I can assure you that the only way you''re really going to know which you like is to trust your eyes. I am advocating to the powers that be that the different facet plots be categorized because it is my belief that certain facet plots require different depths/tables. #1''s 71 table is HUGEOMONGUS particularly for an old fashioned cut, but in some of the crushed ice shallow stones there seem to be quite a few with a huge table. That could appeal to some - but it isn''t shallow, it''s actually pretty deep - so I dunno, I would want to know more about the crown depth maybe. I can''t even imagine a stone that deep with a table that large, but I''m curious! .... also an SI2 might not be wise depending on the type of cushion it is - In older cuts they hide NOTHING and you have to be careful about them being eye clean just as you would with an emerald or asscher. In some of the modern cuts they''re busy enough that you can get away with it. for an older cut cushion I might want the sym to be higher than good... but for a modern cut again with the busy-ness you can get away with things being a little *off*. If I HAD to pick based on numbers I''d pick #3 but be curious to look at #1. To me it''s mostly about the facet pattern though - are these all the same cut of cushion? Which did YOU prefer between #1 and #3? Did you see them together, in the same light? Is it possible for you to get your two favs together for a comparison?

 

[dani13]

Cushions are not my expertise, as far as the numbers though, I think stone # 3 fits the bill better than the others. It all comes down to what stone you like best though (to your own eye). Are the stones eye-clean? You just have to be cautious of that with the S12's...

 

[jeff123456]

I believe that all of them are Modified Cushion cuts. I liked #1 but i was hesitant b/c of the H color. I couldn''t really see any yellow though.
I didn''t see 1 and 3 together b/c they were from different people.

The stones that i saw were eyeclean, they were nice..
The guy is directing me towards #2? Is there a reason that you guys don''t like #2?
Thanks.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/1/2006 9:03:51 PM
Author: jeff123456
I believe that all of them are Modified Cushion cuts. I liked #1 but i was hesitant b/c of the H color. I couldn''t really see any yellow though.
I didn''t see 1 and 3 together b/c they were from different people.

The stones that i saw were eyeclean, they were nice..
The guy is directing me towards #2? Is there a reason that you guys don''t like #2?
Thanks.

it''s deep and has a big table? I dunno - I really think you have to trust your eyes *far* more than which one a jeweler is directing you toward... he might have ulterior motives - and it IS the priciest one. My cushion is an old cut with 66 depth and 20 crown and 53 table... but from what I''ve seen on pricescope and looking through ::cough:: hundreds of cushions online, is that the crushed ice (I don''t trust the term "modified cushion" because I''ve seen it mean more than one thing lol) cushions tend to be shallower - like even less than 60 with big tables like 60-65. I''d have to see the facet plots of these to know what *they* mean by "modified cushion". Heck even mine is a modified if you think about it because it has long lgf for an old mine cut. IME the experts don''t even agree on terms LOL I honestly don''t know what a stone that is 72 deep will do - particularly without info about the crown. It might be gorgous. I have never to my knowledge seen any stone with a 71 table though!! That''s ginormous. Only 15% of the diameter of the stone is not table in the crown - if the crown is shallow (and you don''t have that info) AND the stone is still 71 deep that''s extremely bottom heavy. If the crown towers like a monument then I dunno... it just... I dunno. You''ll have to LOOK at them and make an eye judgment.