Calling Cushion Experts! Cehra question on chart....

[diagem]

Date: 4/14/2007 12:22:13 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 4/14/2007 2:01:44 AM
Author: DiaGem
Check out the Pav and Crown on this baby..., and yes... according to the GIA... it would be called a modified too!!!! Alltough it was cut in the late 1800''s!!!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/check-this-out-tiffany-diamond-128-54-carats.60693/

You know DG that is a very interesting point.... its modified - but modified HOW? Hmm..... and I''ve only seen that one plot for modifieds.... but cushion brilliants have two distinctive plots and produce two very distinctive looks - and share a name. And yet old mine brilliants and SOME cushion brilliants can be almost indistinguishable. It has split mains on the crown and pavillion..., it has four extra triangular facets on each one of the four main pavilions near the girdle, and its culet is divided by eight more facets going all the way up to the first step facet junction... (i hope you can understand me!)

yeah, cushions make no sense at all LOL And yet the pursuit of illumination drives me forward! I wish some of the attributes had names... or if they do, I knew what they were. There''s a name for just about every feature and quality in a round...

... and suddenly I am gripped with this fear that cushions will be overtaken and perfected and will lose all of their uniqueness and artistry... which I totally do not want. But it would be wonderful to be able to have these discussions about them with some common terms like... many of the cushions you''ve done have 8 uniform pavillions, whether the stone is square or elongated and I still prefer that look even in an elongated stone (like that maxmillion diamond) but some of these diamonds are cut on a long axis and have a slight bit of an emerald cut character to them which I didn''t like at first but have come to love in my stone and appreciate in others. And as of this thread I''ve seen that quality in a relatively (to the axis) square stone. I dont think it is posible with all the different varieties...., one thing for sure... I would not want it to happen!

What I would be interested in seeing would be a stone that is elongated and has an OMC pattern with the 4 corner facets thinner than the 4 side facets, but the two sets of side facets the same size even though the stone is elongated... it would shift the corner a bit to the longer side... hmmm... I don''t know if that would look good, but I DO think it looks good to shift the corner facets off when all 8 pav mains are uniform diameter.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/14/2007 12:56:05 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/14/2007 12:22:13 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

You know DG that is a very interesting point.... its modified - but modified HOW? Hmm..... and I''ve only seen that one plot for modifieds.... but cushion brilliants have two distinctive plots and produce two very distinctive looks - and share a name. And yet old mine brilliants and SOME cushion brilliants can be almost indistinguishable. It has split mains on the crown and pavillion..., it has four extra triangular facets on each one of the four main pavilions near the girdle, and its culet is divided by eight more facets going all the way up to the first step facet junction... (i hope you can understand me!)

Actually, I think I do - at least the the part about the 4 extra triangles near the girdle bisecting the 4 side pav mains. Not quite sure I have the visual on the culet part LOL

The question was actually rhetorical though LOL! Or at least more philosophical in nature... meaning, that every time I see a cert that says " modified" I have to say okay, but modified HOW? because it''s obvious that they''re not always done to mimic the plot on the cert! Or rather that the cert isn''t always an accurate reflection of the cut! Modified could really mean anything over 58 facets!

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/14/2007 1:03:15 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 4/14/2007 12:56:05 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/14/2007 12:22:13 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

You know DG that is a very interesting point.... its modified - but modified HOW? Hmm..... and I''ve only seen that one plot for modifieds.... but cushion brilliants have two distinctive plots and produce two very distinctive looks - and share a name. And yet old mine brilliants and SOME cushion brilliants can be almost indistinguishable. It has split mains on the crown and pavillion..., it has four extra triangular facets on each one of the four main pavilions near the girdle, and its culet is divided by eight more facets going all the way up to the first step facet junction... (i hope you can understand me!)

Actually, I think I do - at least the the part about the 4 extra triangles near the girdle bisecting the 4 side pav mains. Not quite sure I have the visual on the culet part LOL The 4 extra facets are actually extra steps..., and the culet facets are acting the same as the star facets on any brilliant crown.

The question was actually rhetorical though LOL! Or at least more philosophical in nature... meaning, that every time I see a cert that says '' modified'' I have to say okay, but modified HOW? because it''s obvious that they''re not always done to mimic the plot on the cert! Or rather that the cert isn''t always an accurate reflection of the cut! Modified could really mean anything over 58 facets! Correct. 59 facets plus will qualify automaticaly as a modified brilliant!!!

There are so many variations of Cushion patterns that the GIA "claim" they can''t copy the faceting plot for every odd faceting arrangement out there....
Pity, they sure know how to charge for grading $$$$$$$$$$$!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/14/2007 1:23:58 PM
Author: DiaGem
There are so many variations of Cushion patterns that the GIA ''claim'' they can''t copy the faceting plot for every odd faceting arrangement out there....
Pity, they sure know how to charge for grading $$$$$$$$$$$!

I say a big old PSHAW! They have to run a sarin to get the angle info they get in the first place - how freaking hard would it be to print up the 3D plot of the pavillion on their cert when they print up all of the *other* info on it.

Okay it took me all of like 2 minutes to make this up using my sarin, if they had the program already set up it could insert and print the plot of the actual stone right onto their grading certificate. And they could do it for the side as well... and I suppose you could argue that the sarin isn''t 100% accurate but they could throw in disclaimers, at least it would be *vastly* more accurate than the 100% NOT accurate generic plots they use!

 

[Cehrabehra]

compare to the actual cert plot and I must admit my stone actually is fairly close to this, but others are definitely not!

 

[Cehrabehra]

sorry yellow sparkles for the diversion into cut and grading philosophy LOL!!

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/14/2007 2:08:31 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 4/14/2007 1:23:58 PM
Author: DiaGem
There are so many variations of Cushion patterns that the GIA ''claim'' they can''t copy the faceting plot for every odd faceting arrangement out there....
Pity, they sure know how to charge for grading $$$$$$$$$$$!

I say a big old PSHAW! They have to run a sarin to get the angle info they get in the first place - how freaking hard would it be to print up the 3D plot of the pavillion on their cert when they print up all of the *other* info on it.

Okay it took me all of like 2 minutes to make this up using my sarin, if they had the program already set up it could insert and print the plot of the actual stone right onto their grading certificate. And they could do it for the side as well... and I suppose you could argue that the sarin isn''t 100% accurate but they could throw in disclaimers, at least it would be *vastly* more accurate than the 100% NOT accurate generic plots they use!

I dont think Sarin can read and draw every type of "fancy shaped faceting arrangement out there if it is not somehow in their memory!!
But i may be wrong...

 

[Rachie]

I have a cushion that has the same plot on a GIA report as yellowsparkles and it does not look like crushed ice. It is also a cushion modified brilliant. I guess this just goes to show the uniqueness of all the different cushions out there! Here is a pic of it when it was loose.

 

[yellowsparkles]

Date: 4/14/2007 2:13:55 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
sorry yellow sparkles for the diversion into cut and grading philosophy LOL!!

No problemo. This is all very interesting and way beyond my expertise. I am glad that you all are participating in the discussion.

 

[yellowsparkles]

Rachie I love you stone. If you don''t mind giving the details. I appologize if you have already done so in another thread.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/14/2007 2:53:03 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/14/2007 2:08:31 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 4/14/2007 1:23:58 PM
Author: DiaGem
There are so many variations of Cushion patterns that the GIA ''claim'' they can''t copy the faceting plot for every odd faceting arrangement out there....
Pity, they sure know how to charge for grading $$$$$$$$$$$!

I say a big old PSHAW! They have to run a sarin to get the angle info they get in the first place - how freaking hard would it be to print up the 3D plot of the pavillion on their cert when they print up all of the *other* info on it.

Okay it took me all of like 2 minutes to make this up using my sarin, if they had the program already set up it could insert and print the plot of the actual stone right onto their grading certificate. And they could do it for the side as well... and I suppose you could argue that the sarin isn''t 100% accurate but they could throw in disclaimers, at least it would be *vastly* more accurate than the 100% NOT accurate generic plots they use!

I dont think Sarin can read and draw every type of ''fancy shaped faceting arrangement out there if it is not somehow in their memory!!
But i may be wrong...

I don''t know, but I''d like to know. It seems if it works by using shadow that it could work with every shape... I think I''ll start another thread on this and see what those in the know have to say!

 

[Rachie]

Not a problem!

1.05 ct, I, VVS2
6.79x5.25x3.67
Table - 54%
Depth - 69.9%
Girdle - Thin to slightly thick, faceted
Polish - VG
Symmetry - VG
Fluorescence - Strong Blue

Here is a pic of it in the ring.
https://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/files/Rachring143.jpg
ETA: I don't know why this one didn't show up. I tried to post more than one pic and apparently I didn't do so well.

And one that I took today. The prongs look gigantic in pictures! I promise that they are nice and dainty in person!

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 4/14/2007 4:02:09 PM
Author: Rachie
I have a cushion that has the same plot on a GIA report as yellowsparkles and it does not look like crushed ice. It is also a cushion modified brilliant. I guess this just goes to show the uniqueness of all the different cushions out there! Here is a pic of it when it was loose.

Right-- this is the same type of modified that I was discussing above... Rachie''s picture is really good to illustrate this b/c you can see clearly that the pavillion mains do not go all the way up the pavillion. Instead they end about 2/3 of the way up at the "split" that DiaGem described, and in that remaining 1/3 there are extra pavillion facets-- that is why these are "modified".

In contrast, here is the cushion modified brilliant that tends to look more like crushed ice-- as you can tell, totally different pavillion faceting, and the extra facets are more under the table which I think is what causes the crushed ice look...

 

[boston_jeff]

Sorry-- posted my cert by accident...

Trying again...

 

[neatfreak]

Is this the one you wanted Jeff?

 

[boston_jeff]

... here

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/14/2007 6:26:48 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Right-- this is the same type of modified that I was discussing above... Rachie''s picture is really good to illustrate this b/c you can see clearly that the pavillion mains do not go all the way up the pavillion. Instead they end about 2/3 of the way up at the ''split'' that DiaGem described, and in that remaining 1/3 there are extra pavillion facets-- that is why these are ''modified''.

In contrast, here is the cushion modified brilliant that tends to look more like crushed ice-- as you can tell, totally different pavillion faceting, and the extra facets are more under the table which I think is what causes the crushed ice look...

Okay I ignored your cert and looked at the other plot you were talking about and I disagree... at least in part - I pointed out to you that one that did NOT look like crushed ice but had that facet structure, remember? And I''ve seen MANY (so many in fact its hard for me to believe these that don''t look crushed!!!) examples of *this* (the op mods) facet plot that really DO look like crushed ice.

On the first paragraph above though, I DO see what you''re talking about and I think you''re right... thank you! And after that and thinking about this more, I think it again falls into what on a brilliant we would attribute to LGF but on the mods is... well heck I have no idea what to call that center ring of facets, but whatever they are, I think it matters a lot how far under the table they stick out or if the LGF above them do so as well....

 

[yellowsparkles]

First, I appologize if I am asking the same dumb questions. I am not so great with the technical stuff. Cehra and Boston Jeff - you both have OMC. I really like the looks of your stones. Besides the plot being different on the GIA report, is there a huge difference in the looks of your stones and the 1.54 cushion I was looking at? I really like the stats on yours Boston Jeff. I wouldn''t mind going lower than a G with some floro. Do you all recommend sticking to EX or VG symm?
Also, Boston Jeff - what vendor did you use to find the stone? Scott 00 I like your stone too and it seems to look like the 2.04. Gee, I need to re read this thread.... it is starting to get more confusing. lol

I am going to call the vendor I have been talking to tomorrow. Should I ask him to find an OMC also? I like the looks of the 1.54, but I like the idea of having an OMC. I would like to trade color for size and see how much bigger I can afford.

Thanks again for everyone''s help.

'');" alt="Insert smilie

" src="http://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/36.gif" align="absMiddle border=0">

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/15/2007 4:42:42 AM
Author: yellowsparkles
First, I appologize if I am asking the same dumb questions. I am not so great with the technical stuff. Cehra and Boston Jeff - you both have OMC. I really like the looks of your stones. Besides the plot being different on the GIA report, is there a huge difference in the looks of your stones and the 1.54 cushion I was looking at? I really like the stats on yours Boston Jeff. I wouldn''t mind going lower than a G with some floro. Do you all recommend sticking to EX or VG symm?
Also, Boston Jeff - what vendor did you use to find the stone? Scott 00 I like your stone too and it seems to look like the 2.04. Gee, I need to re read this thread.... it is starting to get more confusing. lol

I am going to call the vendor I have been talking to tomorrow. Should I ask him to find an OMC also? I like the looks of the 1.54, but I like the idea of having an OMC. I would like to trade color for size and see how much bigger I can afford.

Thanks again for everyone''s help.

'');'' alt=""Insert smilie

'' src="http://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/36.gif" align=absMiddle border=0>

Okay, I’m going to start with the easiest stuff first First, there is a certain rationale to getting the HIGHEST sym and pol you can find. In round we wouldn’t accept anything less than ID ID or EX EX, maybe the occasional VG. When I got my stone I was very happy that it was VG VG. The modern cushions that are coming out are often EX EX but most cushions in general are all over the place. Yes, the higher the better, but it isn’t always necessary. Both of the stones you posted had “good” listed and they still looked beautiful from those pics. The antique style cushions can take a lot of color, lack of sym etc. and just spit it back to you as CHARM. These things are just not charming in the Irbs but the OECs are also very charming even when irregular.

Jeff and I have OMB stones – which just means the certificate says “old mine brilliant” which is very similar to the antique version of the “cushion brilliant” but with higher crowns, bigger culets, and smaller tables. Another good thing about the OMBs is that for some reason they’re cheaper still! But if you like that old fashioned chunky look, you’re more likely to find it in an OMB anyway so bonus bonus! If you ask for an OMC you very well might get a genuine antique which might or might not be what you seek.

As for comparing these two mods with my stone (or anyone else’s) it’s really impossible to do without a hundred more pics or in person with a loupe. I would have to see at what angle the additional facets effected the look of the stone…. A picture of the pavilion might help some… or a sarin scan gem file LOL what you posted is very face up and I don’t know what would happen when the stone is angled a bit. That square stone really has a pretty kozibe effect though….. if you don’t look at these and feel in love, keep looking… there’s more out there! But both of these are beautiful in spite of their modified cert LOL (perhaps I’m too hard on mods LOL)

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 4/15/2007 4:42:42 AM
Author: yellowsparkles
Also, Boston Jeff - what vendor did you use to find the stone?

Hi ys,

I used Mark @ ERD, but, like Cehra, I actually found the stone myself online (in her case, Bluenile, in my case, Mondera). I sent Mark the cert, and he knew the cutter or supplier so he was able to call the stone in and look at it himself to make sure it was not a dud. That''s why working with Mark is so great-- not only can he find great stones on his own but he also may be able to quickly call in a stone you find elsewhere (since a lot of them are nearby in the district) and give you his expert opinion.

With respect to Pol/Sym, mine is G/VG, which I am very happy with. Others I saw with Good symmetry tended to be a little wonky, but that is not to say others would be just fine.

You really seem that you are on the right track, and if you are patient I have no doubt that you will find a stone you love. Since you like the chunky facets, I would recommend that you expand your search to focus on antique-style cushion brilliants and OMBs, and the occasional mod that fits the bill...

 

[yellowsparkles]

Thanks everyone.

I feel better now. I know what I want and I know that with patience I will find "the stone".