Cushion - Smaller table than depth abs. necessary?

[LoRez]

So, after much gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair, I finally put down a deposit on a 1.01 ct. Cushion Brilliant and setting for an e-ring yesterday. We went to a PS-recommended jeweler here in LA, and I feel like we have been given excellent service throughout the process. We had narrowed it down to two stones - one, from our jeweler, which we had viewed and were happy with. The second was a stone from a reputable online vendor with photos, however I have not seen this stone in person.

My dilemma is this - I think (?) that I am happy with the stone I put money down on yesterday. Unfortunately, when I came home and continued reading on PS I kept seeing mention of how you want a cushion with a smaller table than depth, in order to provide maximum brilliance and fire. Is that the case with cushions of all carat sizes? The reason I ask is that the specs on our stone are as follows:

1.01 ct. GIA Cushion Brilliant (4-pav plot)
H VVS2
Ratio 1.05
Table 68%
Depth 66.0%
Polish VG
Symmetry G
Fluor MB
Girdle Med-Ext Thick (faceted)

and the specs on the online stone are these:

1.01 ct GIA Cushion Brilliant (4-pav plot)
H SI1
Ratio 1.05
Table 63%
Depth 66.8%
Polish VG
Symmetry VG
Fluor None
Girdle Slightly Thick-Ext Thick (faceted)

I know cushions cannot be judged by the numbers, but why else do people seem to insist on having a depth larger than a table? Am I just driving myself slowly mad here?!? We saw it, we liked it, but I''m hoping we haven''t just been whisked along in this whole process without a true understanding of what makes a gorgeous cushion. Please advise if possible!

 

[neatfreak]

A big table can give some weird effects, and can make the stone appear glassy. Were you able to see the many many stones in person? Or just a few?

Normally I say trust your eyes, but only if you have seen many stones in person so you can be sure that you are making an educated decision on what your eyes like.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/21/2009 12:34:23 PM
Author: neatfreak
A big table can give some weird effects, and can make the stone appear glassy. Were you able to see the many many stones in person? Or just a few?

Normally I say trust your eyes, but only if you have seen many stones in person so you can be sure that you are making an educated decision on what your eyes like.

Ditto, see if you can compare some others with smaller tables to be sure of what you like in a cushion.

 

[LoRez]

We saw probably a dozen cushions, a few of which we ruled out from the start simply because they were too rectangular, too large, too small. I have looked at dozens more online, in PS threads and in photos from vendors that display actual stone pics. I was initially more caught up in the Cushion Brilliant vs. Cushion Modified Brilliant issue, as I am fairly certain we prefer the former to the more crushed-ice look of a Modified. I really wasn't aware of the supposed importance of having a small table & a deep stone until I came home and began delving into some of these threads last night! Another jeweler had given me the guidelines of looking for tables in the mid-to-high 60's as ideal, which is why I didn't question a table of 68% on the first stone! It's agonizing because I saw the first stone 3 times in person, though, was pleased by it every time but am starting to question the depth of my knowledge now. It's odd, though, as there are cushions on here that people seem to view favorably that have larger tables than depth - see the link below? Granted, this isn't an up-close look but it's a stone with a 60% table and 59% depth.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/thank-you-to-the-pricescope-family-and-members-finally-i-have-it-round-princess-find-out-my-d.59335/

Unfortunately I have put money down on the 1st stone and ring already, so I may need to call our jeweler now and see if he'll consider applying that towards the setting (we are going to have him make the ring for us regardless) and giving me a week or so to order and take a look at the 2nd stone from the online vendor. Why, oh why, does picking out a cushion have to be this difficult?

 

[DiamondFlame]

1 or 2% difference isn''t going to make much of a difference imho. If you like the personality of the cushion, I say go for it. Don''t let some numbers throw you off track. I have seen some cushions with tables larger than their depth and they still look gorgeous.

 

[DaCounselor]

I would try to look at some cushions with smaller tables if you are questioning your choice. To my eye there is a distinct difference in looks based upon table size. I personally prefer the more antiquey look of the smaller tables and steeper crown angles, but you may not.

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 2/22/2009 5:42:21 PM
Author: DaCounselor
I would try to look at some cushions with smaller tables if you are questioning your choice.

Very good advice.

 

[LoRez]

An update on this one - so I ended up ordering the online stone mentioned above, as I couldn''t rest until I was able to view the two side-by-side! When I did, the decision was clear. I''m not certain if it was the slightly smaller table (63% vs. 68%) or the slightly better symmetry (VG vs. G), but the online stone was the winner. Chunkier, more enticing flashes of light versus the more glittery, crushed-ice look of the stone we had originally put a deposit down on. Fortunately our jeweler was understanding, and allowed me to apply the deposit towards the purchase of the ring which he is still making for us. Here is a look at the 2nd cushion from above that I ended up going with if you''re curious, click on "Real Diamond Image"

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Good-Cut-Cushion-Diamond-1202760.asp

The odd thing - James Allen actually rated the above stone as having a "Good" cut prior to my purchase, I''m positive as I printed out the specs on it. But when I brought up the page again tonight, I noticed that the cut was now rated two grades higher as "Ideal." Really bizarre, as I have no idea why they''d change the rating post-purchase?!? Maybe I did find a "diamond in the rough," though, as this was the most beautifully-proportioned of all the online cushions I looked at and very minimally-included for a stone rated SI1! And I owe it all to Pricescope, who taught me what I needed to know to pick out the perfect stone!!

Waiting for the call any day now to tell me that the stone is set and the ring is ready...

 

[chrono]

I''m glad you were able to look at the two cushions side by side. That''s the best way to make a decision as to which one to pick. It''s hard to describe the look of a small tabled stone versus a larger tabled stone. There are some who like the large table look but a majority of PSers prefer the smaller table look. It gives it a more antique-y look and less table glare.

 

[cinnamongurl]

LoRez...I know how difficult this search can be!! I too have been reading the posts about Cushions, and was so caught up in the numbers and percentages. You really need to see them in person. Even jewelers that have sent me pictures through email has been tough, because you just need to see the way they sparkle and perform in person. I am going to see a potential candidate this weekend, and hope for the best, because I too am ready for the search to be over!!! Good luck, and I can''t wait to hear your update and see your beautiful pictures! It will all be worth it once it''s on your finger!

 

[Rhino]

Just to add my .02c, the table/depth relationship isn''t a hard fast rule. There are cushions with comparable table/depths that are fine although you stand a better chance of locating a winner with smaller table/greater depth combos. In house ratings of "Ideal" are not reliable. It is a term exclusive to AGS and they do not grade cushions as being "ideal" so dont'' place too much stock in that.

 

[Gypsy]

Beautiful cushion!

 

[LoRez]

Date: 3/8/2009 12:59:43 AM
Author: Rhino
Just to add my .02c, the table/depth relationship isn''t a hard fast rule. There are cushions with comparable table/depths that are fine although you stand a better chance of locating a winner with smaller table/greater depth combos. In house ratings of ''Ideal'' are not reliable. It is a term exclusive to AGS and they do not grade cushions as being ''ideal'' so dont'' place too much stock in that.

Fair enough - if there is ANYTHING I have learned with cushions, it''s that there are no hard and fast rules! I am glad I was able to view the two side-by-side, though, because whatever "magic factor" it was that made the difference only became apparent then.

I didn''t place much stock initially in the James Allen "Good" rating, as I knew that wasn''t part of the GIA cert. and subjective based on the seller! More than anything, I was just baffled as to how & why it changed from "Good" to "Ideal" on their site post-purchase?!? The important thing is that I found a stone that I''m happy with, and I think she will love