Beacon
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2006
- Messages
- 2,037
Thanks for the comments!Date: 9/2/2008 12:46:44 AM
Author: Beacon
How very beautiful your ring is! I love the finished result. I read your thread about the process with great interest. Now that the project is finished, what size is the halo? Also, what size melee did they use?
It is a stunning ring - absolutely lovely. Congrats!!
On the contrary, you''ve captured the beauty of the stone/ring quite well!!Date: 9/1/2008 11:19:40 PM
Author: stone_seeker
Its a modern cushion brilliant but has that antique-ish looking high crown with small table. Has tons of fire. the pics dont so it justice. as you can tell, i''m a terrible photographer.
Thanks everyone!! Here are the specs again:Date: 9/2/2008 10:44:55 AM
Author: ericad
SS, I''m speechless! It''s remarkable, stunning, fantastic!
Remind me again what the dimensions are on that cushion?
I have a lump in my throat just looking at it!!!!!!
woops...sorry. it is 9.25mm x 8.50mm x 5.50Date: 9/2/2008 11:02:34 AM
Author: ericad
Do you know what the millimeter measurement is of the stone? Just asking for my own selfish reasons
I bought it from a jeweler called IBN here in the diamond district. He doesnt do a whole lot of retail work but I was referred to him by someone I work with who was related to him. I also worked with Mark @ ERD for a while and almost bought from him but this stone came up last minute and it just had everything I was looking for.Date: 9/2/2008 11:05:48 AM
Author: goobear78
Amazing ring. I love the setting and your pictures are great!
May I ask where you purchased your stone from? I''m looking at cushions now. Thanks!
It seemed to me that cushions that had 8 pavilion mains were more of the chunky faceted look that I was going for. I looked at dozens of stones and that seemed to be the case but may not be always so not sure. The first few months were just trying to figure out what exactly I was looking for in a stone and a lot of indecision on my part but I wanted a stone that was at least a G/VS2 and there just werent that many in inventory. Then I fell in love with the chunky faceted style so that took even more time to find. I could have settled a few times but glad I didnt - it just takes a while to find the one stone you love. What I also wanted, and I think took the most, was a stone that wasnt too deep so that my 3ct didnt look like a 2ct. Every time a G/VS2 or better came along, it was either too deep or had too big a table. Finding just the right mix - that also didnt look too dark in the center - is what was most painstaking.Date: 9/2/2008 11:14:55 AM
Author: bebe
Stone Seeker, I need your help here.
Currently I have Jon at GOG looking for a 3-4 +ct cushion for me. Could you tell me about the 8 mains?
What''s the difference?
What road blocks did you run up against during your 4mo (!!) search? What could you find, and what could you not find?
Beautiful ring. I''m off to look again!
I ended up with the same thing for my round, which I was not looking for either. But like yours, my stone had other more important things I wanted. I''ve never regretted it, and I doubt you will either. That cushion is just amazing!Date: 9/2/2008 11:25:28 AM
Author: stone_seeker
The VS1 might have been a bit overkill and ended up costing more but had to be done for me to get the stone I wanted.
Bebe - sorry, I dont want you to think that certain tables are better than others. I just prefer the look of smaller ones personally. I saw some cushions with table in mid 60s that looked great. Some believe that smaller tables have more fire and that there is some physics behind that but I''m not sure i that''s true. Its all about the combination of depth and table that determine performance. The smaller tables had higher crowns which is a bit more antique-ish and the look I was going for.Date: 9/2/2008 11:42:31 AM
Author: bebe
SS, what did you consider too big a table? what effect does that have on a cushion.
I''m looking for sharp faceting, top knotch performance, no lower than G, totally eye clean
and hopefully around 4ct.
And I''m with you on the depth as well !!
Is all this asking ''too much'' ha ha!! got a feeling it might take me 4 mos. too.
btw, thanks for being so nice to answer all our questions.
Thanks so much SS.Date: 9/2/2008 12:30:48 PM
Author: stone_seeker
Bebe - sorry, I dont want you to think that certain tables are better than others. I just prefer the look of smaller ones personally. I saw some cushions with table in mid 60s that looked great. Some believe that smaller tables have more fire and that there is some physics behind that but I''m not sure i that''s true. Its all about the combination of depth and table that determine performance. The smaller tables had higher crowns which is a bit more antique-ish and the look I was going for.Date: 9/2/2008 11:42:31 AM
Author: bebe
SS, what did you consider too big a table? what effect does that have on a cushion.
I''m looking for sharp faceting, top knotch performance, no lower than G, totally eye clean
and hopefully around 4ct.
And I''m with you on the depth as well !!
Is all this asking ''too much'' ha ha!! got a feeling it might take me 4 mos. too.
btw, thanks for being so nice to answer all our questions.
Mark at ERD showed me a 3.4ct stone that was gorgeous but it had a big culet which was also something I was hoping to avoid (looked at medium to small to none). But it was a real beauty that if I didnt get the one I ended up with I probably would have bought anwyay.
I think your stone is out there but the larger you go, the fewer the options of getting everything unless you wait so you have to figure out what aspect means the most. Its not asking too much and I''m sure Jon at GOG will find it if its out there. And if your budget is big enough, anything is possible.