Which diamond?

[soxfan]

Hello, after buying two OEC cut diamonds and setting them in platinum, I now want something warmer in rose or yellow gold. I am waffling between two stones:

https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/9p5h42-2.034-m-si2-ideal-antique-cushion

and:

http://www.loveaffairdiamonds.com/2-25ct-old-european-cut-diamond-ags-q-si1/

Same price. WAY different stones. And I love them both and can't make up my mind The canera is obviously cut for light performance, but has a visible inclusion. And at 8x7, it's a nice size. But the Q! I think her faceting is beautiful as well. I know I said I wanted to downsize, but I think that stone would be so pretty in rose gold. I could even do a solitaire so it wouldn't look so big.

I would love your opinions on which you like better and why. Thanks!

 

[Fulvia]

I vote for the Q OEC! I love her faceting and size. The visible inclusion would rule out the Canera for me - but then again I prefer OECs to cushions any day.

All this said: you can't go wrong IMO! They are both super charming and lovely stones.

 

[soxfan]

I vote for the Q OEC! I love her faceting and size. The visible inclusion would rule out the Canera for me - but then again I prefer OECs to cushions any day.

All this said: you can't go wrong IMO! They are both super charming and lovely stones.

Thanks Fulvia! The table on my .93 OEC is 45%. Is this 55% table a concern? The diamond is a LOT bigger than my .93, so is this proportionate for the stone?

 

[Fulvia]

I vote for the Q OEC! I love her faceting and size. The visible inclusion would rule out the Canera for me - but then again I prefer OECs to cushions any day.

All this said: you can't go wrong IMO! They are both super charming and lovely stones.

Thanks Fulvia! The table on my .93 OEC is 45%. Is this 55% table a concern? The diamond is a LOT bigger than my .93, so is this proportionate for the stone?

The OEC's table is still in acceptable range, I think - albeit on the higher end of it: a general PS rule is that anything over 58% should be ruled out.

 

[lovedogs]

To my eye, the Q is gorgeous and I would choose that in a second. Not to say that Canera isn't beautiful in it's own right--it's a great stone--but I think the "personality" of the Q and that amazing faceting pattern make it more unique and special (IMHO).

But seriously I think you can't go wrong since both are great stones. But for me the Q would win out for sure

 

[mrs-b]

I like the OEC. But I LOVE the VCA. The inclusion isn't black, nor is it 'the first thing you see' when you look at the stone. With the setting you're considering, I think you simply wouldn't notice it - and I've stared at that stone, un-set, AT LENGTH. Re the table - for me, one of the draws of an OEC is the small table and high crown. 56% would not work for me in this regard.

When I first saw the VCA, my first thoughts were not about the inclusion. They were more along the lines of "HOLY TAMOLE!"

But that, of course, is a technical diamond viewing term....



ETA The VCA has, in my opinion, more personality than the OEC. You rarely see antique cushions cut with that perfect curve to the sides. It's an organic, sensual shape, whereas for me, a circle is a circle...and this is coming from someone whose entire collection is 'circles'.

 

[soxfan]

I like the OEC. But I LOVE the VCA. The inclusion isn't black, nor is it 'the first thing you see' when you look at the stone. With the setting you're considering, I think you simply wouldn't notice it - and I've stared at that stone, un-set, AT LENGTH. Re the table - for me, one of the draws of an OEC is the small table and high crown. 56% would not work for me in this regard.

When I first saw the VCA, my first thoughts were not about the inclusion. They were more along the lines of "HOLY TAMOLE!"

But that, of course, is a technical diamond viewing term....



ETA The VCA has, in my opinion, more personality than the OEC. You rarely see antique cushions cut with that perfect curve to the sides. It's an organic, sensual shape, whereas for me, a circle is a circle...and this is coming from someone whose entire collection is 'circles'.

The fact that you have actually seen that stone and love it makes it VERY hard to count it out, because I know I would love it too!

 

[John P]

It might be helpful to understand the proportional-differences in technical terms.

Here are two basic outlines reflecting 1.14 LW, 45.6T, 23.5% CH, and 1.01 LW, 55.9T, 14.4% CH. The different personality-potential is clear.



As you regulars all know, antique tables with very steep CAs have more weight in the crown than diamonds with more modern proportions. I thought it might be interesting to visit why...

The main reason was economical. Before the invention of the rotary saw in the 1890s a single rough octahedron typically yielded just one diamond. The table facet would be created by grinding down the top of the rough crystal, so it made sense to keep tables high (thus far smaller) so as not to waste carat weight. These small tables and high crowns were paired with very wide pavilion mains. What those cutters were doing was boosting visible dispersion. In fact, modern use of the term "fire" comes from those days. That word was a literal description of the reflection/refraction of fire from the gas lamps under which those diamond cutters were working.

The rotary saw changed everything. Suddenly producers could get two diamonds from a single piece of rough (DeBeers reacted by nearly doubling prices, by the way). Crown heights were decreased nearly overnight. This was also happening while electric lighting became commonplace. Thus, the focus on cutting-for-fire in pre-electric days began a transition toward what looked bright under incandescent, (and eventually) halogen, halide and LED store lighting.

All that to say; the illustrated diamonds will have notably different personalities when seen in different lighting environments. Both could be tremendous in their own specific flavor.

 

[Acinom]

What a blessing (and how 'painful' at the same time) to have to choose between these stones. I would be seriously torn. I have a huge weak spot for Canera cushions so I have a tendency to vote for the cushion. Especially now I learned that mrsblop has seen the stone in real life and that it completely pleased her eyes.

I honestly think you cannot go wrong here.
What setting are you thinking about?

 

[lovedogs]

What a blessing (and how 'painful' at the same time) to have to choose between these stones. I would be seriously torn. I have a huge weak spot for Canera cushions so I have a tendency to vote for the cushion. Especially now I learned that mrsblop has seen the stone in real life and that it completely pleased her eyes.

I honestly think you cannot go wrong here.
What setting are you thinking about?

I agree that knowing mrsBlop has seen it in real life and likes it makes a huge difference. No substitute for having someone knowledgable see it and think it's beautiful. That makes the decision potentially even harder for you!

Now I'm not sure what I would choose if I were you. Is there any chance or way to order both and see which is more pleasing to your eyes in real life? Or is shipping prohibitive (maybe if you are outside the US or particularly far from either vendor). I think with stuff like this there isn't a BAD choice at all--just whichever you end up preferring.

 

[soxfan]

What a blessing (and how 'painful' at the same time) to have to choose between these stones. I would be seriously torn. I have a huge weak spot for Canera cushions so I have a tendency to vote for the cushion. Especially now I learned that mrsblop has seen the stone in real life and that it completely pleased her eyes.

I honestly think you cannot go wrong here.
What setting are you thinking about?

Hey Acinom! Ok, so for the cushion it would be an emilya in yellow gold. The pic is rose gold, but it would be yellow. (Mrs-Blop and I think alike!



For the Round it would be this solitaire in yellow or rose gold, depending on the tone of the diamond (which I've been told would probably favor yellow gold)



It's two totally different looks. BUT at least I have reconciled myself to the fact that I prefer antique cuts over MRB's. LOL!!!!

 

[soxfan]

What a blessing (and how 'painful' at the same time) to have to choose between these stones. I would be seriously torn. I have a huge weak spot for Canera cushions so I have a tendency to vote for the cushion. Especially now I learned that mrsblop has seen the stone in real life and that it completely pleased her eyes.

I honestly think you cannot go wrong here.
What setting are you thinking about?

I agree that knowing mrsBlop has seen it in real life and likes it makes a huge difference. No substitute for having someone knowledgable see it and think it's beautiful. That makes the decision potentially even harder for you!

Now I'm not sure what I would choose if I were you. Is there any chance or way to order both and see which is more pleasing to your eyes in real life? Or is shipping prohibitive (maybe if you are outside the US or particularly far from either vendor). I think with stuff like this there isn't a BAD choice at all--just whichever you end up preferring.

I don't think I can shell out the money to order both to see BUT I trust Erica on her opinion 100% as she is an old cut expert, and I also don't need to see the Canera IRL either since Mrs. Blop almost bought it and said it was beautiful. It's just a matter of making my mind up. LOL! I have to say I am leaning toward the round in a solitaire though. All of my rings have halos and I would like a solitaire. And at this size, it would be a substantial one with a lot of personality and the yellow gold/warm diamond look is really pulling at my heartstrings.

 

[lovedogs]

well--that image made me change my mind (I'm no help, am I?? ). I adore the emylia, and think that entire look is timeless, classic, and unique.

So now I think my vote goes to the cushion now that I know your plans in terms of setting.


EDIT: just saw your response as I was writing mine. I'd 100% recommend going with your "gut" on this, and if your gut is telling you to go with the OEC, then trust yourself! Especially if you have other halos and are looking for something different, I think the OEC solitaire will provide you with a unique look compared to your other pieces.

 

[soxfan]

well--that image made me change my mind (I'm no help, am I?? ). I adore the emylia, and think that entire look is timeless, classic, and unique.

So now I think my vote goes to the cushion now that I know your plans in terms of setting.


EDIT: just saw your response as I was writing mine. I'd 100% recommend going with your "gut" on this, and if your gut is telling you to go with the OEC, then trust yourself! Especially if you have other halos and are looking for something different, I think the OEC solitaire will provide you with a unique look compared to your other pieces.

A solitaire would DEFINITELY be a new look for me! I've always wanted an 8 prong one with a huge diamond!

 

[Bonfire]

Cushion all day long! That crown!

 

[LLJsmom]

For me the deciding factor would be based on color. Soxfan, you already have an L. Would the M be warm enough for you?

 

[soxfan]

For me the deciding factor would be based on color. Soxfan, you already have an L. Would the M be warm enough for you?

I think so? Mrs-Blop said it was a warm ivory. My L and K pear face up really white. I think this one with yellow gold would be warmer......

 

[mrs-b]

For me the deciding factor would be based on color. Soxfan, you already have an L. Would the M be warm enough for you?

I think so? Mrs-Blop said it was a warm ivory. My L and K pear face up really white. I think this one with yellow gold would be warmer......

The stone is not yellow, as such. But it has a very definite golden glow to it. I go back and forth as to whether its best feature is its perfect cut or its delicious color.

Sox, would you be doing this on layaway? If you aren't, there's nothing to stop you buying it and having a look and returning it if you're not a huge fan. (I just realized I'm actually sitting here shaking my head as I'm typing cause I can tell you right now - that's never gonna happen.)

 

[soxfan]

For me the deciding factor would be based on color. Soxfan, you already have an L. Would the M be warm enough for you?

I think so? Mrs-Blop said it was a warm ivory. My L and K pear face up really white. I think this one with yellow gold would be warmer......

The stone is not yellow, as such. But it has a very definite golden glow to it. I go back and forth as to whether its best feature is its perfect cut or its delicious color.

Sox, would you be doing this on layaway? If you aren't, there's nothing to stop you buying it and having a look and returning it if you're not a huge fan. (I just realized I'm actually sitting here shaking my head as I'm typing cause I can tell you right now - that's never gonna happen.)

LOL! I have to sell my VC ring first before I do anything

I have probably a stupid question too If LAD has an "upgrade policy" of 1.5 times greater the value (they give you 100% of your purchase price) of your purchase toward an upgrade. Would that mean if I spent $5000 and I bought something that cost $7500 I would get $5000 credit toward it? Is there anything I'm missing?

 

[mrs-b]

Nope - not missing anything. I think VC's upgrade policy is like GOG's - in that you only have to upgrade by a penny; any diamond more expensive than the one you originally bought can be bought with 100% value of your original stone added to it. I prefer that policy; it means if you want to, say, change shape or something but not spend much more money, you can do it without having to kick in an extra 50% of your original stone's cost. My main e-ring stone is from BN. They have a 200% upgrade policy - meaning I have to double what I initially spent. I'd LOVE to switch my diamond up and increase my budget by, say, 10k. But that's not even close to what I paid for that stone, and to have to pay double would make it a massively expensive stone and, consequently, prohibitive for me. So I'm pretty much stuck where I am. For that reason, I prefer VC's policy over, say, someone like BGD's policy, or LAD's.

 

[soxfan]

Nope - not missing anything. I think VC's upgrade policy is like GOG's - in that you only have to upgrade by a penny; any diamond more expensive than the one you originally bought can be bought with 100% value of your original stone added to it. I prefer that policy; it means if you want to, say, change shape or something but not spend much more money, you can do it without having to kick in an extra 50% of your original stone's cost. My main e-ring stone is from BN. They have a 200% upgrade policy - meaning I have to double what I initially spent. I'd LOVE to switch my diamond up and increase my budget by, say, 10k. But that's not even close to what I paid for that stone, and to have to pay double would make it a massively expensive stone and, consequently, prohibitive for me. So I'm pretty much stuck where I am. For that reason, I prefer VC's policy over, say, someone like BGD's policy, or LAD's.

I'm sending you a message through LT.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, I didn't know how to answer this when I first read it yesterday, but I am going to give you my thoughts.

On the CAC, beautiful stone and the only negative is the inclusion. The color looks like it has brown undertone to me (unless it is a photography thing), so I think it would be beautiful in rose gold. Love the shape of the stone, and I like antique cushions better in lower colors than OECs. If this is a forever ring that you know you will never sell, then it would be my choice if you can live with the inclusion. But if you might later sell, this is very risky because that inclusion will be a dealbreaker for many people, including me. There's been an AV stone with a less visible I1 inclusion for sale for ages. I wouldn't buy lower than an SI1 if resale is ever a possibility.

The OEC has an almost 56 table , 33 crown angle, and 14.7% crown height which doesn't make this a great example of an OEC to me, but it is pretty from the top view. Not sure about Q color in an OEC and part of the girdle is extremely thin, which means either girdle rehab or a bezel or halo setting.

Since you already have an OEC and a pear, I really think I'd go for an antique cushion. But I would save more or go smaller and get one with better clarity.

 

[tweeter8177]

Nope - not missing anything. I think VC's upgrade policy is like GOG's - in that you only have to upgrade by a penny; any diamond more expensive than the one you originally bought can be bought with 100% value of your original stone added to it. I prefer that policy; it means if you want to, say, change shape or something but not spend much more money, you can do it without having to kick in an extra 50% of your original stone's cost. My main e-ring stone is from BN. They have a 200% upgrade policy - meaning I have to double what I initially spent. I'd LOVE to switch my diamond up and increase my budget by, say, 10k. But that's not even close to what I paid for that stone, and to have to pay double would make it a massively expensive stone and, consequently, prohibitive for me. So I'm pretty much stuck where I am. For that reason, I prefer VC's policy over, say, someone like BGD's policy, or LAD's.

Hi Mrs-blop! I believe that the CACs fall under VC's Gold Upgrade program, which if I am reading right, you can only upgrade for another "fancy" shape. It may mean you can't upgrade for a CER? I only mention that since Soxfan likes both OECs and antique cushions, so it is a tad limiting for future upgrades. Still a great policy, but I would confirm with VC if it matters!

Soxfan - I love both choices! I would have leaned toward the cushion because you already have an OEC, but I can see having a solitaire to add to your collection too!!! I look forward to seeing what you choose!

 

[soxfan]

Okay, I didn't know how to answer this when I first read it yesterday, but I am going to give you my thoughts.

On the CAC, beautiful stone and the only negative is the inclusion. The color looks like it has brown undertone to me (unless it is a photography thing), so I think it would be beautiful in rose gold. Love the shape of the stone, and I like antique cushions better in lower colors than OECs. If this is a forever ring that you know you will never sell, then it would be my choice if you can live with the inclusion. But if you might later sell, this is very risky because that inclusion will be a dealbreaker for many people, including me. There's been an AV stone with a less visible I1 inclusion for sale for ages. I wouldn't buy lower than an SI1 if resale is ever a possibility.

The OEC has an almost 56 table , 33 crown angle, and 14.7% crown height which doesn't make this a great example of an OEC to me, but it is pretty from the top view. Not sure about Q color in an OEC and part of the girdle is extremely thin, which means either girdle rehab or a bezel or halo setting.

Since you already have an OEC and a pear, I really think I'd go for an antique cushion. But I would save more or go smaller and get one with better clarity.

Yes, it doesn't have the best proportions I have been studying it. LOL!

 

[soxfan]

Thank you everyone! I have decided not to get either of stones. I appreciate all the advice!!