mountainlion
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2014
- Messages
- 12
Hi all, I been lurking for a while and using what I've learned to come down to a couple fancy yellow cushion cut diamonds from different local vendors in my area. One vendor does only loose diamond sourcing (no inventory); the other is a retail jeweler in the area that has given me good pricing (I think) on a loose stone. This diamond will be for an e-ring. I was wondering if anyone could offer their opinions.
2.75ct FY Cushion, VVS2, 68% table, 67.9% depth, VG polish, Good Symmetry. Faint Fl. 7.71 x 7.66 x 5.20, GIA. Price: $19k.
This one I'm on my own for analyzing in person, it’s from the retail jeweler so of course they want to sell it. It certainly shows big! Color from the directly over the top down is good. The table on it is BIG compared to other cushions I’ve seen.
The main issue I have seen with this stone is when viewing it slight angles. It really seems to lose its color and sparkle and you can see through it. From my reading, judging windowing effect should be considered only when looking from the top down view as angles tend to show windows more, but the reality is, on a finger the diamond is going to be seen at various angles and the windowing seems bad to me, even at slight angles. The band we have picked out for either stone has an open head/prongs so, the effect will likely be more noticeable than a more closed basket type setting.
Below are some pictures of this stone and what I'm seeing. I realize pictures can be taken to make a diamond look amazing or completely awful. I think these did an ok job of actually representing some of what I’m seeing.
The poor sparkle and windowing views:
The price seemed very good. If you think this stone looks like it’s performing poorly then that’s all I need to hear…if I’m judging the windowing and light performance incorrectly and the diamond is great, that’s great too. I know pics only go so far, but I don’t know if I’m being overly critical. Thoughts and guidance on this stone are much appreciated. I can show my other top choice from the sourcing vendor as well. This one was 2.3 ct and has more of a crushed ice look with amazing sparkle. Much less windowing and it was analyzed and grading verified by the gemologist at the sourcing vendor. Thanks!
2.75ct FY Cushion, VVS2, 68% table, 67.9% depth, VG polish, Good Symmetry. Faint Fl. 7.71 x 7.66 x 5.20, GIA. Price: $19k.
This one I'm on my own for analyzing in person, it’s from the retail jeweler so of course they want to sell it. It certainly shows big! Color from the directly over the top down is good. The table on it is BIG compared to other cushions I’ve seen.
The main issue I have seen with this stone is when viewing it slight angles. It really seems to lose its color and sparkle and you can see through it. From my reading, judging windowing effect should be considered only when looking from the top down view as angles tend to show windows more, but the reality is, on a finger the diamond is going to be seen at various angles and the windowing seems bad to me, even at slight angles. The band we have picked out for either stone has an open head/prongs so, the effect will likely be more noticeable than a more closed basket type setting.
Below are some pictures of this stone and what I'm seeing. I realize pictures can be taken to make a diamond look amazing or completely awful. I think these did an ok job of actually representing some of what I’m seeing.
The poor sparkle and windowing views:
The price seemed very good. If you think this stone looks like it’s performing poorly then that’s all I need to hear…if I’m judging the windowing and light performance incorrectly and the diamond is great, that’s great too. I know pics only go so far, but I don’t know if I’m being overly critical. Thoughts and guidance on this stone are much appreciated. I can show my other top choice from the sourcing vendor as well. This one was 2.3 ct and has more of a crushed ice look with amazing sparkle. Much less windowing and it was analyzed and grading verified by the gemologist at the sourcing vendor. Thanks!