Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Thoughts on these two cushions, please (pic attached)

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

pixley

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
1,596
Hi everyone! My cushion search may finally be over. These two cushions are on hold for me at the moment: both are cushion brilliants. The one on the left is a 1.08ct G VS1 and the right is a 1.10ct F VS2, EX/EX 56%T, 68.9%D. I would like to make a decision soon. Am leaning towards the 1.10 F/VS2 mainly for the colorless factor. Both stones are gorgeous, brilliant and fiery, and both are L/W ratio of 1.15. Any opinions would be great! Thanks for taking a look :)

audscushions.jpg
 
Date: 12/13/2007 10:27:55 PM
Author:pixley
Hi everyone! My cushion search may finally be over. These two cushions are on hold for me at the moment: both are cushion brilliants. The one on the left is a 1.08ct G VS1 and the right is a 1.10ct F VS2, EX/EX 56%T, 68.9%D and would like to make a decision soon. Am leaning towards the 1.10 F/VS2 mainly for the colorless factor. Both stones are gorgeous, brilliant and fiery, and both are L/W ratio of 1.15. Any opinions would be great! Thanks for taking a look :)
Click to expand...
Pixley - they both look lovely.

I''m not a cushion expert at all, however, if you are just looking for opinion, before I even read what you wrote about them, the F VS2 spoke to me
30.gif


This may not be an unbiased opinion since it may just be the subtle color difference "speaking" to me ...
20.gif


All this being said, and no "technical" diamond stuff being taken into account ... My vote is for the 1.10 F VS2!

One of those babies is going to look amazing when you one a home! Good luck making your final cut!
2.gif
 
They are both beautiful; it is weird because I think they look similar. Have you seen these in person? I am glad you found 2 you like
9.gif
 
Unfortunately, I haven''t seen either in person, but have video footage and more pics. The vendor''s enthusiasm for these stones is pretty infectious, so I put my faith in his recommendation for both.
 
I think both have a chance. Based on just the one pic, I''m leaning towards the one on the left. Something about it, but I can''t put my finger on it. I would look at them in person and at many different angles in many different lights. Good Luck!
 
I like the one on the right, not due to the colour but there seem to be a bit of extra liveliness captured in the picture. Since my comment is probably not accurate as it is based in a picture, what does the vendor say? Which is is preference and why?

ETA
If you have more pictures, please post them. It could show more of a difference between the two. Any chance of an Idealscope or ASET?
 
They do look very similar, but from this one photo, I''d probably choose the one on the right (the F).
 
More pics coming right up. The vendor prefers the 1.10, but he says they are nearly identical and would make a perfect set of earrings, HA! This is the 1.10 F/VS2 by itself. I think the images make it look a little more elongated than it is IRL, at least that''s on my monitor...

audsfvs2.jpg
 
Again, G/1.08 on the left, F/1.10 on the right.

audssidexside.jpg
 
Fromt the first picture the one on the left is calling to me, but I don''t know why...
 
The facet pattern and symmetry of the G (on the left) is much more appealing to me personally. It's funny, because when I first opened the thread, I thought that the lower color stone was the one on the right. So, it's clear to me that I like the the one on the left. Honestly, I highly doubt you would see color in either stone of that size especially since they are such nice cuts. But, they are similar looking stones, so my question is whether there is a substantial price difference?
 
I'm feeling the same thing about the stone on the left. I think the symmetry is a bit more gentle in that stone. The outline even seems slightly more curved as well, which I prefer. Should I ask for more technical images?
 
Gosh, its so hard to tell...the stones look nearly identical!!

But.....to me, the stone on the left has softer edges, stone on the right more of a ''squarish" look then the other stone. I would probably just go on personal shape preference and the price....
 
I prefer the faceting on the stone of the left. I personally like the shape of the stone on the left better also. Although, the stone on the right does have a little more whiteness to it. Gosh, this is tough! Which one are you leaning towards?
 
I would take the left in a heartbeat if only it were an F. Maybe if it weren''t sitting next to an F, it wouldn''t be such an issue. He says it''s actually on the low side of G, so it may not be noticeable once it''s set.
 
Dont worry about the F vs. the G. You will never notice that difference in real life....I have a G and it is completely WHITE. If you would take the one on the left in a heartbeat, then go for it!!!! Its a gorgeous stone!!!!
 
I can''t see any color. But I immediately liked the one on the left. On closer inspection, I can''t exactly quantify why, but the left was an immediate grabber for me.
 
I am no expert, but I like the one on the right. I was drawn to that one first.
 
Wow, that''s a really difficult call. Initially my eye naturally went to the stone on the right. Are those stones 4 or 8 pavilion? 4 if I were guessing. Beautiful !
 
the one on the right caught my eye just on initial appearance in that specific photograph.

ETA: "that specific photograph" refers to the first one in this thread. I didn't scroll down and see the others until after I posted this.
 
I''d take the 1.10 because the vendor is recommending it (if the vendor is Mark at ERD, or Bill Pearlman, or another respected PS vendor). But I was thinking they could be earrings as well. They''re really lovely.

What are the dimensions on them?
 
Hmmm, not sure what the dimensions are on the G because it wasn't one that I initially asked Jonathan to call in. The 1.10 is 6.49 x 5.62 x 3.87, EX/EXbut the 1.08 seems to face up a smidge bigger due to what seems like a difference in depth. GOG doesn't back stones that are below VG/VG, so I'd assume the 1.08 has at least VG polish and VG symmetry if not better. Here's a link to the snazzy video that Jonathan captured: http://www.goodoldgold.com/videos/4RECTCUSHIONS.wmv I asked him about the 1.1 looking less fiery under the top half of the table, but he said it was just the photography angle and that it's identical to the 1.08. If anyone's looking for an H, the far right stone in the video is quite the powerhouse!
 
It''s interesting that you should ask, Pauly. The cert for the stone on the right had the old mine brilliant facet pattern (so I got excited) but I think it''s a modern cushion brilliant instead. Here''s a link to the GIA report for it: http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?track=email_a_frield_email&pid=LD00932679&filter_id=0#grading_report I''ll post the video of a side by side comparison once I track down the link.

OK, I give up trying to understand GIE and cushions.
1.gif
From the pictures I would have guessed Modern cushion brilliant as well; however you and I have the exact same GIE plot! I was going for antique cushion/old mine brilliant, which I think I have, who knows though. In the end I love the stone and I guess that''s all that matters. Conratulations on which ever stone you pick, I don''t think you can go wrong.
 
I think most often, the GIA plots match up with the stones, but not in my case. You definitely have one of those antiquey, old style cushions - it is so delicious, it''s like a big bowl of vanilla ice cream - 3 scoops side-by-side! I think whoever graded the 1.10/F that I''m looking at must''ve had a brain fart when he or she chose that plot, cause it just doesn''t match up at all. I may just have to wait for the upgrade opportunity to snag myself an antique style cushion.
 
Yea. You really can''t rely on the facet pattern on a lab report to really grasp the actual appearance. These stones must be seen (and preferably by someone who really knows what they''re looking at) to really formulate any kind of accurate assessment. The angles to which teh diamond has been cut to will really impact the stones appearance and in fancies you have two primary factors playing and causing the contrast ... leakage and head/body obstruction. A poor balance of either can throw the optics out into left field and renders alot of technologies ineffective for making a good assessment too. Relying on lab reports is useless for determining beauty or appearance in fancies.

Really ... as far as beauty between teh 1.08 and the 1.10 ... its a coin toss. Both jam. In the spot lighting you can see one stone lighting up in areas and another in others. The 3rd stone in the vid has an appearance that is common many radiants and lots of other cushions we see. That crushed ice look.

Peace,
 
Date: 12/14/2007 6:22:46 PM
Author: Rhino
Yea. You really can''t rely on the facet pattern on a lab report to really grasp the actual appearance. These stones must be seen (and preferably by someone who really knows what they''re looking at) to really formulate any kind of accurate assessment. The angles to which teh diamond has been cut to will really impact the stones appearance and in fancies you have two primary factors playing and causing the contrast ... leakage and head/body obstruction. A poor balance of either can throw the optics out into left field and renders alot of technologies ineffective for making a good assessment too. Relying on lab reports is useless for determining beauty or appearance in fancies.

Really ... as far as beauty between teh 1.08 and the 1.10 ... its a coin toss. Both jam. In the spot lighting you can see one stone lighting up in areas and another in others. The 3rd stone in the vid has an appearance that is common many radiants and lots of other cushions we see. That crushed ice look.

Peace,
Click to expand...
I agree after seeing the pics and the videos. They look similar which is so weird; either would be gorgeous!
 
Date: 12/14/2007 6:28:00 PM
Author: Skippy123

Date: 12/14/2007 6:22:46 PM
Author: Rhino
Yea. You really can''t rely on the facet pattern on a lab report to really grasp the actual appearance. These stones must be seen (and preferably by someone who really knows what they''re looking at) to really formulate any kind of accurate assessment. The angles to which teh diamond has been cut to will really impact the stones appearance and in fancies you have two primary factors playing and causing the contrast ... leakage and head/body obstruction. A poor balance of either can throw the optics out into left field and renders alot of technologies ineffective for making a good assessment too. Relying on lab reports is useless for determining beauty or appearance in fancies.

Really ... as far as beauty between teh 1.08 and the 1.10 ... its a coin toss. Both jam. In the spot lighting you can see one stone lighting up in areas and another in others. The 3rd stone in the vid has an appearance that is common many radiants and lots of other cushions we see. That crushed ice look.

Peace,
Click to expand...
I agree after seeing the pics and the videos. They look similar which is so weird; either would be gorgeous!
Click to expand...
Yea ... with the unpredictability in appearance in the world of cushions, or fancy shapes for that matter, to find 2 that look so similar isn''t always an easy find. Can I interest you in earrings pixley?
3.gif
jk

As I look at the original pictures too, it appears the G is a tad more contrasty in appearance and becuase of that may grab the eye. Ie. the pattern of lights and darks has what some consider a more pleasing effect in the photography. That is something that can be a little deceptive about still photography sometimes (and even reflector images) because the contrast that is caused from lens reflection of a camera oftentimes isn''t the same as human heady/body reflection and the appearance of contrast brightness in a diamond.

To the eyes, they are really close. Hope that helped.

All the best,
 
I hate the 3rd one in the vid, too be honest id go with 4 and save some money.
H would be fine color wise and the performance is as good as 1 or 2.
Honestly I don''t think you can go wrong with 1 2 or 4...
that doesn''t help you pick from 1 or 2... but honestly I have no preference performance wise and color is a personal choice and a cost trade off only you can make.
 
Date: 12/14/2007 3:27:08 PM
Author: pixley
It's interesting that you should ask, Pauly. The cert for the stone on the right had the old mine brilliant facet pattern (so I got excited) but I think it's a modern cushion brilliant instead.
Click to expand...
This is hilarious. I had BN send me that one some time ago because the plotted pavilion style and dimensions are what I was looking for. The GIA grader simply picked the wrong plot. No mystery with facting styles, no gray area, no doubts. A simple human error at the GIA. It is an eight-main modern that looks exactly like all the other stones those guys produce in that style.
 
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