Cushion Question for Cehrabehra and Others

[boston_jeff]

Hey everyone,

I have been learning a ton about cushions by reading the gazillion threads in the forums about this very ununiform shape. The FAQ started by fatafelice ("A Cushion by Any Other Name") and a thread called "Paper Tricks with Culet Size" were particularly helpful in describing some of the different facet plots available.

Cehra, you have made an effort to distinguish between two different types of 8 pavillion "cushion brilliants" (ignoring modifieds for now). Yours and Silverlilly''s "antique-style", where the mains are along the equators of the stone, as compared to MMM''s "modern-style" where the facets and facet junctions are along the equators, creating a "quadrant" look to the stone.

However, little has been mentioned about what appears to be one of if not the most common "cushion brilliant" available, which is the 4-main version with this facet plot:

My question is, what does this type of cushion look like? Is it more like the antique cushions, the modern cushions, or the "crushed ice" cushion modifieds?

Thanks in advance, as this will really help me on my search! (I''m looking for an antique-style with great light performance)

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 2/27/2007 1:54:56 PM
Author:boston_jeff
(I'm looking for an antique-style with great light performance)

I'm not a cushion expert by any means but I think "antique cushion" and "great light performance" are mutually exclusive. But I guess it depends on what you mean by "light performance" ... cushions behave differently with light than Round Brilliants. You can get rainbow colors and big chunky facets of light with cushions more stunning & unexpected & unconventional ... ??


ETA:

It's all pros & cons really.

For instance ...

SQUARE H&A stone have optical qualities like Round Brilliants and "superior light performance" in the way most folks around here think of it: flashy, symmetrical, good balance of light & dark areas in the stone. BUT BUT BUT - they do NOT look like antique cushions (in outline or in faceting) ... at a distance they look kind of like RB's ... so they don't "accomplish" what many Cushion-shoppers/Cushion-lovers are looking for.

FUNKIER CUSHIONS may not have the same white light return or symmetry or balance of light & dark areas inside the stone that Round Brilliant/H&A lovers cherish ... BUT BUT BUT they look "special" "unique" "unusual" ... even modern cut stones can have true antique-style ... but it's the IMPERFECTIONS and FUNKINESS and LACK of "great light return" that distinquishes this style & gives them their charm.

Does that make sense? Anyone else agree/disagree?

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/27/2007 2:05:13 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 2/27/2007 1:54:56 PM

Author:boston_jeff

(I'm looking for an antique-style with great light performance)

I'm not a cushion expert by any means but I think 'antique cushion' and 'great light performance' are mutually exclusive. But I guess it depends on what you mean by 'light performance' ... cushions behave differently with light than Round Brilliants. You can get rainbow colors and big chunky facets of light with cushions more stunning & unexpected & unconventional ... ??

Thanks Deco... I should have been more clear-- I'm looking for a cushion with relatively great light performance, as compared to other cushions. That being said, I have seen some cushions that have scored very well on Bscope, etc. I understand that an IS image of a cushion is not likely to look incredible....

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/27/2007 1:54:56 PM
Author:boston_jeff
Hey everyone,

I have been learning a ton about cushions by reading the gazillion threads in the forums about this very ununiform shape. The FAQ started by fatafelice (''A Cushion by Any Other Name'') and a thread called ''Paper Tricks with Culet Size'' were particularly helpful in describing some of the different facet plots available.

Cehra, you have made an effort to distinguish between two different types of 8 pavillion ''cushion brilliants'' (ignoring modifieds for now). Yours and Silverlilly''s ''antique-style'', where the mains are along the equators of the stone, as compared to MMM''s ''modern-style'' where the facets and facet junctions are along the equators, creating a ''quadrant'' look to the stone.

However, little has been mentioned about what appears to be one of if not the most common ''cushion brilliant'' available, which is the 4-main version with this facet plot:

My question is, what does this type of cushion look like? Is it more like the antique cushions, the modern cushions, or the ''crushed ice'' cushion modifieds?

Thanks in advance, as this will really help me on my search! (I''m looking for an antique-style with great light performance)

Its hard to be certain..., but your avatar could have this type of faceting pattern on the pavilion.

For antique-''style'', you will need the 8x8 faceting arrangements..., but it still could be called ''modified'' in some examples.

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/27/2007 2:10:38 PM
Author: DiaGem

Its hard to be certain..., but your avatar could have this type of faceting pattern on the pavilion.


For antique-'style', you will need the 8x8 faceting arrangements..., but it still could be called 'modified' in some examples.

Thanks DiaGem, I probably should have looked more carefully at my own avatar!
Do you have an opinion about the look/beauty/performance of the 4-main version? I certainly trust your eye/expertise!

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/27/2007 2:16:15 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Date: 2/27/2007 2:10:38 PM
Author: DiaGem

Its hard to be certain..., but your avatar could have this type of faceting pattern on the pavilion.


For antique-''style'', you will need the 8x8 faceting arrangements..., but it still could be called ''modified'' in some examples.

Thanks DiaGem, I probably should have looked more carefully at my own avatar!
Do you have an opinion about the look/beauty/performance of the 4-main version? I certainly trust your eye/expertise!

Look: your preferred taste!
Beauty: in your eyes!
Performance: you can use ''tools'' offered here on PS (i am not familiarized with any of these tools personally), in my opinion..., especially when it comes to
"Pushing Cushions"..., I rely only on my eye-sight to evaluate performance (Beauty!!!)

 

[boston_jeff]

I certainliy agree with you, Deco, as one of the reasons I want a more antique-style cushion is that it has non-symmetrical facets and a mix of small and chunky flashes... they can be special stones. That being said, I think (rather, I''m hoping) that there are antique-style stones that are too dark, whether it be from a bad bow-tie or not cut tightly enough (good symmetry, angles off, etc.). I''m just hoping to find a nice antique cushion that does not sacrifice too much with respect to light return...

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/27/2007 2:32:52 PM
Author: DiaGem
Look: your preferred taste!

Beauty: in your eyes!

Performance: you can use 'tools' offered here on PS (i am not familiarized with any of these tools personally), in my opinion..., especially when it comes to

'Pushing Cushions'..., I rely only on my eye-sight to evaluate performance (Beauty!!!)

Fair enough. I am going through a vendor and was trying to make the decision of whether to ask him to call in any 4-mains stones or just go for the 8-mains.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/27/2007 2:36:13 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Fair enough. I am going through a vendor and was trying to make the decision of whether to ask him to call in any 4-mains stones or just go for the 8-mains.

If you are specific about prefering the Antiquish Look...., forget about the "four mains"....

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 1:54:56 PM
Author:boston_jeff
Hey everyone,

I have been learning a ton about cushions by reading the gazillion threads in the forums about this very ununiform shape. The FAQ started by fatafelice (''A Cushion by Any Other Name'') and a thread called ''Paper Tricks with Culet Size'' were particularly helpful in describing some of the different facet plots available.

Cehra, you have made an effort to distinguish between two different types of 8 pavillion ''cushion brilliants'' (ignoring modifieds for now). Yours and Silverlilly''s ''antique-style'', where the mains are along the equators of the stone, as compared to MMM''s ''modern-style'' where the facets and facet junctions are along the equators, creating a ''quadrant'' look to the stone.

However, little has been mentioned about what appears to be one of if not the most common ''cushion brilliant'' available, which is the 4-main version with this facet plot:

My question is, what does this type of cushion look like? Is it more like the antique cushions, the modern cushions, or the ''crushed ice'' cushion modifieds?

Thanks in advance, as this will really help me on my search! (I''m looking for an antique-style with great light performance)

Hi! This wouldn''t be a crushed ice appearance... let me paste this chart I made long ago... first gotta find it haha.... if you didn''t see this thread you might want to check it out: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-gurus-please.47678/page-2

Okay this is one of john''s pics first....

None of these is an antique cushion cut - the first is the one you''re inquiring about.... the middle and variations of it are seen frequently around here - this is like the square H&A also.... and the last one is the "crushed ice" one... it also has 4 pav mains but those extra facets around it really give a choppy appearance. how far down that extra ring is and how wide/thin the 4 mains are will make a big difference. John has some pics of a stone with the last plot above on that link I sent you to.

Okay here is that chart I made:

Okay... now referring to the chart above.... you''ll see that #1 is the 4pav plot you''re asking about.... #2 in various LGF is a very popular modern cushion, #3 is another 4pav plot with an extra row of facets, #5, 6, 8, 10 are all plots that COULD look like an old mine cut or antique cushion.... #8 is what my stone is (old mine brilliant) but it *looks* inside more like #6 because the corners are thinner... #10 is a traditional old mine cut which also has the thinner corners but VERY short lgf. #5 and #6 are basically identical other than the culet size and maybe the LGF length.

One of the reasons that the "quadrant" style cushion is so popular, is that even at elongated ratios there isn''t a "bowtie" effect. The sizes of the sparkles are more uniform like that of a round. In an antique style cushion with the facets on the equatorial lines (as you adaptly put it!) there is more variation and can be less uniformity which creates both the "bowtie" thing AND the huge chunky facets (they''re one and the same - is the glass half full or half empty LOL)

I''m going to send this in case my computer dies and I lose it all.... but I''ll go look on JA to see if I can find what you seek

 

[Cehrabehra]

Okay I''m going to post some links... these are not endorsed or recommendations - they''re just for educational purposes and there''s a shout out to james allen for making this easier! pull up the GIA certs THEN the pic images so you can have both on the screen and compare the facet plot with the photos.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=869727 This you might find interesting - it has *six* pavillion mains

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=1015483 This one is a "crushed ice" 4pav main cushion with the extra 8 facet row.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=1000226 This one is an 8pav main cushion *with* the extra 8 facet row....

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=966945 This is an 8 pav main cushion brilliant - and as you can see it looks very much like a traditional old mine cut but the table is huge and I don''t think it has a high crown.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=863836 Here ya go.... this is a 4 pav main without the extra row of facets and it is rather pretty.... finally an example for you! I wonder if JA would take a shot of this diamond to contribute for educational posterity! haha

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=1003504 Another example of what you seek - with a HUGE table. I think a stone like this would have reasonable sparkle but not a fireball exactly.

I''m going to hit send.... my power cord is problematic and I lose everything occasionally and this was too much work to lose so I''ll post another post if I find anything else of use lol

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 2:33:51 PM
Author: boston_jeff
I certainliy agree with you, Deco, as one of the reasons I want a more antique-style cushion is that it has non-symmetrical facets and a mix of small and chunky flashes... they can be special stones. That being said, I think (rather, I''m hoping) that there are antique-style stones that are too dark, whether it be from a bad bow-tie or not cut tightly enough (good symmetry, angles off, etc.). I''m just hoping to find a nice antique cushion that does not sacrifice too much with respect to light return...

yes! One of the really cool things about my stone is how wide the gamut is in the size of sparkles. The "bowtie" facets on an elongated antique cut cushion are about as big as you''re going to find on any stone of any size and they produce HUGE flashes of color that literally travel many feet. I''ve awoken in the am and had the light coming in and have shot rainbows that extended about a foot long a dozen feet away. Amazing! Then there are the regular chunky fire, the "normal" sized fire kinda like what you see in a 1-2 carat round, then pinfire... and then what I call the glitter... omg it''s so cool - it doesn''t travel far, but when you look at my stone in the sun the whole stone looks like it is filled with rainbow champagne glitter INSIDE the stone.

except my stone is VG symmetry.... it just displays ordered chaos - like listening to jazz music

 

[Cehrabehra]

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=864542 This one has an 8pav main antique orientation but the LGF are very long and the table fairly large.... you can see the faceting in there like in a round brilliant kinda.... or maybe more like an oval. It isn''t that chunky because of how it is cut.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=933346 Here is another 4 pav main lke you were looking for - this one looks really choppy but I think it''s the long lgf.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=1013787 Another 4pav and its a good example I think - still fairly large table for a cushion and this is pretty deep which may be good, may not be good.... depending on how much is crown!

 

[Fly Girl]

Cehrabehra - Awesome Cushion tutorial!!! I''ve been trying to figure some of this stuff out. I think I will be studying these for a long time.

Thank you so much for sharing.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 4:45:13 PM
Author: Fly Girl
Cehrabehra - Awesome Cushion tutorial!!! I''ve been trying to figure some of this stuff out. I think I will be studying these for a long time.

Thank you so much for sharing.

Thanks I wish I had pictures from each of those links to put here in this thread so the thread would last even when the links are dead.... but I won''t do that without James allen''s permission.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 2:09:43 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Date: 2/27/2007 2:05:13 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 2/27/2007 1:54:56 PM

Author:boston_jeff

(I''m looking for an antique-style with great light performance)

I''m not a cushion expert by any means but I think ''antique cushion'' and ''great light performance'' are mutually exclusive. But I guess it depends on what you mean by ''light performance'' ... cushions behave differently with light than Round Brilliants. You can get rainbow colors and big chunky facets of light with cushions more stunning & unexpected & unconventional ... ??

Thanks Deco... I should have been more clear-- I''m looking for a cushion with relatively great light performance, as compared to other cushions. That being said, I have seen some cushions that have scored very well on Bscope, etc. I understand that an IS image of a cushion is not likely to look incredible....

also you should clarify if you''re looking for an antique stone or an antique cut.... and either way you can still have great light return... fatefelice (I think that''s her sn) has an antique *style* cushion and it had an amazing IS. I don''t think she has an aset of it (that would be cool) and antique cushions and great light performance are not *always* mutually exclusive But deco is right - it sometimes depends on what you consider great light performance. But if you''re just thinking of an idealscope - they can have great light performance in that way too.

 

[boston_jeff]

I''m definitely looking for an antique cut, not an antique stone.

I knew that you would be someone who could help me out on this issue (thus the shout-out in the thread title). You pretty much hit the nail on the head with what I am looking for-- an antique cut (which I think means one of 5, 6, 8, or 10 in your awesome chart above), which performs beautifully to the eye and at least admirably with respect to IS and other light performance tools (I would love to see the amount of green on the ASET from a nice antique cushion).

Tonight I will take a close look at all the links you took the time to post, and will respond here with any other questions/comments!

Thanks again!

 

[moremoremore]

I'm not sure if it was said above...it probably was...those plots are just stock...and don't tell you how the stone will look....You really need to SEE the stones. For example, do a search on James Allen and you can actually see the stones compared to the plots to see how they vary...Best of luck!

Oh, I see that Ceh did it! Good job!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 5:15:30 PM
Author: boston_jeff
I''m definitely looking for an antique cut, not an antique stone.

I knew that you would be someone who could help me out on this issue (thus the shout-out in the thread title). You pretty much hit the nail on the head with what I am looking for-- an antique cut (which I think means one of 5, 6, 8, or 10 in your awesome chart above), which performs beautifully to the eye and at least admirably with respect to IS and other light performance tools (I would love to see the amount of green on the ASET from a nice antique cushion).

Tonight I will take a close look at all the links you took the time to post, and will respond here with any other questions/comments!

Thanks again!

woooohhooooooo!!!!! I think green is underrated.... I''ve heard them say that you need a *little* green in a round but not too much but then in a princess its almost all green.... I think it''s cool how tight rounds can reflect so much white light, but I think it''s cool how some of the "outside the box" cuts reflect so much colored light! I''ve not seen an IS or ASET of my stone.... and moremoremore is right - you must use your eyes... did you notice how many of those plots in the big chart above share names and NOT cuts?? Usually (I wouldn''t *count on it though*) the plot on the *certificate* is the right shape but the proportions can be way off.

things to think about:
**you can go really low in color for antique cushions and they look great because they look antique - or you can stay really high. I prefer the warmer colors for them, but really there''s no wrong answer here.
**do you want fluorescence?
**do you want a culet? I was actually disappointed mine wasn''t larger... I had fantasies of being able to stand it on end and even still I get the urge to have it filed down to a larger size but I''m resisting LOL you can barely see mine and even then not in all situations.... and it is "slightly large". "slightly large" is a pretty big range though so if you get "medium" it''s probably going to be difficult to see.
**what ratio do you like? I personally think the most classic ratio for cushions is 1.15:1 The truly square looks too square and mine (which is 1.26) is a bit long (but I like it that way). I''ve even seen them closing in on 1.40:1 that looked good.
**clarity - big facets mean less places for inclusions to hide - EVEN the clear/white type. My stone is VS2 but it is a very high vs2 and I think a regular VS2 and *possibly* an SI1 would be good but the SI1 would have to be examined. They won''t hide like in a round.
**CROWN HEIGHT - this isn''t listed on the certs but IMO it is important to know.... the bigger this is the better IMO. Particularly if you''re looking for fire over brilliance. I always say my stone doesn''t have any brilliance but that''s not really true... it does, it just isn''t insane like you see in rounds. The color however IS insane! Sometimes with cushions you''ll find really large tables and flat crowns - I wouldn''t go under 15% (which is standard for ideal rounds - but in cushions you can find some really weird combos) but if you can get closer to 20 or over that could be very interesting!!
**table - diagem and I agree pretty much that small tables are good things. I wouldn''t look at anything over 55% for an antique cut - for the modern cuts I''d go to maybe 60-62 TOPS but I''ve seen them go to 74!!
**depth - this is a crapshoot.... good luck finding pavillion angles or even being able to make sense of them if you do LOL Overall depth is dependent on so many things but I wouldn''t go under 60% - this is a trust your eyes thing though for sure. (not that any of them aren''t haha)

remember - this is all just my opinion haha - but from what I''ve found it''s as good as anything else out there.... considering there are no real standards to work with...

 

[diagem]

Cehra,

Great contribution..., my compliments to you....
I vouch for your posts/threads..., it puts the wonderful wild (and wild is an understatement!!!)world of Cushion Shaped Diamonds into a focused perspective!!!

Cushion Diamond seekers can actually focus themselves upon reading your material!!!

Thumbs UP!!!

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/27/2007 6:31:35 PM
Author: DiaGem
Cehra,

Great contribution..., my compliments to you....
I vouch for your posts/threads..., it puts the wonderful wild (and wild is an understatement!!!)world of Cushion Shaped Diamonds into a focused perspective!!!

Cushion Diamond seekers can actually focus themselves upon reading your material!!!

Thumbs UP!!!

BTW, where did you get #11 ?

 

[Scott Terence]

Here is an ASET of my OMC, hope it helps...

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 6:43:54 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 2/27/2007 6:31:35 PM
Author: DiaGem
Cehra,

Great contribution..., my compliments to you....
I vouch for your posts/threads..., it puts the wonderful wild (and wild is an understatement!!!)world of Cushion Shaped Diamonds into a focused perspective!!!

Cushion Diamond seekers can actually focus themselves upon reading your material!!!

Thumbs UP!!!

BTW, where did you get #11 ?

ahhhh very interesting that you point that out.... because that was the facet plot I wanted cut a long time ago when I couldn''t find what I was looking for. I found it on http://www.diamondsourceva.com/Education/Shape/diamonds-shape-cushion-cut.asp but if you look at the crown faceting you''ll see there is a flaw in the drawing (which I fixed before I put it in my chart) - what I liked about this was that even though the stone is a long stone, the 8 pav mains are still evenly spaced.

I used it to create a mockup of what I wanted in a stone. I never posted this before but this was what I was thinking... mind you this is what I was thinking back when I had only been posting for 2 weeks LOL I didn''t mess wtih the crown facets, they could be tweaked to line up a little better, but I really did love this facet pattern for the bottom... no clue how it would work, but I thought it would be pretty. Mind you this is for pure entertainment only - the work of a true novice LOL Don''t laugh too hard (see pic below)

BTW thank you for your comments, you are my guru You have no idea how much I wish that 2.5Dblue was on MY finger!!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 7:00:55 PM
Author: Scott 00
Here is an ASET of my OMC, hope it helps...

did you ever get a sarin of this before you set it scott? I''m determined to get a good sarin of mine... I want to spend some time wraping my brain around how the angles in my stone interact LOL

 

[dianne]

I don''t mean to hijack this thread but I have to say this:

Cehra--My hats off to you!! I am amazed at the amount of information you have to offer and how freely you are willing to share by typing extensive postings to assist us...especially with cushion questions. The fact you love, love, love your stone comes thru in your postings loud and clear. You are so honest about the qualities of your stone that you adore in spite of the fact they possibly do not fit the desires of other cushion-lovers (the warmer color, larger culet, and the longer length to width ratio). I find your postings to be informative, postive, and downright cheery. I can only imagine how inspiring you are to those in the midst of their diamond search.

Your vibrant personality is infectious!---I already have my cushion and you make me want another one!

Thank you for what you bring to this site!

boston_jeff-- I think you are well on your way to being an informed customer! Good luck with your search and please keep us informed of your progress! It is exciting but I found it to be exhausting, too, but well worth it if you get a stone you love.

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/27/2007 5:57:35 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

things to think about:

**you can go really low in color for antique cushions and they look great because they look antique - or you can stay really high. I prefer the warmer colors for them, but really there''s no wrong answer here.

I''m looking in the G/H range. I would look lower but the stone is not for me, and I view G as a safe middle ground. Since this is her first big diamond, I am going to stay fairly white

**do you want fluorescence?

I am not sure I want it, but I will surely take it if it has no negative effect on the stone, especially in an H to help it face up whiter

**do you want a culet?

I think I would rather not have a visible culet, even though that stone that DiaGem posted in the ''Paper Tricks with Culet Size'' thread was magical. I think that although I love the look of antique-cut cushions, the open culet is not necessarily what I am love about them.

**what ratio do you like?

I like stones that are rectangular but not elongated... sort of rectangular squares, so I have been looking mostly in the 1.1-1.15 area, and would probably extend up to 1.17

**clarity - big facets mean less places for inclusions to hide -

for budgetary reasons, I have been looking mostly at SI1, but will not buy an SI1 without assurances from a vendor that it is totally eyeclean from pretty much any distance

**CROWN HEIGHT -

Given my budget, I have yet to get too picky on crown height, but I have read your posts on the subject and will be sure to look at that before I purchase a stone. I''m hoping that most of the stones cut in this facet pattern with smallish tables have good crown heights.

**table - diagem and I agree pretty much that small tables are good things. I wouldn''t look at anything over 55% for an antique cut - for the modern cuts I''d go to maybe 60-62 TOPS but I''ve seen them go to 74!!

This is probably true most of the time, but fatafelice''s antique-cut is a 60% table, and it is fantastic, so I probably will not constrain my search to 55%, but realize that getting a table significantly smaller than the depth is a good thing

**depth - this is a crapshoot.... good luck finding pavillion angles or even being able to make sense of them if you do LOL Overall depth is dependent on so many things but I wouldn''t go under 60% - this is a trust your eyes thing though for sure. (not that any of them aren''t haha)

I want a stone with good depth, but do not want a stone that hides too much weight and faces up small. I plan on getting any stone independently appraised prior to purchase so maybe I''ll get a better sense of this stuff

I can''t thank you enough for taking the time to post in this thread with personalized advice (and for sharing your knowledge and opinions in other cushion-related threads which I have read). When you started your search, did you ever think you would become one of the resident experts on this cut?

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 8:47:17 PM
Author: dianne
I don''t mean to hijack this thread but I have to say this:

Cehra--My hats off to you!! I am amazed at the amount of information you have to offer and how freely you are willing to share by typing extensive postings to assist us...especially with cushion questions. The fact you love, love, love your stone comes thru in your postings loud and clear. You are so honest about the qualities of your stone that you adore in spite of the fact they possibly do not fit the desires of other cushion-lovers (the warmer color, larger culet, and the longer length to width ratio). I find your postings to be informative, postive, and downright cheery. I can only imagine how inspiring you are to those in the midst of their diamond search.

Your vibrant personality is infectious!---I already have my cushion and you make me want another one!

Thank you for what you bring to this site!

boston_jeff-- I think you are well on your way to being an informed customer! Good luck with your search and please keep us informed of your progress! It is exciting but I found it to be exhausting, too, but well worth it if you get a stone you love.

wow!! Thank you I do love my stone and all cushions... I think the enigma and mystery of them is part of what attracted me, that and the FIRST thing I said when I called vendors last July was "I want big rainbows" LOL!! that''s very kind of you to say

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/27/2007 8:47:17 PM
Author: dianne
I don't mean to hijack this thread but I have to say this:

Thank you for what you bring to this site!

ditto

boston_jeff--I think you are well on your way to being an informed customer! Good luck with your search and please keep us informed of your progress! It is exciting but I found it to be exhausting, too, but well worth it if you get a stone you love.

Thanks dianne! I'm trying... This will be a big purchase for a frugal person like me (some might say "frugal" is a little too euphemistic), so consistent with my personality I have sort of thrown myself into this head first. Early on I focused on learning about cut proportions, light return, etc., mostly in reference to Rounds because there is the least amount of variation. Unfortunately, I stumbled upon cushions and opened up a whole new universe of plots, preferences, eccentricities, etc. Sometimes I think it would have been better had I just pulled the trigger on an ACA a month ago

. But I want this stone to be something special for my GF, so I am willing to put in the time to get it right. And I don't think I would have been able to do that without this forum, so thanks everyone!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 2/27/2007 9:43:53 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Thanks dianne! I''m trying... This will be a big purchase for a frugal person like me (some might say ''frugal'' is a little too euphemistic), so consistent with my personality I have sort of thrown myself into this head first. Early on I focused on learning about cut proportions, light return, etc., mostly in reference to Rounds because there is the least amount of variation. Unfortunately, I stumbled upon cushions and opened up a whole new universe of plots, preferences, eccentricities, etc. Sometimes I think it would have been better had I just pulled the trigger on an ACA a month ago

. But I want this stone to be something special for my GF, so I am willing to put in the time to get it right. And I don''t think I would have been able to do that without this forum, so thanks everyone!

Its funny that you said this because when I was searching, every day I kicked myself and said maybe I should just get a round - but I didn''t WANT a round!!! Now that I have my cushion I *do* want a round - but for a pendant. Much smaller, much less $$ - and a second stone. I think that''ll be perfect. I don''t regret my main stone being a cushion one iota.

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/27/2007 10:08:51 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Its funny that you said this because when I was searching, every day I kicked myself and said maybe I should just get a round - but I didn''t WANT a round!!! Now that I have my cushion I *do* want a round - but for a pendant. Much smaller, much less $$ - and a second stone. I think that''ll be perfect. I don''t regret my main stone being a cushion one iota.

Any opinion on my responses to your post above re: specs?