Engagement Rings - Size Matters?

[iota15]

Okay. Whew. This might be unpopular but here it is anyway:

If your girlfriend wants a honking ring, bigger than ANY of her girlfriends, 2.5 is going to look "small" (relatively), even with a halo. It's not small by ANY MEANS for what the average North American can afford... but if you're making 225K a year, I assume at least some of your social network is also making that kind of dough.

With that kind of a salary, you can probably be assured that at some point, one of your buddies is going to pull out a 3, or maybe even a 4 ct ring. Now 2.5 with a halo may look HUGE (which it really is in the greater view of things) to many ladies here, but I know in certain circles, this is just somewhat above average/somewhat on the larger side... but not big.

When you're used to seeing ginormous jewels on women (colored stones, emeralds, Lady Di's sapphire, etc.), 2.5 carats, even in a halo looks small (even though it's a diamond). I don't think, in real life, "wow (eye popping out) that is really big - almost cocktail like, but I know it's real", which seems like what your gf is after, until it hits at least 3 on a small finger, and 3.5 on a larger one. I'm not saying that's necessarily the best look either, but well, to each their own, and also, to each their own social circles.

If you don't think 2.5 is big, it's likely your lady won't either. (To be honest, I don't even know if 3 will cut it but your lady might like to advertise that magic 3 mark and although it's just a bit bigger, it is, well, a bit bigger.). Maybe the question is whether you want to buy her or yourself into some kind of crazy competition to satisfy her insatiable wants.

What are your requirements? Perhaps we can help you find a beautiful, but large looking stone in a budget you find reasonable. Not all 2.5 carats look the same size - some are bigger looking, and some are smaller because carat refers to the weight of the stone.

If it helps, I have a 4.25 finger. I tried on a 2.5 ct rectangularish radiant but it had the face-up size of a 3 carat (approximately 75 sq. mm's - obtained by multiplying the length and width ratios). I thought it actually "looked big" at that size, probably getting to "too big" but I was swooning. That particular stone however was poorly cut so it lacked the sparkle factor. When I came to my senses, I opted for something smaller, and to my eyes, prettier.

 

[yssie]

Okay. Whew. This might be unpopular but here it is anyway:

If your girlfriend wants a honking ring, bigger than ANY of her girlfriends, 2.5 is going to look "small" (relatively), even with a halo. It's not small by ANY MEANS for what the average North American can afford... but if you're making 225K a year, I assume at least some of your social network is also making that kind of dough.

With that kind of a salary, you can probably be assured that at some point, one of your buddies is going to pull out a 3, or maybe even a 4 ct ring. Now 2.5 with a halo may look HUGE (which it really is in the greater view of things) to many ladies here, but I know in certain circles, this is just somewhat above average/somewhat on the larger side... but not big.

When you're used to seeing ginormous jewels on women (colored stones, emeralds, Lady Di's sapphire, etc.), 2.5 carats, even in a halo looks small (even though it's a diamond). I don't think, in real life, "wow (eye popping out) that is really big - almost cocktail like, but I know it's real", which seems like what your gf is after, until it hits at least 3 on a small finger, and 3.5 on a larger one. I'm not saying that's necessarily the best look either, but well, to each their own, and also, to each their own social circles.

If you don't think 2.5 is big, it's likely your lady won't either. (To be honest, I don't even know if 3 will cut it but your lady might like to advertise that magic 3 mark and although it's just a bit bigger, it is, well, a bit bigger.). Maybe the question is whether you want to buy her or yourself into some kind of crazy competition to satisfy her insatiable wants.

What are your requirements? Perhaps we can help you find a beautiful, but large looking stone in a budget you find reasonable. Not all 2.5 carats look the same size - some are bigger looking, and some are smaller because carat refers to the weight of the stone.

If it helps, I have a 4.25 finger. I tried on a 2.5 ct rectangularish radiant but it had the face-up size of a 3 carat (approximately 75 sq. mm's - obtained by multiplying the length and width ratios). I thought it actually "looked big" at that size, probably getting to "too big" but I was swooning. That particular stone however was poorly cut so it lacked the sparkle factor. When I came to my senses, I opted for something smaller, and to my eyes, prettier.

Realistically I have to agree with everything iota said in this post. To us (and the general population) a 2.5 or a 3ct is a huge stone, but depending on your social and professional circles it may or may not be - and that, and not the general population, is what she will be seeing and comparing against.

If your gf wants the biggest ring and you're making that sort of salary I hate to say it but I'm pretty sure even a 3ct is going to be one-upped very quickly - in part because I'm sure that she's not the only one of her friends to want the "biggest ring of all of us".

I agree with previous posters that a more spready shape (ovals, pears) may be something to investigate, as what counts here is mm, not carat weight, and some shapes distribute the stone volume to show more mm face-up than others for the same weight.

 

[slg47]

Okay. Whew. This might be unpopular but here it is anyway:

If your girlfriend wants a honking ring, bigger than ANY of her girlfriends, 2.5 is going to look "small" (relatively), even with a halo. It's not small by ANY MEANS for what the average North American can afford... but if you're making 225K a year, I assume at least some of your social network is also making that kind of dough.

With that kind of a salary, you can probably be assured that at some point, one of your buddies is going to pull out a 3, or maybe even a 4 ct ring. Now 2.5 with a halo may look HUGE (which it really is in the greater view of things) to many ladies here, but I know in certain circles, this is just somewhat above average/somewhat on the larger side... but not big.

When you're used to seeing ginormous jewels on women (colored stones, emeralds, Lady Di's sapphire, etc.), 2.5 carats, even in a halo looks small (even though it's a diamond). I don't think, in real life, "wow (eye popping out) that is really big - almost cocktail like, but I know it's real", which seems like what your gf is after, until it hits at least 3 on a small finger, and 3.5 on a larger one. I'm not saying that's necessarily the best look either, but well, to each their own, and also, to each their own social circles.

If you don't think 2.5 is big, it's likely your lady won't either. (To be honest, I don't even know if 3 will cut it but your lady might like to advertise that magic 3 mark and although it's just a bit bigger, it is, well, a bit bigger.). Maybe the question is whether you want to buy her or yourself into some kind of crazy competition to satisfy her insatiable wants.

What are your requirements? Perhaps we can help you find a beautiful, but large looking stone in a budget you find reasonable. Not all 2.5 carats look the same size - some are bigger looking, and some are smaller because carat refers to the weight of the stone.

If it helps, I have a 4.25 finger. I tried on a 2.5 ct rectangularish radiant but it had the face-up size of a 3 carat (approximately 75 sq. mm's - obtained by multiplying the length and width ratios). I thought it actually "looked big" at that size, probably getting to "too big" but I was swooning. That particular stone however was poorly cut so it lacked the sparkle factor. When I came to my senses, I opted for something smaller, and to my eyes, prettier.

Realistically I have to agree with everything iota said in this post. To us (and the general population) a 2.5 or a 3ct is a huge stone, but depending on your social and professional circles it may or may not be - and that, and not the general population, is what she will be seeing and comparing against.

If your gf wants the biggest ring and you're making that sort of salary I hate to say it but I'm pretty sure even a 3ct is going to be one-upped very quickly - in part because I'm sure that she's not the only one of her friends to want the "biggest ring of all of us".

I agree with previous posters that a more spready shape (ovals, pears) may be something to investigate, as what counts here is mm, not carat weight, and some shapes distribute the stone volume to show more mm face-up than others for the same weight.

I agree with all of this also (I did not read your first post closely enough and did not realize your income/likely social circle which plays a large part in these things). I think a 3 carat with a halo will still look rather substantial though as the halo adds a lot to the size.

 

[lovemybling]

I think it depends on the shape of the cushion you like as to how much finger coverage you will get for your desired look.

I prefer a more rectagular shape..then then you halo I think you would get the finger coverage you want.

I think you know she WANTS the 3 carat. If you can swing it that is what I would do. It is the blowing her exepectations

Where else have you looked for the setting you want? what type of cushion, AVC, mondern brilliant...

 

[antelope1]

I really think you're going to have to go to the 4ct mark to make sure no one gets a diamond bigger than her's in the near future because $10k is not a big jump relative to your salary.

However -- $50k to get to 4cts is a big jump, and it's probably going to be a big jump for anyone else in her circle. The next guy is probably not going to do it, so her ring will stay the nicest for a long time. If that's important to her...you might think about hitting 4cts.

Does she also want a D IF? Because I once walked into Tiffany's to browse and saw a nice 1ct Lucida that happened to be a D IF (as graded by T&Co.) Mind you, it was 1ct. It was set in 18k yellow gold with a PT head. And it was $72k. Did I mention it was 1ct?

If the T&Co branding is important to her, and if she's really set on having the nicest ring of all...perhaps you should up your budget to meet her expectations?

 

[BristowVA]

Thanks for your feedback. What I do know is she has said numerous times she wants a cushion; as opposed to princess, oval, etc. But again, I'm not sure she knows much about diamonds; we're both probably in the same boat. She has just seen cushions - and thinks that is what she likes the best.

The particular setting that she likes - Tiffany Legacy style halo - has a round diamond as the center stone at the store. But I was under the impression that rounds cost more $ for the same size. Is this correct?

From the sound of it, you may be reccomending a different style stone with larger face size so that it will appear larger. Is this correct?

I think the two others based on my viewining of the different cuts are radiant and round - but this is just my guess - I only know cushion is definitely her #1 choice. Would either be better face-wise?

Although, again, I'm heistate to go away from the cushion. Especially, since she has specifically mentioned on numerous occassions she really likes the chunky faceted/antique "Cushion Brilliant" style she has seen.

So in order to get the best "face" value - I think from what I've read I'm willing to go down in color and clarity (e.g. H/I and VS1/VS2).

What seems strange is when I go from a 2.5 ct in these specs to a 3 ct it goes up at least $10k. For just a half-carat, which many of you have said will not be very much more noticable, this seems like a lot?

 

[slg47]

If she wants a cushion then by all means get one An antique style cushion will look very different than a round, oval, radiant, etc. I am not sure about the stats of her friends rings but you may want to stay F/G VS.

 

[HopeDream]

If you're making 225k/year then a 10k difference is only 4% of your total income.
If your girl needs 3ct for the stone to be a mind-clean size, and for bragging rights, then 4% is a small investment in her happieness.

Is she the kind of person that would view a halo as "filler?"

Whatever you decide to get will look fantastic on her hand, and a 2.5 is going to look larger on her smaller finger than it does on your mom's larger finger. Keep in mind that cushions spread differently on fingers than RBs do.

Good luck!

 

[antelope1]

What seems strange is when I go from a 2.5 ct in these specs to a 3 ct it goes up at least $10k. For just a half-carat, which many of you have said will not be very much more noticable, this seems like a lot?

When you break the x.5 or x.0 carat marks, the wholesale price per carat changes. In addition, there is a lot of variation in the cut quality of a cushion (but the cut is not graded the way RBs are, for example), so the 3ct you are comparing to the 2.5ct may be better cut and priced accordingly.

Also, don't forget that changes in color and clarity can affect the price per carat and the retail price. Just one step difference in color or clarity can have a several thousand dollar effect on price at those carat weights. So make sure that you're comparing apples to apples.

$10k seems a bit high, but is well within the normal range of price variations for a 0.5 ct step at those sizes, especially if something else has changed as well.

 

[BristowVA]

4cts?!? Let's not get carried away. I know a 4ct would definitely exceed her expectations, but that's in the 80k range! I make a good living, but am no Donald Trump. Even I know 80k is insane.

I guess what this all boils down to is what is reasonable to spend for someone in my tax bracket? 25k? 30k? 40k? 50k? I don't really have a budget, but I also don't have 50k in the bank to just blow. I just don't want to spend too little or too much..

 

[slg47]

I think only you can decide what is reasonable to spend. 3 ct with halo sounds lovely but make sure you get a high quality stone/setting

 

[antelope1]

4cts?!? Let's not get carried away. I know a 4ct would definitely exceed her expectations, but that's in the 80k range! I make a good living, but am no Donald Trump. Even I know 80k is insane.

I guess what this all boils down to is what is reasonable to spend for someone in my tax bracket? 25k? 30k? 40k? 50k? I don't really have a budget, but I also don't have 50k in the bank to just blow. I just don't want to spend too little or too much..

You have sense on your shoulders! I was just teasing about the 4cts.

Back to reality -- are you shopping online? Or in a B&M store? Are you wedded to your merchant? Because if not, I'll bet you we could find you a nice 3ct in your price range and specs from an online vendor. I did a search for you, check it out:
https://www.pricescope.com/diamond-search-results/?shape=CU&size__gte=2.5&size__lte=3.5&color__gte=H&color__lte=H&clarity__gte=16&clarity__lte=21&hca_index__gte=0&hca_index__lte=10&depth__gte=50&depth__lte=80&table__gte=50&table__lte=83&h_GIA=on&h_AGS=on&pair=&price__gte=100&price__lte=999999&symmetry__lte=7&symmetry__gte=0&polish__lte=7&polish__gte=0&fluor_strength__lte=4&fluor_strength__gte=0&hca_index__gte=0&hca_index__lte=10&combo_country=us&combo_region=&vendor__country__contains=&vendor__region__contains=&country=US&region=&city=&latitude=38&longitude=-97&color_m=H-&color_p=H%2B&vendor__latitude__gte=-180&vendor__latitude__lte=180&vendor__longitude__gte=-180&vendor__longitude__lte=180&lab=null&page=1&vendor__latitude__gte__=-180&vendor__latitude__lte__=180&vendor__longitude__gte__=-180&vendor__longitude__lte__=180&l_country=&l_region=&type_search=1&all=all&h_other=off

 

[BristowVA]

Thanks. I think I'm definitely going to have to go with 3 ct+. On cushions, if I am looking for something with a larger face to get that "bigger finger coverage" - is there a certain table or depth I should look for? I know she wants something closer to square than rectangle - so I'm going to try and stay around 1.00 l/w but not sure how that affects table/depth?

 

[Imdanny]

I think you answered your own question in your OP.

If you're going to buy a cushion, you should research the different types of cushions (you can do that here at PS) . There are many different types.

I'd use the search function to find threads about cushions. If I'm not mistaken, two posters in particular have written very long, well researched posts about cushions.

In fact, I'd start a new thread with "cushion" in the title because you'd get a lot of specific advise.

 

[vbnet]

I vote for 3. I would actually go a bit bigger than just 3. Why? Why not? It's a time of your life (I'm guessing) that you don't have huge financial commitments. We were looking for a cushion in the 2ct , then 2.5, then my husband upped the ante to 3 and I was delirious. Maybe he had it in mind all the time but it was a thrilling experience for me. Then he wanted diamonds on the side and you can see by my avatar it's quite a it of coverage, my finger is 6.5 I believe. Anyway, just my .02.

 

[vbnet]

If you're making 225k/year then a 10k difference is only 4% of your total income.
If your girl needs 3ct for the stone to be a mind-clean size, and for bragging rights, then 4% is a small investment in her happieness.

Is she the kind of person that would view a halo as "filler?"

Whatever you decide to get will look fantastic on her hand, and a 2.5 is going to look larger on her smaller finger than it does on your mom's larger finger. Keep in mind that cushions spread differently on fingers than RBs do.

Good luck!

This came in while I was typing and I concur. edited to strike the 4 ct idea

 

[vbnet]

[
What seems strange is when I go from a 2.5 ct in these specs to a 3 ct it goes up at least $10k. For just a half-carat, which many of you have said will not be very much more noticable, this seems like a lot?[/quote]



It may not be much mm on paper, but when we saw the difference. We liked it.

btw, If you are loving cushions, Perry Chen at artofplatinum.com sourced mine, MissyDebby's and several others. And yes, now people will chime in for me hijacking the thread, so sorry in advance.

 

[daysie]

FWIW, I've always thought a guy spends approx 3 months of his salary. I'm not familiar with the tax bracket in the U.S, but that would equate to $56,250 before tax. So I don't think the 3+ carat would be unaffordable.

Also, just as a thing to note, when you step up the ante, so will your friends (assuming your friends earn or near what you're earning).

Sidebar, just over 2 months ago, I purchased my ER and at that time, it was the biggest in our circle of friends (2 cts). Please believe me when I say that I didn't do this so I would have the biggest ring amongst my friends. I did it because my mother has led me to believe I would need a 2ct ring to compensate for the fact that she never got one. Anyway off topic. What I wanted to forewarn you is that once I got my 2cts, everyone else who got engaged after me has set this as their bar, so I wouldn't be surprised if the yet to be engaged will end up with a diamond way larger than mine. Since I am not concerned about having the biggest diamond in the group, I couldn't care. But if your gf is, then she probably will want to continually upgrade. So to save yourself some $ down the track, you might want to start off smaller (i.e. 2.5cts) and work your way up over the years. Just go with a vendor that has a lifetime upgrade policy.

Last point of ref, there is no such thing as too big! And what you will find is that most girls start suffering from DSS (diamond shrinkage syndrome). So once they get used to the diamond, it gets smaller as the time goes on.

Good luck!

 

[antelope1]

IMO, there is such a thing as too big -- a poorly cut, but very large diamond, will look like costume jewelry, not an engagement ring. If you saw the 3ct and liked it, it was probably a better cut diamond than the 2.5ct, which could account for part of the price difference. So you should go as large as you can in your budget and specs, but don't sacrifice cut to get there.

The one thing that you can do to make sure that her ring is better than everyone else's (even after they get larger diamonds), is to get her the best cut possible, which is actually pretty hard to do in a cushion. The ones that I have seen in stores in NoVA have been ... disappointing to say the least, which is why we went online. For cushions, most PSers will generally recommend Perry @ Leon Mege (artofplatium), Mark @ ERD, or Jon @ GoodOldGold.

To determine cut quality, make sure you get an ASET and IdealScope image (or at least have the chance to look at the diamond under an ASET scope and IdealScope). Lots of cushions can face-up well in certain lighting (like the lighting in the jewelry store!!), but ASET and IdealScope will show where the leakage is.

 

[shopgirl2]

I hope this helps. I have a size 5 finger as well and my ring takes up half of my ring finger. My diamond is a little less then a carrot. I think the bigger size will look too big on your future wife's finger. Her friends will likely think that the ring is bigger then theirs just because she has smaller fingers. I know my friends think that mine is bigger then theirs even though we have the same size carrot. If you want to spend more money on her why don't you get her a better cut and/or clarity diamond.

 

[purplesilk]

If you can afford it, buy a 3 ct diamond...she will be thrilled with it !!!

 

[Imdanny]

...I once walked into Tiffany's to browse and saw a nice 1ct Lucida that happened to be a D IF (as graded by T&Co.) Mind you, it was 1ct. It was set in 18k yellow gold with a PT head. And it was $72k. Did I mention it was 1ct?

Wow! (and not in a good way!)

 

[bigterpsfan]

I hope this helps. I have a size 5 finger as well and my ring takes up half of my ring finger. My diamond is a little less then a carrot. I think the bigger size will look too big on your future wife's finger. Her friends will likely think that the ring is bigger then theirs just because she has smaller fingers. I know my friends think that mine is bigger then theirs even though we have the same size carrot. If you want to spend more money on her why don't you get her a better cut and/or clarity diamond.

I agree go with quality over quantity! You want a stone that will reflect light, lively and eye catching, not a big piece of glass....just sayin.

 

[BristowVA]

Ok, so I've done some cushion searching. To get something of larger size (3 ct+) without spending an unrealstic amount of money it looks like some serious compromises are going to have to be made in terms of color and clarity.

I've come across two inital stones:

(A) 3.05 G SI1



(B) 3.40 J VS 2



Here's what concerns me.

With the 3.05 G - the SI1. I want to ensure that the stone is 100% eyeclean - this one looks like there might be an issue on the table? And, I REALLY don't like the idea of an SI at all. Even if the stone is eyeclean - which this may not be? - I feel kind of strange giving an SI stone for an engagement setting (this being the most important piece of jewelry your SO should likely ever own?).

With the 3.40 J - first, wow, the size is huge - which is exactly what I am looking for. But the J is definitely an issue to me. I was told this stone faces up more white than a J. But especially in a halo setting - does anyone think that a J would be to yellow? What are the surronding diamonds in a halo usually color wise?

So, (1) is an SI1 just not a good choice and (2) can I completely rule out a J color because it is too yellow for a halo?

Any general thoughts on either of these stones - inclusions, color, clarity, look, etc. would also be MUCH appreciated!

And, finally, I've been told by more than one vendor now that there is really no reason to ask for or get an ASET image? And, the best way to evaluate the stones is to just look at them. The reason being that they can be manipulated to show more red, etc. Is this true? Or, should I 100% be asking for and getting an ASET to evaluate these stones?

 

[slg47]

Some vendors do not like ASET technology. It does have limitations but can help assess light return of a stone. Of the two you posted, I like the G much better, I think G is a better color for a halo and I like the shape better.

http://www.micropave.com/index.php/diamonds/104046249006.html is this one out of budget? It is VS...

I just saw this one...N color but WOW size! http://goodoldgold.com/diamond/7145/ I would probably stick with E/F/G/H color but just throwing it out there

 

[Circe]

What are the proportions of the stones? With rounds, there's usually a general ballpark connection between weight and size, but with fancies, the variations can be huge. There are cushions like the Daussi line that are deliberately cut shallow and that face up *huge* for their carat weight (it's an interesting look, and worth checking out given what you want), but many cushions are very deep, and wind up looking small for their carat weight. Though, in the 3 carat range you don't have to worry about it looking "small" - just maybe not as big as it might. If it were me, I'd actually look just shy of the 3 carat mark and try to find a spready stone ....

 

[antelope1]

I am ok with a SI1, if it is eye-clean. The one you posted, it's hard to tell if it is eye-clean because there are some reflections. You might want to ask for another photo. I'd also ask for a neutral background so we can judge the sparkle on Diamond #1.

FWIW, I have an eye-clean SI1 (there is a white feather suspended in the pavilion that is visible when the stone is not set, but only visible in certain lighting from the side, from about 6 inches). I would personally prefer a white inclusion suspended in the pavillion Once the diamond was set, there was no way to get light at the right angle to see the feather. And only I can see it from the side if I squint real good. I actually prefer diamonds with some interesting inclusions because you can always be sure that you're getting your diamond back from a cleaning or whatnot.

On color, I am color-sensitive, so I would go higher rather than lower. I have an I color cushion myself set with H/I pave, and I can definitely tell the color in my cushion, particularly under sodium lighting or LED spotlights. My pave is full-cut, so it sparkles white. I have heard that single-cut might produce chunkier flashes that are more consistent with the way cushions sparkle in general.

Perry has a I VS2 3.53ct for $32.4k and a 3.36ct G SI1 for $28.5k (linking from artofplatinum is too hard for the likes of me...) -- both are in your general budget and offer better size/color than the two you have posted above.

ASET can be manipulated, but so can jewelry store lighting.

 

[BristowVA]

How concerned should I be with a cloud right in the center of a table? The vendor assures me it is 100% eye clean. But on the cert it is drawn in as plain as day (as well as another cloud drawn on the very edge of the crown)?

Finally, the table is 61.9% and the depth 61.5%. I was under the impression "antique style" cushions had tables closer to 55%. But the vendor says in this diamond the table is a "little larger than other antiques" but still has "bigger" facets and a great brilliance?

Any help on if this is correct or what I should be looking for?

 

[bigdiamondtinygal]

First of all, I'm drooling at the size of those stones! Next, I'm not sure if I missed it in your post but are the certs on those 2 stones GIA certs or EGL? EGL has more lenient grading standards so if they are EGL I would say to skip the J if you are color sensitive. Personally, I like the shape and the kozibe effect in the photo of stone 1, but I don't like that you can see the inclusions in the photo. It would be best to view the stone in person for sure before making a determination. I also think that antique cushions typically have much smaller tables than 61% (if that matters to you).

Personally, neither of these stones sounds ideal for what you are looking for. Have you checked with Perry? He has found some great big cushions...also what about Mark Turnowski? With a halo setting, you may want to choose a higher color so as not to call attention to the color of the center stone (again this only matters is you/she don't like lower colors). I have a J and I love it, but no halo - but I love warm diamonds.

 

[antelope1]

How concerned should I be with a cloud right in the center of a table? The vendor assures me it is 100% eye clean. But on the cert it is drawn in as plain as day (as well as another cloud drawn on the very edge of the crown)?

Finally, the table is 61.9% and the depth 61.5%. I was under the impression "antique style" cushions had tables closer to 55%. But the vendor says in this diamond the table is a "little larger than other antiques" but still has "bigger" facets and a great brilliance?

Any help on if this is correct or what I should be looking for?

Clouds really are generally eye-clean if they are suspended in the pavilion. (If you post the cert, that will help so we can all be on the same page.) You can get a SI1 from a big inclusion (like my feather) or many smaller inclusions. If I had a pick, I'd go for many small ones every time because they are less likely to show. I once looked at a SI1 that was definitely eye clean, but looked like a nebula under the microscope. This is not to say that all SI1s are eye clean, but that many can be up to certain tolerances. And when you get down to it, the dust and fingerprints that will collect as part of daily wear will be more bothersome than most SI1 inclusions.

It is true that "antique" style cushions have smaller tables. However, a 62% table is not large. (IMO, 70% is large.) If a cushion has enough of the "antique" characteristics (table equal to or less than 53%, culet equal to or larger than slightly large, crown angles > 40 degrees, and lower half < 60%), then it will be called an "Old Mine Brilliant" on the GIA cert. But those are not the only "antique cushions" and smaller crowns just mean different light return patterns (more fire = more colored light reflected back). BTW, greater brilliance means more white light sparkle, greater fire means more colored light sparkle.

Antique style can also refer to the cutting pattern in the pavilion. Chunky antique means means broader facets. CCL has a table somewhere...perhaps he will link it here for you.