Cushion owners: A question on dimensions

[luckystar112]

So, I have my handy dandy amazon.com diamond size chart and it says that a 1ct cushion should be 5.5mm. Yet, any 1ct cushion that I have found online is usually around 5.8-6.3mm. I know this has a lot to do with ratio. Does a larger ratio make the diamond look bigger? For instance, neatfreak and I have the same finger size--and her diamond, although under a carat...has what I consider perfect finger coverage. But when I try to see what a 1ct from the amazon.com sheet would look like on my finger, it looks a lot smaller than neatfreak''s photos.
(Sorry to use you as an example neatfreak, I just seem to see your cushion a lot compared to everyone elses! lol.)

So for those of you with cushions...would you say that the amazon chart is correct?
1.0= 5.5mm
1.5= 6.5mm
2.0=7.5mm
2.5=8mm
3.0=8.25mm

Do you think that this chart is based upon a 1.0 ratio?

Thanks for your help!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 6/29/2007 12:51:28 AM
Author:luckystar112
So, I have my handy dandy amazon.com diamond size chart and it says that a 1ct cushion should be 5.5mm. Yet, any 1ct cushion that I have found online is usually around 5.8-6.3mm. I know this has a lot to do with ratio. Does a larger ratio make the diamond look bigger? For instance, neatfreak and I have the same finger size--and her diamond, although under a carat...has what I consider perfect finger coverage. But when I try to see what a 1ct from the amazon.com sheet would look like on my finger, it looks a lot smaller than neatfreak''s photos.
(Sorry to use you as an example neatfreak, I just seem to see your cushion a lot compared to everyone elses! lol.)

So for those of you with cushions...would you say that the amazon chart is correct?
1.0= 5.5mm
1.5= 6.5mm
2.0=7.5mm
2.5=8mm
3.0=8.25mm

Do you think that this chart is based upon a 1.0 ratio?

Thanks for your help!

Yes, cushion is based on a square on the amazon chart. My cushion is oblong (1.26:1 ratio) and is 7.5 x 9.5. My stone is dead on for what is listed under emerald and oval cuts.

Because with a set depth at a pointed culet you have all 4 sides going down at the same angle in a square and with an oblong you have two going down like a square and two that are going at a shallower angle, you have more of the weight in the "visible" part of the stone in a longer stone.

 

[neatfreak]

Personally, I think the amazon chart is fairly useless except for rounds. What I would do (and DID) when I was cushion searching is NOT to use the cushion pictures, but to use the longer emerald examples, and just cut out the right ratio for my cushion to see what it would look like. Each "line" behind the little images represents one mm, so even if there isn't an emerald that is exactly right, you can figure out the right dimensions pretty easily.

And remember that once your stone is set it will look MUCH bigger than a taped on flat image #1 because it's 3-D and #2 because of the setting.


ETA: Let me rephrase that a little. The useless part is that IMO for fancy shapes, the 1 carat on their chart is often NOT the same size as a 1 carat of that stone IRL. So I think it's useful to compare the MM measurements of stones, I would use that to compare rather than the carat designations.

 

[diagem]

Date: 6/29/2007 12:51:28 AM
Author:luckystar112
So, I have my handy dandy amazon.com diamond size chart and it says that a 1ct cushion should be 5.5mm. Yet, any 1ct cushion that I have found online is usually around 5.8-6.3mm. I know this has a lot to do with ratio. Does a larger ratio make the diamond look bigger? For instance, neatfreak and I have the same finger size--and her diamond, although under a carat...has what I consider perfect finger coverage. But when I try to see what a 1ct from the amazon.com sheet would look like on my finger, it looks a lot smaller than neatfreak''s photos.
(Sorry to use you as an example neatfreak, I just seem to see your cushion a lot compared to everyone elses! lol.)

So for those of you with cushions...would you say that the amazon chart is correct?
1.0= 5.5mm
1.5= 6.5mm
2.0=7.5mm No Rules when it comes to Cushions!
2.5=8mm
3.0=8.25mm

Do you think that this chart is based upon a 1.0 ratio?

Thanks for your help!

 

[luckystar112]

Thanks guys!

Yeah, I realized on most of the diamonds that if I just did some simple math I could figure out how off it was...but what can I say, I failed math.

Diagem--I know there are no rules to cushions...which is why I posted on here. Just wanted to see how far off it is, if it is at all.

 

[TravelingGal]

Doesn''t work in my case. Princess of one carat seem to be that spread, but a lot of cushions here seem to be a bit bigger than cushions for the carat weight.

mine is nearly square at 1.03 ratio. Depth of 64, if my memory serves me correctly. dimensions are 5.9x6.1. My mom''s cushion is 67 depth and is 1.01 carat. Ratio of 1.03 and is 5.7x5.9.

 

[diagem]

Date: 6/29/2007 12:48:00 PM
Author: luckystar112
Thanks guys!

Yeah, I realized on most of the diamonds that if I just did some simple math I could figure out how off it was...but what can I say, I failed math.

Diagem--I know there are no rules to cushions...which is why I posted on here. Just wanted to see how far off it is, if it is at all.

Hope this helps:
Based on my calculations...



So for those of you with cushions...would you say that the amazon chart is correct?
1.0= 5.5mm at 80%+ td
1.5= 6.5mm at 70% td
2.0=7.5mm at 60% td No consistency!!!
2.5=8mm at 62% td
3.0=8.25mm at 68% td