kathness
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2013
- Messages
- 403
Chrono|1365165511|3420791 said:There are sort of ideal old-style cushion cuts but for the most part, there is no standard idea cushion (or any fancy shapes) cut or grading. There is no HCA or other method except to judge an ASET.
ecf8503|1365167009|3420803 said:For fancy cuts you can't judge by the numbers - you need and ASET image (and the honest eye of a jeweler who is an expert in these types of cuts).
That said, Good Old Gold's August Vintage cushions (which are an antique style with larger facets than modern cushions) CAN be given an Ideal cut status and a perfect 0 for light performance.
What style of cushion are you looking for (modern or antique)?
FancyPantsSparkles|1365168965|3420820 said:Who is grading the diamonds as ideal though? GIA or AGS?
FancyPantsSparkles|1365168965|3420820 said:ecf8503|1365167009|3420803 said:For fancy cuts you can't judge by the numbers - you need and ASET image (and the honest eye of a jeweler who is an expert in these types of cuts).
That said, Good Old Gold's August Vintage cushions (which are an antique style with larger facets than modern cushions) CAN be given an Ideal cut status and a perfect 0 for light performance.
What style of cushion are you looking for (modern or antique)?
Who is grading the diamonds as ideal though? GIA or AGS?
ecf8503|1365173620|3420875 said:Sorry - didn't mean to confuse anyone. But if you look at the AGS document, on this one for example, it does say Ideal cut and 0 for light performance. http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9600/ I haven't looked at *all* of GOG's AVC's, but to me it's a good sign that at least some stones are able to attain this level of approval from a major lab. JMHO.
kathness|1365179985|3420950 said:1. Is there a particular ratio a person should look for? I've read somewhere that a ratio of 1.25 was meant to be good for cushion cut diamonds.
Personal preference. I like mine to be absolutely square although lately, a slightly rectangular shape seems interesting.
2. Is there an advantage of having modern cut cushions over vintage cut cushions? Or is this a personal preference?
Personal preference. I love chunky facets with tiny tables so antique style appeals greatly to me. That's not to say I haven't been wowed by a few modern cushions though.
3. I've seen the AVC from GOGs how does this compare to VC Antique Cushion cut? According to VC's site he no longer accepts August Vintage Cuts.
No idea as I've only seen GOG's AVCs in person.
kathness said:Thanks Chrono! So the more red the better.
I was looking at 3 different cushions from VC, ERD and GOG. I got a bit confused with the aset images they have.
Rhino said:Just for the record there are currently 2 cushion cuts I am aware of that qualify as official AGS Ideal. The Brellia Square Cushion Hearts & Arrows and the August Vintage Cushion (those that would get Ideal in each category). Even those Brellia and AVC that don't get the full "Ideal Cut" grade (due to polish/symmetry) will always have AGS Ideal Light Performance though. I think that AGS may also be changing certain criteria to qualify for Ideal Cut. Similar to GIA, how GIA will allow "very good" polish/symmetry to qualify for their "Excellent" cut grade I believe AGS may be following suite and allowing their "Excellent" grade for polish/symmetry to also get "Ideal Cut" status. I've seen this on some new Reports but I've yet to talk to one of their lab techs to confirm.
There are some other modern cushion cuts which apparently also qualify for "Ideal" in optics but confirmation with AGS would also be required.
Just like their round alternatives these ideals take more time and labor to cut and more material is cut away to achieve the final product so naturally it is impossible to cut them at the same cost it does for non ideals which focus primarily on being cut to maintain the most weight possible.
Victor Canera said:Hi Kathness,
As others have mentioned, there isn't really a standardized "ideal cut" status in cushions but going with AGSL, they do have their cut score which is a combination of the other grades like polish, symmetry, light performance. They do use the "ideal" terminology in giving the highest score.
Our Canera Antique Cushions consistently score 0 for Light Performance and in most instances score a 0 in the final cut category. We've been really constrained in stones because of the rough diamond environment but as an example, we just sent a 2.35ct stone to AGS that achieved an AGS 000 score.
The difference in ASET images can also be partly attributed to the ASET setup that a vendor uses. We've been tweaking our ASET setup for months and I think we'll continue to tweak this going forward.
The cost difference from other stones pretty much has to do with yield from rough. Our yield from rough is less than 50% these days so we're losing more than 50% of the weight of rough into a polished stone. If you have a lot of specifications and guidelines (light performance considerations for example) that you need to follow in making a stone, you're going to lose a lot of weight from rough as opposed to just making a stone have the general appearance of that design. So, as an example, you could have a 1.05ct, really nice performing cushion or a 1.40ct that just looks like an antique cushion.
Good luck.