iota15
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2010
- Messages
- 1,278
frankiextah|1303449624|2902453 said:iota15|1303443022|2902399 said:frankiextah|1303441246|2902383 said:Just to be clear a 2 ct cushion is visually and definitively smaller than a 2ct round brilliant and thus is less expensive.
I would disagree with that. A 2 ct cushion is not necessarily smaller looking. Depending on the stone, cushions can look larger or smaller. Especially at the 2 ct size, there's a lot more weight for a size differential - and certainly, there are some 2 ct cushions that look MUCH larger than a typical 2 ct round.
I apologize for being misinformed... I would love to see an optically excellent cushion that has a larger physical parameter than an ideal cut round brilliant, of the same carat weight? I would imagine the cushion would have to have a shallower crown and a shallower depth to achieve the same circumference as a round brilliant, and thus wouldn't have excellent optics in the first place ?
It's a common misconception. Cushions can be bigger, and they can be smaller... Let me show you some examples:
*************
2ct Ideal Round Brilliant
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8078/
51.88 sq. mm's of surface area (coverage)
2 ct Cushion
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8192/
54.01 sq. mm's of surface area coverage
This cushion is 2.13 square mm's bigger than the RB.
2 ct AVC
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8214/
53.2 sq mm's
This AVC is 1.32 sq. mm's bigger.
***********
3 carat Ideal Round Brilliant
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2205261.htm
69.07 sq. mm
3 ct Cushion
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8221/
74.05 sq. mm's
This cushion is 4.98 sq. mm's larger than a RB of the same weight.
**********
I have also noticed that elongated cushions seem to face-up larger as well.
The general perception is that RB's are larger because their outer measurements are greater than the cushion's outer measurements. However, if you look at how much surface area (true coverage) each stone provides, cushions can certainly be larger.
If you go even further and calculate the circumference of each stone (the distance around the edge of each stone), you'll find the cushions above are actually significantly larger than the RB's above.