modern cushion VS antique cushion

[diagem]

Recently i've been finding out that a lot of jewelry connoiseurs would prefer antique piece of diamond jewelry rather than a modern piece, especialy when it come with cushion diamond shapes.

The biggest problem is that antique cushions are very rare finds these days, and modern cushions are all over the market.

As jewelry lovers i would love to find out your preferences:

ANTIQUE CUSHION DIAMONDS (OLD-MINE.) (the heavy topped, lumpy cushions that reflect their fire in a blocky kind of light return)

OR MODERN CUSHIONS ( that include a very brilliant light return, but are much flatter than their counterparts)

Which would you prefer????

 

[valeria101]

Old cushion... is old mine ? If not I sort of understand the question but not quite. Picture would help

 

[diagem]

Sorry, yes i meant antique cushion = Old-Mine Cuts

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/18/2005 437 AM
Author: DiaGem
Sorry, yes i meant antique cushion = Old-Mine Cuts

Well, I had no idea Jonathan finished his new webpage about old and new cushion cuts (link). These diamond portraits come from there.

For what that matters, one vote for the good old fellow to the right !

looks more like "polished stone" than high tech optic sculpture. If these were two art galleries, they'd never catch quite the same crowd, I think.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Here is a side by side diamcalc model of each with the same lighting and exact same weight and facing the same direction

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/18/2005 4:24:40 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Here is a side by side diamcalc model of each ...

These have the same crown, only the one to the right got the culet virtually cut off

Am I seeing things ?

Couldn't say OMC are optically optimized by the dozen, but miracles seem to happen every now and then.

 

[diagem]

Yes they look the same, except that the open culet can be seen when looking face up in all the main crown facets, and the star facets.

Some people hate it cause its called leakage, but some love it cause it has in their oppinion: CHARACTER....

Me personaly, I love it. There are no two Old-Mine Cut that look alike no matter how much you try to match them. so in my oppinion having a piece of jewelry with multiple Old-Mine Cuts is a UNIQE piece of jewelry!!!!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The crowns are very similar, but theo old mine usually has steeper facets.
The large culet is common on the OM. But the other diference is a deeper pavilion and much shorter lower girdle facets.

Overall the old mine suffers a much smaller spread - 17% less than a nice modern round.
This modern stone has a 3% bigger spread than a normal round.

 

[diagem]

Garry,

You are right about the smaller spread VS its round counterpart.

But I thing the majority of Old Mine Cuts have a similar spread as the true (Royal) Asscher Cuts, or Princess cut.

And if i''am not mistaken they are calculated as Fancy Shapes. (A lower price than Round Shapes), am i right?

 

[windowshopper]

oldmine/old cushion---------the new ones are very unattaractive to me

 

[oldminer]

The "look" of the two varieties is quite different. Of course, the "look" is a continuum from the oldest style to the most modern of cuts, so the "look" has virtually an infinite variety possible even within the cushion shape outline. There are many beautiful "looks" within the cushion family. You can create highly efficient and brilliant modern cuts, but sometimes you find extraordinary old cut ones that perform very well and look very different than a modern cut.

Picking from the variety of "looks" that are available is goo for each individual, but you may find it far more difficult to choose a universally "best" cut that everyone would agree upon. Thankfully, we don''t need to choose a single cushion as best, but have a variety of types to enjoy.

 

[SJS1234]

I LOVE this topic!! I much prefer the chunkier look of the old mines/old cushion and SO wanted something like this for my e-ring.....BUT I didn't want the large culet and the low color rating that usually accompanies those stones.....so -- yeah I wanted the best of both worlds -- old and new. After searching around I realized that I might be looking for something that didn't even exist......but I kept thinking that since lots of people still love the look of the old ones, SURELY there's a diamond cutter SOMEWHERE out there who still cuts rough in that chunky old style (but using modern techniques to avoid the culet). I knew that Reena and Moremoremore both got gorgeous cushions from Mark Turnowski, and although they are cut in the modern fashion I hoped that Mark would at least be able to point me in the right direction. Sure enough after a couple of conversations he understood what I wanted and said that he knew a cutter whose creations might be the answer. Several days later he sent a diamond to an appraiser here in town so that I could "visit" it. Sure enough -- it was EXACTLY what I wanted. Teensy tiny culet, F color, VS1 -- and big chunky facets like my grandmother's old mine cut. The only thing was that it didn't have the small table and high crown that I love, but it's such a beauty that I didn't even care. The future fiance now has it in his possession and I can't WAIT to have it on my finger!! It's squarish -- and actually looks like a round in these photos (photos that don't BEGIN to do it justice). The setting isn't mine -- just the diamond -- but they are the only pictures I have at this time.

Edit to add: I also meant to say that unlike most antique cuts -- this diamond has quite a nice spread, maybe even a little shallow -- but believe me when you see it in person it has all KINDS of fabulous fire!
1.2 ct, dimensions: 6.74 x 6.67, F, VS1, depth 61.8%, table 64%
weird numbers I know.....but trust me it's fabulous!

 

[SJS1234]

Oops --forgot to attach.

 

[SJS1234]

and front view.

I know it''s not the "ideal" diamond for most out there......but beauty is in the eye of the beholder, right? I think it is absolutely GORGEOUS!

 

[moremoremore]

I think we all know my vote! "Unattractive"

- HA!!!

 

[SJS1234]

Date: 1/18/2005 9

3:33 AM
Author: moremoremore
I think we all know my vote! ''Unattractive''

- HA!!!

Maybe Windowshopper hasn''t seen yours!! It is SO pretty!!!!!!! I LOVE it! and again, of course -- beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally I find Princess cuts to be unattractive -- but I know that my opinion doesn''t matter, and shouldn''t matter -- to those who love them!

 

[Cath]

I have not been fortunate enough to see either version in person, but every time I see pictures of the Old Mine Cut my heart just stops. They look so gorgeous in pictures -- I love the chunky look and large culet! Of course, I might change my mind if I saw both versions in person or on my finger! But the fact that it is very difficult to find the antique cushion, much less a good one...is somewhat off-putting.

SJS -- I love that front view of your diamond. It makes me swoon.

 

[moremoremore]

LOL..Thanks SJS!
But it''s the truth: different strokes for different folks. That''s the beauty of diamonds...there are so many different cuts out there!!!!
Hey- if an antique cushion is good enough for Ashley Judd...it''s good enough for me too

 

[windowshopper]

WELL THE CLARIFICATION IS THAT THERE ARE HIDEOUS OLD ONES......................certainly just b/c a cushion/oldmine is odl means it was well done. So Moremoremore etc --I guess I see so many that look ...........weird like strange roundish radiants. Usually its the old ones I like....................

 

[Hest88]

Well, I love a nice OMC, large culet and all. There''s just a charm to it that''s unmatched in those precise, newer cushions.

 

[moremoremore]

The only real issue I have with antique cuts is that they all seem to have very dark, unattractive areas...b/c of the facet pattern and sometimes poor cut. I don''t really want charm as much as I want awesome fire- rainbows- life - blinding sparkle! Light return is your friend LOL

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/18/2005 901 AM
Author: SJS1234

I think it is absolutely GORGEOUS!

So do I ! Sure thing... I wish more oldies had this good symmetry. The ring is superb too, btw. Sure you want it replaced

It would be quite a feat (financial feat too) to have that custom made again.

It makes little sense to photograph a fiery stone in blank diffuse light like that - unless the jewel is meant to be looked at only on a rainy day in London. Perhps those lighting conditions are great to show arrows on rounds, but why generalize

Can''t begin to believe why would one struggle to deprive diamonds of their sparkle for commercial presentation nevertheless !

 

[SJS1234]

Date: 1/18/2005 3:32:50 PM
Author: valeria101

Date: 1/18/2005 901 AM
Author: SJS1234

I think it is absolutely GORGEOUS!

So do I ! Sure thing... I wish more oldies had this good symmetry. The ring is superb too, btw. Sure you want it replaced

It would be quite a feat (financial feat too) to have that custom made again.

It makes little sense to photograph a fiery stone in blank diffuse light like that - unless the jewel is meant to be looked at only on a rainy day in London. Perhps those lighting conditions are great to show arrows on rounds, but why generalize

Can''t begin to believe why would one struggle to deprive diamonds of their sparkle for commercial presentation nevertheless !

Thanks!! The ring was never mine -- and in fact I never even saw that setting in person. Mark Turnowski sent the pics to me, but I don''t think he took them himself (could be wrong though), and when I "viewed" the diamond it was loose. The setting I picked out is the Michael B. petit princess setting -- teensy 2 mm one-sided pave! Not antique, but very dainty!

And I totally agree about the pictures -- these don''t do the diamond any kind of justice!! You were talking about my pictures, right?

 

[moremoremore]

SJS- I didn''t realize that was your stone b/c I was skimming. That really is a beautiful stone!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/18/2005 491 PM
Author: SJS1234

...these don''t do the diamond any kind of justice!! You were talking about my pictures, right?

Yes... I actualy tried to figure out when diamonds do look that way and I could barely read in that light

Arrows or any other shape of mirror facets show like painted on glass (as in the picture), but in the same time it doesn''t seem that diamonds were meant for slight diffuse light.

Anyway, with this subject infront I wish I had some decent cut design software. The OMC facet pattern seems appropriate for optimization just like any other. Every now and then a stone gets darn close - both among the old and the new makes. I guess you hvae one, and this one makes a pretty good refference point, I think

 

[diagem]

The thruth of the matter is that, if someone is looking for a lively diamond, then Modern brilliants is the way to go....

But I know someone who cuts these Old-Mine Cut diamonds soooo close to the original old ones, that even some experts have a hard time telling the difference.

The only difference is the symmetry is much better since he is using modern technology. Dont get me wrong, some Old Mine cuts have amazing symmetry (a very rare option for the diamond cutting industrie some 100 to 350 years ago) It just shows that expert cutters existed back then. You usually see them in the IMPORTANT historical diamonds, that are museum pieces today.

The only thing is that the new Old-Mine Cuts are not mass produced, and to get some pieces from my friend the cutter, take a long time. He is busy supplying the demand for it.

I do think that these Old-Mine cuts are the most beautifull things....., whenever you can look at a diamond and see the acctuall faceting (just like the diamond drawings in cartoons), thats the point it becomes a work of art. My personal opinion is that diamonds are not all about Maximum FIRE/LIFE, you can appriciate the faceting allignment of these diamonds, which get lost in the diamonds that shoot fire/life the most.

 

[moremoremore]

Than there's your answer! I'd hold out and wait for the perfect antique cut to come along!
*edited* Duh. I just realized that this thread was for starting a discussion...and you weren't looking for a stone.

 

[diagem]

mmm,

But if your looking for amazing fire and brilliance, stick to modern BRILLIANT cuts, cause step-cuts are not very brilliant either....

Old-Mine cuts are for those few who can appreciate the actuall faceting contra to brilliant fire!!!

 

[moremoremore]

LOL...I''ll take a nice big emerald any day! And actually, I really love it when you can see beautiful facets of a diamond...so maybe a nice big antique cushion would do me good

 

[diagem]

the faceting efect on a high crown Old-Mine Cut will be much more noticable than any Emerald cut.

The only simmilar efect will be on a true old Asscher cut (because of their very high crown angle).
The only modern stone that has these faceting efects is the Lucida by Tiffany & Co.

In my opinion when you have these efects, you are in possesion of a true piece of art!!!

I''am not saying that modern diamonds are not great, but you dont have the faceting efects like these old beauties....