The journey for my mini upgrade for my 25th anniversary...

[Shay37]

Are they pics, or gem advisor files? I think that''s why we can''t see them. You have to click on the file at the bottom of the post and open them in the Gem advisor software or some other such nonsense.

I am so computer illiterate that I cannot figure this one out at all, hence the nonsense part. I did not mean you at all Jonathan.

shay

 

[mrssalvo]

i would think Rhino would have changed the format before posting into a jpeg or something that we would be able to see with having to download things onto our hard drives..i''m sure something happended after he attached the file because it''s showing up on the bottom of his post but for whatever reason the picture is not showing up..

storm???

 

[Kaleigh]

Yes Storm are you there???

 

[ecf8503]

You have to have GemAdvisor on your system, and open, before opening the .gem files for Deanne''s stones. I downloaded it off of GOG''s site a while ago (don''t know if it is here on PS - never looked!) The files open fine when GemAdvisor is open. Once it (the master program) is open, then open Deanne''s files, and let it sit for a minute (watch the bar in the lower right corner, as it is downloading info or "calculating cut quality"). When it is done, then you can press "play" (the little green triangle) and it will "rock" for you to see how it looks moving around.

 

[ecf8503]

Here''s still shots, top down view, from the files Rhino posted - this is #1:

 

[ecf8503]

Here''s #2:

 

[ecf8503]

And here''s #3:

 

[ecf8503]

And here are the Imagescope views generated in the file - first #1:

 

[ecf8503]

Here''s the Imagescope for #2:

 

[ecf8503]

Here''s the Imagescope for #3:

 

[ecf8503]

OK I''ll stick my neck out and give the first opinion (gulp). After looking at all the files, all the views and the stones moving around, .............

I vote #3 hands down!

 

[MissAva]

Ditto!

 

[Shay37]

Me too, for #3. It looks to be rock-em sock-em.

shay

 

[pyramid]

I prefer No.1.

Editing to add, I have not seen them moving around though. I know there is leakage under the table but it looks more interesting to me and I like the look at the sides too, I also prefer the outline shape. There are all beautiful though. I do think that no. 2 seems to have a more defined square shape to it - maybe because the table and star facets show this more in the picture.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

#1 is my least favorite. Too many facets maybe (I don''t now, there is just something about it I do not like) #2 and #3 look great. I would pick either of those.

 

[Kaleigh]

I like #3 as well, but want to see real pics also.

 

[Rhino]

Hi folks.

My bad for assuming everyone had Gem Advisor installed. Thanks ECF for posting the pics for Deanne.

I have a question for ya ECF... did you arrive at your conclusion after viewing just the image of the stones alone or after viewing them along with the red reflector images?

 

[ecf8503]

Hey Rhino! I knew the second I opened the files, with the first image supplied, whether I liked it in a general sense based on my own opinions on shape and general faceting. I looked at the initial image first, then played the motion file, then clicked through all the reflector images, etc.

I liked #1 the least - looks too much like "cracked ice" in a radiant (which I don't care for most of the time) - I like to see more pattern, and that one to me lookes like it was some new cutter's practice stone (sorry if that sounds harsh). In the gem file, the original top down pic looks like the stone is 3-dimensional (like an Asscher you can "fall into", but that's good in an asscher) - in this one it looks like a cone - like you can walk around the perimeter and one wrong step and oops! you fall into never-never land. Then I looked at the motion file ( to "see" it), then red reflector images, etc. The "deepness" in the center seems to be where all the light fell out too......

The second one is ok - the corners are a little sharp for my tastes, and there's not a lot of contrast in the first pic, and I don't care for the "slivery" look of the facets in what I think a cushion should look like (my inexperienced preconceived notion that cushions should have bigger, chunkier facets). It's a pretty stone, and I promise I won't throw it away if you send it to me just to get it out of your inventory...

The third one is fabulous to me - I loved it the second I saw it, as it looks SUSPICIOUSLY like the 1.21ct H SI2 of yours I've been drooling over for MONTHS and pointed Deanna toward on day one... Oh - wait - I think it IS the same stone......

 

[Maya Moonstone]

Hi

I really like the shape of #2, and the "look" of the facets of #3. (forgive me if I don't use diamond speak

)

Is it possible to post the specs of number 2 and 3, as well as the facet patterns, if the stones were graded by the GIA?

Thanks
Maya

ETA: I don't care for #1 at all. It is too busy and reminds me of a radiant. Or am I interpreting the virtual pictures wrong? Is it possible to have "real" photos?

 

[moremoremore]

Oh boy! Three to chose from!!!
From what one can tell without looking at the actual stone, I don''t like #1 AT ALL in either shot. It''s hard on the eyes...too much "confusion" for lack of a better word...and all that leakage in the middle?
#2 is nicer and #3 is really pretty to me...but I love that little X thing going on in the middle....
You''d still need to see the stones in person! (or in one of J''s great pix)

 

[moremoremore]

Is this actual #3? I've always thought it was such a pretty stone and a great value!!

 

[ecf8503]

I believe it is! Lovely, isn''t it?

 

[windowshopper]

i vote #2--I like the center the best and the squared corners. The third is very pretty but its one of them those cushions that looks like a cross between a radiant, an oval and brilliant.......#2 really is unique in that it has the more modern brilliant center but the squared corners that give it a really antique look

 

[DonaBella]

Hi everyone...I thought I''d check in since I am having a difficult time sleeping...isn''t that interesting what Rhino shared with everybody? Those simulated cushions look amazing and challenging at the same time...at least to me they do. I am looking into the third one, just in case anyone was curious!

I have alot of questions for the guys, but I am confident that they will have answers for me...

BTW...I am feeling a lot better...started on some rx meds for the flu and actually had an appetite today.

Mark w/ ERD also spoke to me late the other day and said he will have stones out to me late next week so I should have an opportunity to physically look some diamonds over from both companies and decide which is more "me."

I hate to say it, but if I can get a 1.21 size cushion and she is sparkly and "talks" to me, that can be pretty persuasive! In all fairness, Mark with ERD has been called the "cushion wizard" around here on PS so I need to give him a fair opportunity to show me what he can come up with. I have been very awe-struck by what he has provided both MMM and Reena, just to mention two that I know of. Those are gorgeous stones and ones I find myself drawn to to look at over and over. I also liked Maya Moonstone''s.

Well...it''s 12:25am here in So. Ca so I best get my not-quite-well-self to bed...

Just wanted to say hi to you all!

 

[moremoremore]

THanks for the kind words deanna...mark is definitely a wizard...and Jon''s got a cape and tights too

I think you''ll find a super cushion with these fellas working on the case...

 

[ecf8503]

Date: 10/30/2005 2:30:21 AM
Author: DeannaBanaisn''t that interesting what Rhino shared with everybody? Those simulated cushions look amazing and challenging at the same time...at least to me they do. I am looking into the third one, just in case anyone was curious!

Yes... interesting... that the first 2 AREN''T EVEN REAL STONES!!!!!!!!! I bet they''d be interesting to look at if they were real, though. (But I still like #3!!!!!!!!!!!)

Are you having some stones shipped to you?

Glad to hear you are feeling better, Deanne. Here''s to a speedy recovery!

 

[moremoremore]

Oh that''s very interesting !! LOL.... You tricked us all LOL!!!
I really thought #1 was this one on GOG. Sure looks just like it.

 

[ecf8503]

I think it's kind of the same stone. Looks like they changed the carat wt by 0.01ct, and dorked around with some of the parameters to "create" the first "stone" posted.

Sneaky, sneaky, sneaky, Rhino!!!!!!

Here's the Real McCoy from GOG's site (this is the file that goes with the pic MMM just posted above):

 

[ecf8503]

Here''s #1 again (1.53ct "stone")

The "same"?????????

 

[DonaBella]

Just a little update for everyone... Mark w/ERD has called me and is sending out to me via FEDEX 2 cushions and they should arrive tomorrow!!! I am excited and anxious... On that note, I also have decided to call GOG and ask Jonathan or Tim to send out the 1.21 H cushion that all of you saw as stone #3 in the simulation for my consideration. Now, I have a quick but important question...Am I vain or narrowminded to be more drawn to be leaning more towards the larger, bigger stone? Mark said the stones he is sending out are VS and E or F in color, but I am wondering if I will notice clarity and color as much as I want size...ohhh...I know I will know when the stones actually get here, but can any of you help a girl out here???

HELP!

I am excited and nervous...so silly...huh?

BTW, I am feeling a tad better...