shape
carat
color
clarity

Canera Vintage Cushions

madelise

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
5,401
Have you guys seen the new VC Vintage Cushions? I tried scouring his website and youtube, and didn't find anything. He's only been teasing on his Twitter and FB page.

Hehe, more bling droolage.

Screen Shot 2012-05-17 at 10.23.39 PM.png
 
I don't like it. Sorry. Those facets under the table are too big and it looks dark. Does he offer ASETs? It could be that his pic taking set up is just bad because I like Victor, but his cushions to date... no. I wouldn't buy one and I haven't seen one yet I'd recommend to another.
 
Gypsy|1337318979|3198184 said:
I don't like it. Sorry. Those facets under the table are too big and it looks dark. Does he offer ASETs? It could be that his pic taking set up is just bad because I like Victor, but his cushions to date... no. I wouldn't buy one and I haven't seen one yet I'd recommend to another.

You haven't seen one what? I'm confused. You don't like any vendor's cushions, or just this one?

I see what you mean by the dark areas.. Do those count as "windows"?
 
Gypsy|1337318979|3198184 said:
I don't like it. Sorry. Those facets under the table are too big and it looks dark. Does he offer ASETs? It could be that his pic taking set up is just bad because I like Victor, but his cushions to date... no. I wouldn't buy one and I haven't seen one yet I'd recommend to another.

Er, ditto. Based on that one pic, me no likey. (how's that for a technical sounding conclusion?)
 
madelise|1337319473|3198190 said:
Gypsy|1337318979|3198184 said:
I don't like it. Sorry. Those facets under the table are too big and it looks dark. Does he offer ASETs? It could be that his pic taking set up is just bad because I like Victor, but his cushions to date... no. I wouldn't buy one and I haven't seen one yet I'd recommend to another.

You haven't seen one what? I'm confused. You don't like any vendor's cushions, or just this one?

I see what you mean by the dark areas.. Do those count as "windows"?

No, I like plenty of windows. I haven't seen one from Victor that I like (this isn't the first I've seen). Not windows. That either bad photography or obstruction/ leakage.


T-gal, I like the techinical jargon. :D
 
Oh I see. Whoops, I thought you meant you've never seen one, period, as in from all the vendors, and all I could of was, wahh what about them AVCs!

Are those dark areas purely due to bad angles, maybe? Or is it because it is shallow? :confused: :confused: :confused: I notice that some of the DBL branded vintage cushions get these dark areas, too.


PS I love learning from you guys :tongue: There should be a handbook, I swear.
 
Hmm... not a fan, honestly.

My technical addendum to TGal's technical conclusion 8) It's hard to tell what's going on from just the videos but I'm seeing lots of giant facets and lots of teeny tiny facets and I don't know what to focus on. IMO big chunky facets that produce big rolling flashes a la AVC can be lovely, groups of smaller virtual facets that yield a "tub of glitter" look and that permit uniform colour distribution all over the stone like DBL's signatures can be lovely, but I only want one or the other...


M AVC - soft, rounded body and table outlines, cut for quantity of big bold flashes, I like the uniformly "chunky" look
Capture_14.png


M DBL - soft rounded body and table outlines again, cut to highlight and distribute colour
CaptureDBL.png


M VC - straight sharp body and table outlines, mix of large and small VF groupings in different parts of the stone, uneven colour distribution, but what is the goal?
VC4.pngVC5.png
 
Hum...I really don't like it either. It's the first VC cushion I've seen and it does nothing for me. I find it sharp, fragmented, cold looking - basically the polar opposite of everything I normally love about antique stones. :blackeye:
 
The one from VC looks more modern to me than antique. I guess there could be a market for those, but I vastly prefer the AVC.
 
I dont care for it either :-( Seems like the facets outside of the table are also large.
 
Ooh, I like the 2.0 version a LOT, Victor! :love: Much improved.
 
Hope it's okay for me to post this pic from VC's facebook fan page.

The improved 2.0 version:

GORGEOUS! I would take one of these in a heart beat.

Canera cushion.jpg
 
Apologies to the PS staff for my last for it not being within the forum policies. I wasn't aware of not being able to post photos.

I just wanted to thank all of you for your constructive criticisms and feedback.

Anyway, suffice it to say that these two stones are not our final Canera Vintage Cushions. We haven't finalized the faceting pattern of our stones yet. They had been sent back for re-polishing earlier this week. We've been working on Canera Vintage Cushion v2 which incorporates a lot of changes based on computer simulation results from these two stones, consultations with AGS and feedback from our friends and clients. We've also made changes to the manufacturing end of the equation.

These two stones gave us a lot of experience in the rough market for the "models" of rough needed to polish cushions, specifically vintage cushions. It allowed us to:
1)See what the yield is based on certain rough shapes therefore the final polished price. Quick fact; There is an additional approx. 15% loss involved between polishing a regular cushion modified stone and a vintage cushion. This is one of the reasons vintage cushions are more expensive.
2)To see how our vision translated with the polishing of our polishing partner.

Another quick fact; Did you know that cushion rough (unless rectangular) can be used to polish round brilliant diamonds? This is another reason why cushions are a bit more expensive in general than other fancy shapes. The reason is that we're competing against rough buyers who would like to polish these stones into rounds. With the huge price difference between rounds an fancy shapes, it's very difficult to complete against these buyers and have a final cushion come in at a reasonable final cost.


My best to all of you,
 
Laila619|1337378461|3198712 said:
Hope it's okay for me to post this pic from VC's facebook fan page.

The improved 2.0 version:

GORGEOUS! I would take one of these in a heart beat.


The 2.0 is much better. I agree. MUCH BETTER. I would try to keep that table more square though and less round.

Victor are you going to invest in a nice ASET set up? Because that would be something VERY important to us Prosumers when it comes to recommending diamonds.


Have you seen this stone in terms of faceting patterns? I prefer this to the AVC facet pattern, so I thought I'd post it for you to show you alternatives to help you since you haven't nailed down the final cushion faceting.

http://www.engagementringsdirect.com/0.93-carat-g-vvs2-a-cut-beyond-cushion-cut-diamond-gid-15231.html Just the way it combines antique and modern and a high table, plus no strong maltese cross. (Not suggesting anyone copy it, it' belongs to Mark, but it might help him figure out options for his own faceting).
 
Are we sure that's 2.0? It's not 3.0, because that's is HEAPS better. Booyah!
 
Gypsy|1337379175|3198715 said:
Laila619|1337378461|3198712 said:
Hope it's okay for me to post this pic from VC's facebook fan page.

The improved 2.0 version:

GORGEOUS! I would take one of these in a heart beat.


The 2.0 is much better. I agree. MUCH BETTER. I would try to keep that table more square though and less round.

Victor are you going to invest in a nice ASET set up? Because that would be something VERY important to us Prosumers when it comes to recommending diamonds.


Have you seen this stone in terms of faceting patterns? I prefer this to the AVC facet pattern, so I thought I'd post it for you to show you alternatives to help you since you haven't nailed down the final cushion faceting.

http://www.engagementringsdirect.com/0.93-carat-g-vvs2-a-cut-beyond-cushion-cut-diamond-gid-15231.html Just the way it combines antique and modern and a high table, plus no strong maltese cross. (Not suggesting anyone copy it, it' belongs to Mark, but it might help him figure out options for his own faceting).

See I think the ERD one is beautiful, BUT it almost looks too splintery to me, like a cross between a round and a cushion. The center especially reminds me of a round. I think I prefer the bolder, chunky facets.
 
Much better!

ETA: Gypsy I actually like the very round table ::)
 
Thanks guys.

I'm actually pretty happy with the faceting on this last stone. If I were to make changes they would be very minor at this point.

I've gotten great news from AGS today. We've been speaking to them for the past months about light performance with cushions. We've submitted a Sarin scan of this exact diamond and I've just gotten word that it would be "From a light performance perspective, this is a very solid 0." as our AGS contact so nicely put it.
 
The version 2.0 is FAR better looking, like night and day. I really like it, and the fact it will have great performance but not look like an AVC replica. I much prefer the facet structure of this stone to the AVCs. It looks more rustic (?).
 
justginger|1337381132|3198734 said:
The version 2.0 is FAR better looking, like night and day. I really like it, and the fact it will have great performance but not look like an AVC replica. I much prefer the facet structure of this stone to the AVCs. It looks more rustic (?).

Ah, but it IS AVC. A. Victor. Canera. :cheeky:
 
Victor Canera|1337380724|3198726 said:
Thanks guys.

I'm actually pretty happy with the faceting on this last stone. If I were to make changes they would be very minor at this point.

I've gotten great news from AGS today. We've been speaking to them for the past months about light performance with cushions. We've submitted a Sarin scan of this exact diamond and I've just gotten word that it would be "From a light performance perspective, this is a very solid 0." as our AGS contact so nicely put it.
WONDERFUL NEWS!
 
Oh wow, I really love the 2.0 version. Drool-worthy, for sure.
 
Love the 2.0 version.
 
Yssie said:
Much better!

ETA: Gypsy I actually like the very round table ::)

+1. The OMCs I've seen have roundish table. So to me this cut looks more like a real OMC than those with a square table. It would be nice to have both options, and that can make this line less predictable.
 
I love the 2.0 and the DBL :love: :cheeky:
 
Oh, just noticed that it has no culet. Adding one (please make it round and not rectangular) would add some nice kozibe effect. With those two things it would be very close replica of OMC.
 
Victor Canera|1337380724|3198726 said:
Thanks guys.

I'm actually pretty happy with the faceting on this last stone. If I were to make changes they would be very minor at this point.

I've gotten great news from AGS today. We've been speaking to them for the past months about light performance with cushions. We've submitted a Sarin scan of this exact diamond and I've just gotten word that it would be "From a light performance perspective, this is a very solid 0." as our AGS contact so nicely put it.

Wow, that is great!! Congrats!
 
The 2.0 version is very nice, I like it a lot :lickout:
 
Love the new 2.0 version, too!
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top