Cushion cut specs

[Tulip04]

Does anyone know what the specs (depth, diameter etc) should be on a 2ct Cushion cut ring for it to look like a 2 ct ring?

Thanks

 

[valeria101]

what do you mean ?

 

[moremoremore]

So it's not too deep you mean?

 

[Tulip04]

I guess its the depth, yes.
Sometimes the ring looks smaller because it's deep.

 

[moremoremore]

I don't know too much about cushions...but finding a stone that is fairly "true to size" will be to just find a well cut stone. There can be so many variantions (depth, table, length to width ratio), that there is no "standard" 2 carat measurements. Valeria knows better...maybe she will reply!

I believe that there aren't any set guidelines out there for cushions...making it a little tougher to find good ones...There are also the true antique cushions and then "modern" cushions....Hope others respond!

 

[oldminer]

I have never created AGA Cut Class charts for cushion shapes. The reason is that they are not normally cut and when they are, cutters take advantage and generally make them too deep. If you can't hope to find one that is cut really well, then there is little point in my creating a search that will end up dissapointing to you.

There are wonderful cushion cuts around. Very pretty, different and with very nice brilliancy, but they are generally not good examples of fine cutting. Fine cutting gives you a stone of proper depth, adequate apparent size and durability. Most cushions don't qualify.

I suggest you use basically oval cut specs, but just don't expect to fall over a cushion that meets those standards. Maybe someone is cutting a super cushion already, but I am not aware of them.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

I think cushions are a great example of why Dave Atlas and I disagree about the standardization of the cut of Fancy Shaped Diamonds. While Dave has developed detailed guidlines for different cuts of diamonds, I feel that these stones should be viewed on a case by case basis.


A 2 to 1 marquise is considered optimal- but some people like them fat- whgatareyagnnado?




In general, the depth you should look for in a cushion can vary between 50% up to 80%- there are quite a few variations.


Here's a sample:

Here's a 2.01 G/SI2 Cushion.




I could find all kinds of problems with this cut based on light return characteristics- but in person, the stone does what I think most buyers would expect- It looks antique. This is contrary to maximum light return.




The person who cut this diamond is literally a "genius" in my opinion.


Remember, if you had paid $10k+ for a piece of rough, the decisions made on the cut are driven by dollars as well as beauty.


This is simply a fact of life in the diamond business- if you ain't got the scratch, you can't buy the rough.


The people with this kind of money are generally pertty good at making such decisions- or they would not be succesful in the diamond biz.




In many cases, these decisions may not be what a gemologist might choose- another fact of life in this business.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 4/19/2004 12:30:53 PM moremoremore wrote:



Valeria knows better...maybe she will reply!

----------------

Thanks more! but I don't...

As far as I do know, any diamond that does not correspond to the classic cut shapes would at least sometimes be called "cushion"! There are no rules or standard model. So you can well set your own set of priorities and use them 'cause there isn't anyone out there to prove you wrong

If the only restriction is 'size' (area face up) than keeping depth under 65% would do the trick (these are rectangular, and depth is calculated relative to the width - so it does not have the same 'interpretation' as it does for rounds and squares).



Some called (here, in some older posts) the Regent a 'cushion' because the shape is too rounded to be 'square' ?! If you want best light return and decent size for weight - this is it, I guess.

Than... at least one shopper got a 'cushion' from Good Old Gold (somewhere on 'Show me the Ring") having it selected for light return - another way to go for it I suppose.

And OMCs are called 'cushion' and well...

There is at least one branded cushion cut - but with little info available on what exactly makes this particular model great. It's called "Cushette" and you will find a few threads (mostly with questions) on it. I am not aware wether anyone else inspected these in person aside Garry ("Cut Nut") who did not sound too impressed. From my own memories, the cut looks quite unusual, with some 'radiating' model from aparently small, long facets cut on the pavilion. I would not say that their brilliance is unmatched - just a different cut.

Actually, you might want to take a look at Diamondsbylauren. The site lists quite a few unusual cuts and some are labeled 'cushion', 'lozenghe' or ... you'll see. Some models are really appealing - in my view - and if you are looking for a completely one of a kind, this may well be the place. Most of the stones are not white (fancy) - but if the type of cut is appealing to you, I would ask. No idea who cuts those, but those are clearly beyond standardization - not a bad thing, in my view.

Just 0.2

ADDin: David and I must have been writing in the same time

 

[Tulip04]

thanks for your help.