CushionShopper
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2007
- Messages
- 12
After a long search, I finally settled on the perfect cushion for me:
2.11 carat cushion brilliant (not modified), Canadian
G VS2
D: 68
T: 61
Pol: VG
Sym: G
Fluor: None
Cul: None
Girdle: Thin to Very Thick
I had heard that smaller tables were more desireable in the cushion brilliants, but this rock just pops without the "crushed ice" look of the modified. I compared this stone to others with 55 or 56 tables and found this one to be the clear winner, though the others were beautiful as well. The smaller table definitely gave the stones more of an antique look. So, depending on what you''re going for, that could be ideal.
I also looked at a lot of cushion modified brilliants with various depths and table sizes. In my opinion, the cushion brilliant blows it away because the light is distributed throughout the entire stone (if it''s a good cut). Having said that, I also looked at some other cushion brilliants that were dead in the middle.
Anyway, the search for a cushion has been a lot of work, though the end product is worth it. My advice is to start your search early (like 2-3 months early) and develop a stomach for telling jewelers to keep looking. Also, there is a lot of bad info out there. I found that many of the jewelers that I talked to tried to convince me that a cushion brilliant was the same cut as a modified-that''s definitely not the case. Go to Mark Turnowski''s website and watch the interview with him. He knows what''s up and that interview will shed some light on the subject. If possible, go visit him. He''s a great guy and super knowledgeable. I got my stone elsewhere, but that was just because I happened to find it through my own search (I don''t live in NYC). Good luck to everyone.
Will post pics in a week or two.
2.11 carat cushion brilliant (not modified), Canadian
G VS2
D: 68
T: 61
Pol: VG
Sym: G
Fluor: None
Cul: None
Girdle: Thin to Very Thick
I had heard that smaller tables were more desireable in the cushion brilliants, but this rock just pops without the "crushed ice" look of the modified. I compared this stone to others with 55 or 56 tables and found this one to be the clear winner, though the others were beautiful as well. The smaller table definitely gave the stones more of an antique look. So, depending on what you''re going for, that could be ideal.
I also looked at a lot of cushion modified brilliants with various depths and table sizes. In my opinion, the cushion brilliant blows it away because the light is distributed throughout the entire stone (if it''s a good cut). Having said that, I also looked at some other cushion brilliants that were dead in the middle.
Anyway, the search for a cushion has been a lot of work, though the end product is worth it. My advice is to start your search early (like 2-3 months early) and develop a stomach for telling jewelers to keep looking. Also, there is a lot of bad info out there. I found that many of the jewelers that I talked to tried to convince me that a cushion brilliant was the same cut as a modified-that''s definitely not the case. Go to Mark Turnowski''s website and watch the interview with him. He knows what''s up and that interview will shed some light on the subject. If possible, go visit him. He''s a great guy and super knowledgeable. I got my stone elsewhere, but that was just because I happened to find it through my own search (I don''t live in NYC). Good luck to everyone.
Will post pics in a week or two.
300x240.png)