Thoughts on this cushion?

[edl]

Been lurking here the past few weeks and have learned TONS about diamonds, much more than I ever expected to.

I''m flying to NY to see Mark/ERD next week, he''s got a few stones lined up for me. In the meantime, he sent a photo of this one.

Any thoughts/comments? I think my SO likes the 4-pav CB, but Mark seems to really like this particular stone.

2.02 D VS1
EX/EX
67.9/56
stk-tk
md cutlet
faint flor

 

[:)]

could you post the pic he sent you?

 

[honey22]

Mark is ''the cushion guy'' so I would be guided by his advice. Please post pics!! A 2ct D VS1 - wowee! What a lucky lady to be wearing that rock!

 

[edl]

Strange, I tried attaching the file but it doesn''t show on my reply. Any suggestions?

 

[edl]

3rd time''s the charm?

 

[edl]

Sweetness. Here''s the GIA cert -

 

[edl]

Date: 9/4/2008 9:59:42 PM
Author: honey22
Mark is ''the cushion guy'' so I would be guided by his advice. Please post pics!! A 2ct D VS1 - wowee! What a lucky lady to be wearing that rock!

Pics are up! Let me know what you cushion experts think

 

[bebe]

Looks nice, though I know very little, other than what my eyes like

do you know the measurements? L to W ?

 

[mystiqkal]

georgous!!!! i love cushion briliants!!!

 

[edl]

Date: 9/4/2008 11:43:21 PM
Author: bebe
Looks nice, though I know very little, other than what my eyes like

do you know the measurements? L to W ?

I believe it''s 7.45 x 7.36 x 5.01 - pretty much square and a bit chunky, but that''s what my SO likes. Personallly I like around a 1.1 ratio, but I have to remind myself this purchase isn''t for me...

 

[Lorelei]

It looks great!

 

[stone_seeker]

your post said 67.9% but the certificate says 57.9% (i think).

Mark has a great eye so I would trust him. He normally searches for stones with depths at least 60% so while this is shallower than many he normally picks, it must be for a good reason. Has he sent you any video so you can see how it performs? Shallower cushions run the risk of having some light loss out the sides but this also has a nice small table which may help.

I lvoe the chunkiness and the D / VS1 are great specs!!

 

[edl]

Thanks everyone for your responses! I''ve been working with Mark for a few weeks now, he''s been very patient with all my newbie questions. Can''t wait to meet him in person.

Stone seeker - I just checked again, the depth is 67.9. The GIA scan is pretty fuzzy, I can see how it''d look like 57.9.

I''m curious why it''s a little dark in the middle, but that''s probably because it wasn''t taken by a pro photographer with good lighting, right?

 

[stone_seeker]

Date: 9/5/2008 10:56:17 AM
Author: edl
Thanks everyone for your responses! I''ve been working with Mark for a few weeks now, he''s been very patient with all my newbie questions. Can''t wait to meet him in person.

Stone seeker - I just checked again, the depth is 67.9. The GIA scan is pretty fuzzy, I can see how it''d look like 57.9.

I''m curious why it''s a little dark in the middle, but that''s probably because it wasn''t taken by a pro photographer with good lighting, right?

Ahhh, ok. Makes more sense. Great depth then! combined with small table should be real nice.

that darkness in the middle is sometimes just the reflection of lens of the camera. Thats why some video of the stone moving is helpful. I wouldnt worry.

 

[goobear78]

Looks like a great stone to me! I just bought a cushion from Mark. He really is THE BEST!

 

[geckodani]

Ditto on not being an expert - but it looks great to me!!!

 

[edl]

So, I hopped off the redeye today and saw Mark. He''s truly pleasant and great to work with.

We added one stone to the mix, here''s the specs:

2.19 F VVS2
7.75 x 7.59 x 5.07
Depth - 66.8
Table - 56
Cutlet - Sm
Polish - VG
Sym - G
Flor - None

Here''s the two side by side. The cut is chunkier than the 2.02 D VS1, but I like both. I''ve been trying to figure out which cut my girlfriend likes more, and it seems she''s somewhat indifferent (she''s looked at the pictures).

Any thoughts? The F is easier on the pocket, but the D seems more "perfect" at least spec-wise. Both are beautiful in person.

 

[kcoursolle]

Both are beautiful looking stones! It really boils down to which one she prefers the appearance of since they are different styles. Did she have any preference at all, or was she totally indifferent? If she is totally indifferent I''d go with your gut. I presonally like the chunkier styles better, but this is just my presonal preference. Both are excellent stones, just different styles.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/10/2008 2:15:46 AM
Author: kcoursolle
Both are beautiful looking stones! It really boils down to which one she prefers the appearance of since they are different styles. Did she have any preference at all, or was she totally indifferent? If she is totally indifferent I''d go with your gut. I presonally like the chunkier styles better, but this is just my presonal preference. Both are excellent stones, just different styles.

Ditto KC!

 

[dani13]

I LOVE the stone on the left b/c I like a chunkier look as well....But you have to trust your gut and pick the stone that looks great to you and the gf (she''s one lucky gal)!!!!

Good luck!!!!

 

[CharmyPoo]

Both are really gorgeous diamonds. In the side by side, the one on the left with the chunkier facets appeal to me. However, I think it is also a bad photo of the D diamond because it looks so gorgeous in the first pic. I don''t think you can go wrong with either. Do you have the plot for the F diamond?

 

[stone_seeker]

I love the one on the left but i''m partial to the chunky faceted stones

But you cant go wrong with either.

 

[purrfectpear]

I prefer the one on the left. Chunky facets and I like the proportions better.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Wow, this is a tough decisoin, both are such beautiful stones! Mark just had to throw another one in the mix, didn''t he

I love the big chunky facets of the stone on the left and would love to see that stone in the light, I bet it looks like a disco ball! Let us know what you decide!

 

[DiamondsforDee]

I''m joining the stone on the left fan club. It''s just gorgeous! Your SO is incredibly lucky.

 

[edl]

Wow, I LOVE this forum! You guys are the best!

I personally like the stone on the left more because of the chunky facets - I like the disco ball comment, it definitely throws a lot of light around - but the stone on the right is more "perfectly" cut, etc. I think it looks more like a typical diamond to the average person, whereas the stone on the left is something that the typical Pricescope cushion lover searches for

I don''t have the GIA cert at my computer for the F VVS2, but here''s a plot map I pulled from another certificate that''s basically the same:

 

[Lorelei]

A cushion''s beauty can''t be determined by numbers, as to these two stunners, it is a matter of taste and preference I think - go with the one which makes your heart sing!

 

[CharmyPoo]

They are both so beautiful and I would be over the moon with either of them. It always amazes me that I am told what I want is so rare and hard to find. Yet, I see them on Pricescope so often. Are Pricescope members getting them all or is it really not so hard to find?

 

[pixley]

I vote for the stone on the LEFT as well, but I''m also a little biased since I have that style of cushion

. I would agree that it looks more definitively cushionesque to the observer and the chunkier facets add to its charm. Both are lovely stones.

 

[dasman08]

Both stones look incredible! Wish I had that kind of budget (for a D/VS1)!