Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Urgent Advice Needed re: Cushion Diamond Purchase

J

Jeff_Davis

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
7
Hello, I would like to get the view of this forum on a diamond I have selected. I am hoping to purchase this diamond shortly so your input would be greatly appreciated.

The diamond is a 3.01 carat, GIA certified H color, VS2 clarity, Excellent Polish, Excellent Symmetry, 62% table, 68.4% depth, slightly thick to thick girdle, with no culet and no fluorescence. The retailer says it has the equivalent of a very good cut grade based on its table and depth percentage. Based on the attached GIA diagram I believe this is a Hybrid Cushion with large discernible facets that will not look like 'crushed ice'.

The price of this diamond is mid 30s and the retailer is giving me a credit for the full cost of a diamond I purchased from them over 5 years ago (that engagement did not work out).

I'd like to get your thoughts on the overall diamond as well as whether you believe this will look like 'crushed ice' which I am not particularly interested in. I have attached the GIA report, but do not have a picture of the diamond and it is sight unseen, but I can return it if it does not meet my expectations - hopefully that will not be necessary. I understand it is difficult to determine exactly how a fancy shape diamond will look sight unseen, however, any input you can provide would be helpful.

Many thanks in advance for all your input.
 

Attachments

There is no way we can give an opinion without a picture. If you look at a site with pictures, you can see that roughly one out of 10 cushions might be worth considering. So you could be sending for several before you come up with a winner. Get magnified photos when it comes in and we can try to help you.

I will say in comparing it to this one, I think the table might be a little large and it also has a smaller diameter than this one does. But I will be interested in seeing the pictures.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9647/
 
Faceting is crushed ice.

And I agree with Diamondseeker.
 
Thanks for your reply. The diamond you highlight at goodoldgold in your link is approximately $15,000 (roughly 50%) more expensive than the one I am looking at. I would take a slightly larger table and slightly smaller diameter for a $15,000 savings.
 
Thanks Gypsy. That is a nice looking diamond, but I don't want to go less than an H color since it will be more easily noticeable at 3 carats - especially in a cushion. Also, the girdle is thin at some points and may be subject to chipping. Lastly, everything I read suggests that I shouldn't go with a depth greater than 70% and a table less than 60%.
 
I understand you've done your research. But... your information, while not incorrect, is not entirely correct either.

1. I color will be a bit more noticeably warmer in a larger stone-- if you are comparing two stones that are exact in every other way. But you are not. Because you are looking at fancy cuts- cushions specifically and there is no set facet pattern or cut parameters that would standardize cushions. And the H you are considering has the crushed ice patterning that retains color and traps it. The different between H and I is not huge, and light return and faceting are what matters. A poorly cut H or even G will show more body color than a well cut I with great light return. And the I stone I posted for you has an 8 main cushion pattern (most desireable facet pattern in a modern cushion) and to eye (and I like DS have been doing this for many years) it shows great performance (which you would confirm with an ASET image that JA can provide for you). So, the I could very well be whiter than the H you are looking at. And I is still very white. And even Tiffany carries I color stones.

2. Thin Girdles are not a big danger. Very thin are. Thin, especially in a range as listed for this stone, just means that you should have a gemologist look at it and tell you whether there is any risk. Which JA can do. Most 'thin' girdles are absolutely find and are even considered desirable, as they lead to more spread.

3. Depth. On this, you must understand WHY people say that depths over 70 are not desirable. It is not because of performance, especially as some cushion facet patterns REQUIRE a deeper cut to balance performance. It is SOLELY because of spread. What is spread? The dimensions-- the face up size of the diamond. HOWEVER, as with color-- light performance is what matters here as well. A stone that has smaller dimensions but is brighter and especially has edge to edge brilliance, will LOOK to the eye larger than one that does not have the same light return, but is larger in terms of dimensions.

4. Table. Table less than 60 is actually desirable. That usually means a higher crown. And that means more fire. I don't know who told you that. But they are flat wrong. It could be a spread thing again... a smaller table does sometimes mean a tiny bit of spread loss. But this stone faces up nicely for its weight and I wouldn't worry about that in this case.

And everything is case by case with generic cushions.

So I understand you were provided guidelines. H or better... this depth/table... this girdle. But really in this case it has resulted in you rejecting, incorrectly, a potentially gorgeous stone.

Cushions are not rounds. You cannot shop by the numbers, although I understand your desire for comfort might lead you to. You have to shop with performance. Which is why you see certain vendors recommended here for fancy cuts, because those are the ones that provide you with the tools that you need to shop. Namely images, scans, and trained gemologists.

DS linked you to a fabulous BRANDED stone. The reason that stone costs so much is because of the quality control, cutting standards, and faceting. It has 'perfect' light performance. But yes, you do pay for that. So what you want to do if you want to save money is shop for a generic cushion, like the one I linked you to, from a vendor that can provide you with the tools you need to make an educated decision.

And you DO need more education. If you are spending 30K on something... the amount of information you have, as your last post demonstrates, is only enough to make you dangerous. Not effective.

Or you can trust us, if you do not have the time and we can help you find a nice performing diamond in budget. Many of us have the experience and knowledge to help you and recommend stones for you. But that will take a bit of faith on your part.

Now, if I were you, I would put that JA I on hold. No cost. Ask for an ASET image. Then when you get one post it here. If it passes and is a nice stone... you have the option to buy it and have it shipped to you. Free shipping both ways. And 60 days no questions return policy. I guaranteed you that your vendor will not be able to match that. It's completely risk free.

Then take the JA stone in and compare it with your own eyes against the one you posted. Then you can make a choice for yourself. But I can tell you already... the JA stone will likely be the winner in that contest. Its a really lovely cushion.
 
Thanks Gypsy for the detailed thorough reply. My other concern with the JA diamond is the extreme variation in thickness going from thin to extremely thick which can make the diamond appear lopsided or disproportioned. I imagine this is one reason for the symmetry rating of 'good'.
 
Jeff_Davis|1376333468|3501519 said:
Thanks Gypsy for the detailed thorough reply. My other concern with the JA diamond is the extreme variation in thickness going from thin to extremely thick which can make the diamond appear lopsided or disproportioned. I imagine this is one reason for the symmetry rating of 'good'.
Click to expand...

I don't think the thickness of the girdle has anything to do with whether or not a diamond can look lopsided. It has nothing to do with symmetry -- only the girdle.

EDIT: by symmetry, I mean the faceting being matched on either side :))
 
I second everything the other posters have said and want to add:

You said "I would take a slightly larger table and slightly smaller diameter for a $15,000 savings." You also rejected a stone based on the girdle. While I am not suggesting you buy the stones linked in this thread per say, your rejection statements lead me to think you are focusing on the wrong things when evaluating diamonds. The important points of comparison between the stone you selected and the other stones in this thread are not the table, the diameter, and the girdle. The only important point of comparison is the cut quality, which is a much broader and difficult-to-define aspect of diamonds than most literature will lead you to believe. Especially with fancies like cushions. There are few hard and fast rules. But I urge you to focus on facet patterning initially, which can be evaluated from the GIA plot to begin or from photographs, and then move to photographs and/or imaging like ASETs or your own eyes to judge cut quality. Unfortunately, you cannot assess this all-important variable by examining the component parts like table, depth, or girdle. It must be assessed in a gestalt fashion.

ETA:

To get you started thinking more about faceting and cut, take a look at this thread by a resident cushion expert, Charmypoo:

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/cushion-101-my-experience-in-making-a-harry-winston-halo.183473/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/cushion-101-my-experience-in-making-a-harry-winston-halo.183473/[/URL]
 
Dreamer_D|1376336769|3501560 said:
I second everything the other posters have said and want to add:

You said "I would take a slightly larger table and slightly smaller diameter for a $15,000 savings." You also rejected a stone based on the girdle. While I am not suggesting you buy the stones linked in this thread per say, your rejection statements lead me to think you are focusing on the wrong things when evaluating diamonds. The important points of comparison between the stone you selected and the other stones in this thread are not the table, the diameter, and the girdle. The only important point of comparison is the cut quality, which is a much broader and difficult-to-define aspect of diamonds than most literature will lead you to believe. Especially with fancies like cushions. There are few hard and fast rules. But I urge you to focus on facet patterning initially, which can be evaluated from the GIA plot to begin or from photographs, and then move to photographs and/or imaging like ASETs or your own eyes to judge cut quality. Unfortunately, you cannot assess this all-important variable by examining the component parts like table, depth, or girdle. It must be assessed in a gestalt fashion.
Click to expand...

I agree with this 100% -- great explanation, Dreamer!
 
msop04|1376336364|3501551 said:
Jeff_Davis|1376333468|3501519 said:
Thanks Gypsy for the detailed thorough reply. My other concern with the JA diamond is the extreme variation in thickness going from thin to extremely thick which can make the diamond appear lopsided or disproportioned. I imagine this is one reason for the symmetry rating of 'good'.
Click to expand...

I don't think the thickness of the girdle has anything to do with whether or not a diamond can look lopsided. It has nothing to do with symmetry -- only the girdle.

EDIT: by symmetry, I mean the faceting being matched on either side :))
Click to expand...


Yup. Absolutely nothing to do with a diamond looking lopsided. And this one doesn't.

Symmetry rating is not affected by that. But rather by the arrangement of the facets. And this diamonds OPTICAL symmetry is very nice. Again, symmetry rating has to do with facets, not what you see optically.

The good rating on this stone is fine. So is the girdle.


Also to build on what Dreamer is saying: faceting is not enough. Performance: specifically light performance is what matters. You want a bright stone that performs well under various lighting conditions. That's the goal of faceting. To optimize the light return.

The JA ddiamond I liked you to has a great 8 main facet plot. And potentially has great light return (ASET needed). That's why it was recommended by me.
 
Here's an ideal-cut cushion around your price range, though not as large as your 3ct.

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/2.065-g-vs1-cushion-diamond-ags-104066027001

It's AGS graded triple zero (ideal for symmetry, polish, AND light performance), and you'll see the girdle is thin-to-medium. BGD also provides ASETs, updated certs (the one linked has no inclusion plot), and in-house evaluation, which is a lot better than buying blind from a drop-shipper with a cert alone.
 
Thanks to all for your replies. They've been very helpful and as a result I decided to pass on the 3.01 carat diamond I was looking at primarily due to the crushed ice effect you pointed out. I also decided to pass on the James Allen diamond that you highlighted above due to the I color that will be more obvious in a diamond of this size. While some may prefer the so called 'warmer color' that an I color diamond will exhibit, I prefer more of a cool icy white appearance.

With that, I'd like to get your thoughts on this diamond that I am now considering. I have attached a snapshot of the GIA report. The diamond is a 6 point Cushion Brilliant (not modified), 2.79 carat, G, VS1, Good/Good, no fluorescence, no culet, 62% table, 67% depth, thin to extremely thick girdle. The measurements are 9.16 x 7.95 x 5.35 mm, and the L/W ratio is 1.15.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!
 

Attachments

Jeff_Davis|1376333468|3501519 said:
Thanks Gypsy for the detailed thorough reply. My other concern with the JA diamond is the extreme variation in thickness going from thin to extremely thick which can make the diamond appear lopsided or disproportioned. I imagine this is one reason for the symmetry rating of 'good'.
Click to expand...

No. You will NOT be able to see any difference of thickness of the girdle with the naked eye. And judging from the video, you won't be able to see any overall symmetry defects either. I certainly can't. Stop thinking about the numbers at the numbers and use your eyeballs to look at the actual diamonds.
 
Thanks Rhino. I agree the diamond must ultimately be seen in-person. Even pictures and video online do not represent what a diamond will truly look like under different lighting conditions as these are often produced professionally with consistent lighting that is selected to maximize the brilliance of the diamond. Different lighting conditions (natural sun light, LED light, fluorescent light) may reveal more color, fluorescence, etc.

So yes, I agree with you that a diamond must ultimately be seen in-person under different lighting conditions to get a true representation of what it will look like. That wont happen regardless of what website I purchase from. That said, if there are no other concerns raised with this diamond (currently on reserve for me), then I will place the order and send it back if it does not meet my expectations as that is an option I have available. Of course I'd like to get it right the first time so any thoughts on this particular diamond sight unseen would be great. Keep in mind that I am paying $34k including tax so any slight difference on polish or table for example should be weighed against the additional cost. Thanks again in advance for everyone's insight.
 
Best of luck in your search, Jeff! Post pics when you get it in - we'll all be excited to see it! :))
 
From the certificate I see no flags.
Could be gorgeous, could be a dog.
Make sure the return policy is bullet proof. You've read it more than once.

And get your camera ready to take pics for us. You might also want to order an ASET (I have one and it's my favorite tool): http://www.ideal-scope.com/cart_zoom_item.asp?Id=23&ShowAdd=Y After you purchase your diamond if you don't want it anymore, you can list it on ebay and someone will buy it from you. Or you can list it on here on Pre-loved (our own board for selling things).

It will help you decide yourself the quality of the diamond you get.




I didn't mention this stone before, as I thought it would be out of budget. But this is a beauty, and I thought... hey, why not post it. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/cushion-cut/3.26-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-165665
 
Hi All,

I ended up ordering from Blue Nile the 2.79 carat diamond in a Tiffany Novo like setting with 1/3 carat half circle pave sidestones. The diamond is gorgeous! I must admit I was quite nervous purchasing a diamond sight unseen thinking I might have to send it back and start the search over again. Thankfully that wasn't the case and all my research paid off. The sparkle and scintillation, the size, the colorless appearance, the chunky facets, etc etc - I couldn't be more pleased. And the icing on the cake is that the price was amazing compared to other cushion brilliants and I had it appraised at approx 50% more than what I paid!

Now of course any girl will love the ring they receive and of course all her friends and acquaintances are likely to give the obligatory, 'wow that's beautiful'. Who would say otherwise, right? However, you can usually tell the difference between people who are being kind and those who are truly impressed. And I can tell you that several people have already said that it is the most beautiful ring they have seen, one saying it should be in a magazine, several have taken pictures of it, and tons of people have commented on how huge and beautiful the rock is (including people we don't even know at dinner and other events - and it's only been a week!!!).

I want to thank everyone for your help. Regarding pictures, I tried to take some close-up shots but my camera seems to go out of focus that close and not capture what I see with my naked eye - sorry. Anyway, thanks again for all your help. Now starts all the 'fun' wedding planning.

Best Regards!
 
Congrats. By the way, if your mobile camera has a micro function, that should do the trick.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top