Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Please help us evaluate these PICTURES!!!

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
cushioncut

cushioncut

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jul 4, 2004
Messages
233
Hello,

We are trying to decide whether or not to buy this stone and we’d love some objective opinions. We like this stone because of its square shape (which is somewhat hard to come by), and its large facets...

Here are the specs, and pictures of the stone are below in next 2 posts…

Please let us know what you think of these pictures… Some things we are wondering about, in particular are:

1. Do you think this stone will be lively, and have a lot of fire? The pictures look very grey and white… is this normal or a bad sign?
2. Does this Sarin look good?
3. Do you think this culet looks unusual (in the profile shots), or very large for a medium culet? (I thought medium culets were invisible to the naked eye, how apparent do you think this one would be?)
4. Do you think the crown is too flat?
5. Do you think the bowtie is too pronounced?

If there is anything else you notice about this stone that might help us make our decision, please share your thoughts. We truly appreciate any help. Thank you very much in advance!


ct wt 1.78 cushion
color g
clar vs1
meas. 7.59 X 7.36 X 4.48
depth 60.9
table 59
girdle thin to thick, f
culet med
pol and sym good
Flor no

pavilion depth 47.4%
crown height 9.8%
pavilion angle 44
crown angle 25.9

cushion178-.jpg
 
more pictures...

cushion178a-.jpg
 
last pictures...

cushion178b-.jpg
 
Any Flourescence?
 
no... there is no flourescence.
 
My opinion is yuck!
Sorry but the bowtie and the sewer pipe running down the center just trip my yuck responce.
 
----------------
On 9/4/2004 6:31:36 PM strmrdr wrote:

My opinion is yuck!

Sorry but the bowtie and the sewer pipe running down the center just trip my yuck responce.----------------
Click to expand...



Thank you very much for your honest opinion. I don't know much about diamonds, and I wasn't sure if that was a bowtie or not
sad.gif
, or how bad it was... is it really bad? Also, can you clarify what you mean when you say sewer pipe?

I have looked at those other diamonds -- thank you for the links. I tend to prefer non-branded stones to the jubilee and regent, because I like larger facets...

Thanks again, and please keep the opinions coming...
 
The hole looking area in the center is what I was calling a sewer pipe it is caused by the oversized culet.
It looks like the end of a sewer pipe on the center of the stone.
The bow tie is pretty bad too in my opinion.

cushion178b1.jpg
 
This diamond looks a lot like an old mine cut with the large culet showing.
 
Well, it definitely looks like an old fashioned cushion...old mine...Do you prefer a more modern brilliant cushion? I have to say I don't like the big facets or the big open culet. Those are some big chunky facets...common in the older cushion. Buying a cushion online is goinmg to be very hard.
 
This stone will have big bold flashes of fire.
Round brilliants have bigger bolder flashes, most fancies have a (ideally) larger number of smaller pinfire flashes.
For a cushion this stone will have fewer and even larger flashes than a round brilliant.

If you want to findout what I mean go and compare princess and round diamonds then make your decision.
It will be more like an old cut, only it will have much better light return.

I doubt in this sixed stone your eye will ever be able to identify the culet (sewer).
 
STRM, ... this is an old miner and I never heard of "bow tie" about them.

It's not the same, this is an awesome example as far as I know. Few would be as brilliant!

What you call "bow tie" are those large pavilion facets that produce the "flash" that Garyy talks about. It would have been bad if they were not dark on the Iscope - than you would have a dull old mine. This is a brilliant one
1.gif


Here's (LINK) another OMC wit full optics in place, FYU. There are not too many, but this all for the better, I would think
read.gif
 
Among modern cusions, the Regent could be the brightest. But among old mine cuts, yours is a very nice one, IMO.
4.gif


3VH.JPG
 
Thank you everyone for your opinions. I really appreciate your thoughts on this cushion.

Garry, do you really think this culet would not be visible to the naked eye?

I am glad people think this would not be a dull stone... It's hard for me to tell from these pictures.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the crown height? That is one of my main concerns with this stone. It seems shallow to me, at 9 % -- do you think this is a big deal, or not so much?

I've included a picture of the look I'd love to find. (Of course, not yellow or in the 100 ct range
2.gif
) -- In your opinions, do you think this stone could have a similar look? Do you think it could be this lively?

Thank you all again for any feedback!

allnatt.jpg
 
It looks to me like the faceting might be different in the yellow stone compared to the other cushion you posted. The table looks smaller too. I'll venture to guess that the yellow stone doesn't have nearly as good light return as the first stone, but the light/dark contrast might be better in the yellow stone. Who knows?

Have you considered looking for a yellow stone instead?
 
Hey Valeria

What scale does GemEx use when it scores a cushion? That one seems to have a lot of leakage for a "triple VH".
 
Hmmmm
The look on that stone works to make color look more intense and better, but is a killer in a colorless diamond.
IF you like the broken glass look then you need a radiant.
in my opinion (personal) cushions are one of the worst cuts for colorless diamonds - rectangular radiant is probably THE worst.
 
----------------
On 9/6/2004 12:35:10 AM Rank Amateur wrote:


Hey Valeria

What scale does GemEx use when it scores a cushion? That one seems to have a lot of leakage for a 'triple VH'.----------------
Click to expand...



The respective OMC is listed in GoodOldGold's archive, and you can find it down the link in my previous post... The scale used is that for ovals (it is noted on top of the Bscope immage).

If you do want the cushion cut with the most light return (as garry classifies them in his post above from best to worst
2.gif
) than that would be a branded H&A cusion (there was one posted on "show me the ring" and GoodOldGold carries them too). Those will have a different look than an old mine.

And... the faceting of very, very large gems is not perfectly reproductible in smaller ones - it makes no sense at all since the facet design has to achieve different goals in each case.

Hope this helps.

About the crown height: well, 9% cannot be that bad if 10% is the desirable target
naughty.gif
. I don't think the difference is significant at all. Not to mention that these target numbers keep changing with the wind. I would not be surprised by a 15% high crown on an old stone, but that is not necessarily better at all. The one you found is definitely convincing enough to ask to see it in person. Besides, there is a return policy, right
2.gif


About the lickeage in the other OMC - well, the Bscope evaluates diamonds in direct light, so very reflective facets compensate for lickeage overall. Fancy cuts usually do have some lickeage and... I am not sure it is all bad. Those branded H&A cusions and squares were cut to appear all red on the Iscope - like deal rounds do - and cahieve best light return. Other diamonds are not held to the same standard. It would be great if you do get to judge the difference in person, I woudl think.
 
Thank you Valeria and RA for all of the information...

Someone mentioned light/dark contrast and that was a thing I was worried about. These pictures looks so gray to me, what does this mean? Less fire, or less brilliance, or both?

We need to make a decision to buy or not by tomorrow, and we are still undecided
sad.gif
. They do have a ten day return policy, so I guess we would not lose too much if we saw it in person and it ended up not being what we're looking for -- but I'd like to avoid that if there are obvious problems... It's so hard to tell from pictures!

Does anyone else have any opinions?

I appreciate all the help!
 
----------------
On 9/6/2004 10:12:42 PM cushioncut wrote:



These pictures looks so gray to me, what does this mean? Less fire, or less brilliance, or both?

----------------
Click to expand...



That's what diffuse lighting does to a diamond. I think the pictures are meant to show shape and facet pattern, not brilliance and fire.

If I get this right, the point would be to have an "honest" type of immage that does not make diamonds look better than they are. The result is that all diamonds look ...as you can see. The arrows pattern in a H&A round looks very obvious in such pictures (the ACAs at WF are presented these way...) but what it does to fancies should be outlawd
11.gif
 
Thank you again Valeria -- that really helps!
 
so, cc, what are you going to do? is that in fact an OMC? i really like the look of the older cut stones, culet and all. i hope it works out for you.
1.gif
 
----------------
On 9/7/2004 11:50:23 AM reena wrote:

so, cc, what are you going to do? is that in fact an OMC? i really like the look of the older cut stones, culet and all. i hope it works out for you.
1.gif
----------------
Click to expand...



Thanks -- I like the look of older stones too. This is a new stone, it's a cushion, not an OMC... I love the facets but am not a big fan of the visible culet... We are still deciding what to do...


I know you just got a cushion -- would you say yours has large facets?


Some people say you can't get the large facet look without having the open culet, can anyone comment on this?
 
hm. i would say it has relatively large facets, but perhaps not as compared to an actual antique-cut stone. if you like the big facets, have you thought at all about getting an actual antique cushion?

where are you located and which vendor are you using?
 
We have looked at some antiques, but find we prefer new stones -- they tend to be better cut, and more alive. I'd like to find a modern cut, that still has a lot of old style cushion charm... From the pictures, I think yours looks like this... But most cushions we see don't even really look like cushions at all, except for maybe the rounded corners...

This stone would be really ideal for me, except for that damn open culet
sad.gif
. We may buy it anyway to see how noticable it is. Still deciding...

I will PM you with the vendor name --

Thanks again!
 
I love old mine cuts, and this looks like a nice stone in a similar style. The ideal scope shows it returning a ton of light for a cut of this kind. The culet ("sewer pipe") likely won't even be visible, and if it is, that's part of the old-fashioned charm of this cut style. I love the big, blocky flashes of light from these stones. But then, I'm an old fashioned gal; I hate princesses for their pinpoint sparkle.

I think you should look at it in person.
 
We have decided to buy the stone, and then take advantage of the 10 day return policy if it turns out not to be right for us in person. I think it has a lot going for it, and there is a good chance it'll work out for us. Thanks again to everyone for your help. If I like it in person, more pictures to come!
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top