What do you think of these cushion stats?
- Thread starter kweet
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,437
DiaGem,
Many thanks for your response. Apologies, my diamond knowledge is not at all up to speed with yours. I spotted the open culet and I know that the open culet can lead to light leakage - is this what your concern is? I have seen open culets in old cut cushion such as those at GOG, does it make a difference that this is a modern cushion? Is an open culet not inappropriate for a modern cushion?
What would be the effect of a very thick girdle? Is it the case that a thin girdle would be at risk of chipping?
Apologies for my ignorance, but this is not a "crushed ice" stone is it? I see that its not as chunky faceted as some of the antique style cuts, but would this stone provide good scintillation?
I am mainly concerned with brilliance and finger coverage...
Thanks again,
Looks realy promising...
A few thoughts...
Do you want an open culet on a modern type Cushion cut? I believe the culet shape is a ''diamond'' shape due to the 4 main pavilion facet design...
I would make sure the ''X Thick'' part of the girdles are not OVER-ly thick...[/quote]
DiaGem,
Many thanks for your response. Apologies, my diamond knowledge is not at all up to speed with yours. I spotted the open culet and I know that the open culet can lead to light leakage - is this what your concern is? I have seen open culets in old cut cushion such as those at GOG, does it make a difference that this is a modern cushion? Is an open culet not inappropriate for a modern cushion?
What would be the effect of a very thick girdle? Is it the case that a thin girdle would be at risk of chipping?
Apologies for my ignorance, but this is not a ''crushed ice'' stone is it? I see that its not as chunky faceted as some of the antique style cuts, but would this stone provide good scintillation?
I am mainly concerned with brilliance and finger coverage...
Thanks again,[/quote]
Sorry, I meant to say "is an open culet inappropriate for a modern cushion" not "is an open culet not inappropriate for a modern cushion"!!
Thanks guys for your assistance, I am so grateful for your trusted advice.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,437
Kewl Kweet!!!
In my opinion, there is nothing you need to worry about related to the girdle.
It may be thick in an area however based on the way the photos look, I see no negative effects. ( PLEASE- make sure to at least discuss this with the vendor when he has the stone in his hands to make sure, but problems are unlikely)
IN terms of setting , that might require some expertise- however if you are dealing with a vendor familiar with cushions, that also should be no problem.
In my opinion, there is nothing you need to worry about related to the girdle.
It may be thick in an area however based on the way the photos look, I see no negative effects. ( PLEASE- make sure to at least discuss this with the vendor when he has the stone in his hands to make sure, but problems are unlikely)
IN terms of setting , that might require some expertise- however if you are dealing with a vendor familiar with cushions, that also should be no problem.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
Looks realy promising...
A few thoughts...
Do you want an open culet on a modern type Cushion cut? I believe the culet shape is a ''diamond'' shape due to the 4 main pavilion facet design...
I would make sure the ''X Thick'' part of the girdles are not OVER-ly thick...[/quote]
DiaGem,
Many thanks for your response. Apologies, my diamond knowledge is not at all up to speed with yours. I spotted the open culet and I know that the open culet can lead to light leakage - is this what your concern is? I have seen open culets in old cut cushion such as those at GOG, does it make a difference that this is a modern cushion? Is an open culet not inappropriate for a modern cushion?
No..., its not a matter of being inappropriate..., its a matter of taste! In antique Cushions..., its an inseparable part of the whole appearance..., it adds character IMO! I personaly prefer open culets on all cuts (I dont like pointy objects
But I do know a lot prefer no culets as it is considered ''leakage''..., and leakage is anti-thesis in Diamonds...
What would be the effect of a very thick girdle? Is it the case that a thin girdle would be at risk of chipping?
The thicker the girdle..., the more weight is hidden = less finger coverage. Its hard to find balanced girdle thickness in Cushions and I am a believer that balanced girdles are "a" measure of craftsmanship...
Apologies for my ignorance, but this is not a ''crushed ice'' stone is it? I see that its not as chunky faceted as some of the antique style cuts, but would this stone provide good scintillation? Not a crushed ice appearance but definitely a more splintery type of appearance vs. the boldness flashes an antique cut will deliver.
I am mainly concerned with brilliance and finger coverage...
Again..., it looks like it could have great brilliance which comes with that specific faceting design.
Coverage...., its within the norm I believe...
Thanks again,
That''s really helpful, David and Diamond Gem.
You have allayed my fears on the culet!
I see what you mean on the girdle, I''m thinking that a thick girdle would have a similar effect on coverage as a deep stone - it would concentrate the weight away from the finger coverage? I have attached another photo which might show you something about the girdle not apparent from the other photos...I will ask the vendor but I value and appreciate your unbiased views.
I see what you mean on the splintery look. I''m in two minds about this. Part of me wants the really chunky, antiquey cushion-that-looks-like-you-could-sleep-on-it type. But part of me wants something slightly more modern and "bling-ey" I am figuring that this is a good compromise. While I am in two minds about what I DO want, I am very clear on what I DON''T want - the dead-looking lifeless dull crushed ice with no sparkle. I have seen them in Jonathan from GOG''s videos. Please tell me if this is one of those - don''t hold back!
You have allayed my fears on the culet!
I see what you mean on the girdle, I''m thinking that a thick girdle would have a similar effect on coverage as a deep stone - it would concentrate the weight away from the finger coverage? I have attached another photo which might show you something about the girdle not apparent from the other photos...I will ask the vendor but I value and appreciate your unbiased views.
I see what you mean on the splintery look. I''m in two minds about this. Part of me wants the really chunky, antiquey cushion-that-looks-like-you-could-sleep-on-it type. But part of me wants something slightly more modern and "bling-ey" I am figuring that this is a good compromise. While I am in two minds about what I DO want, I am very clear on what I DON''T want - the dead-looking lifeless dull crushed ice with no sparkle. I have seen them in Jonathan from GOG''s videos. Please tell me if this is one of those - don''t hold back!
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,437
HI kweet,
To me the stone looks as though you will be able to see the facet work- meaning chunky facets.
In terms of the girdle- Diagem did add a valuable point about the visual size.
However based on the measurements, I don''t think that stone will be mistaken for a carat and a half.
BTW- even if it does have some "crushed ice"- IMO there are many stones that are quite appealing with that blingy look......
To me the stone looks as though you will be able to see the facet work- meaning chunky facets.
In terms of the girdle- Diagem did add a valuable point about the visual size.
However based on the measurements, I don''t think that stone will be mistaken for a carat and a half.
BTW- even if it does have some "crushed ice"- IMO there are many stones that are quite appealing with that blingy look......
cushionlovelondon
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2009
- Messages
- 13
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2001
- Messages
- 6,341
You''re too funny diagem ... don''t like pointed objects!
Photography is great for showing facet design but that''s about it. Leakage, head/body obstruction and elements of actual performance I''ve found to be impossible to ascertain via general photography. What I recommend is viewing as many as possible to ascertain which appearance please your eye most. Diagem was right on in the respect of showing a more splintery appearance in the modern facet styles considering light performance being on par. I know viewing various comparisons can be difficult via the web though. Good luck!
Photography is great for showing facet design but that''s about it. Leakage, head/body obstruction and elements of actual performance I''ve found to be impossible to ascertain via general photography. What I recommend is viewing as many as possible to ascertain which appearance please your eye most. Diagem was right on in the respect of showing a more splintery appearance in the modern facet styles considering light performance being on par. I know viewing various comparisons can be difficult via the web though. Good luck!
ChunkyCushionLover
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2009
- Messages
- 2,463
As Jon has said already we have no way of telling from the photographs about the optics as pictures can be deceiving.
It looks like a modern 4 main cushion brilliant with nice optics. Get the vendor to show you an ASET and post it here or better yet send it to an appraisor and view the stone in person.
Check the girdle thickness and see in how many areas it is extra thick but I doubt that should be an issue its probably on the corners only.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
DiaGem,
Many thanks for your response. Apologies, my diamond knowledge is not at all up to speed with yours. I spotted the open culet and I know that the open culet can lead to light leakage - is this what your concern is? I have seen open culets in old cut cushion such as those at GOG, does it make a difference that this is a modern cushion? Is an open culet not inappropriate for a modern cushion?
No..., its not a matter of being inappropriate..., its a matter of taste! In antique Cushions..., its an inseparable part of the whole appearance..., it adds character IMO! I personaly prefer open culets on all cuts (I dont like pointy objects
But I do know a lot prefer no culets as it is considered ''leakage''..., and leakage is anti-thesis in Diamonds...
What would be the effect of a very thick girdle? Is it the case that a thin girdle would be at risk of chipping?
The thicker the girdle..., the more weight is hidden = less finger coverage. Its hard to find balanced girdle thickness in Cushions and I am a believer that balanced girdles are ''a'' measure of craftsmanship...
Apologies for my ignorance, but this is not a ''crushed ice'' stone is it? I see that its not as chunky faceted as some of the antique style cuts, but would this stone provide good scintillation? Not a crushed ice appearance but definitely a more splintery type of appearance vs. the boldness flashes an antique cut will deliver.
I am mainly concerned with brilliance and finger coverage...
Again..., it looks like it could have great brilliance which comes with that specific faceting design.
Coverage...., its within the norm I believe...
Thanks again,
[/quote]
Thank you diagem for pointing that out also as someone who sees more cushions in a day than most ever will in a lifetime, I often advise this and it is good to know it is the correct advice.
I raised the issue of the girdle with the vendor (who is a super guy btw). He said that almost all cushions with the look I''m going for [chunky facets rather than crushed ice] have big girdles and that the way the higher crown slopes down on the angle it needs a big girdle for the integrity of the stone. He also said that it doesn''t make the stone look small at all. He said that it matches up in measurements quite favorably to other 2ct diamonds. To recap, the measurements are - 7.21-7.20-4.97.
Does anyone have any comments?
Maybe it would help if I explained that the diamond look I am going for is Boston Jeff''s absolute beauty (I can''t find his specs among all of the posts) and Pixley''s stunning Cushion Brilliant, (which was 1.01 carat, F/VS 1, L/W ratio: 1.14. I attach a pic of Boston Jeff''s....
Does anyone have any comments?
Maybe it would help if I explained that the diamond look I am going for is Boston Jeff''s absolute beauty (I can''t find his specs among all of the posts) and Pixley''s stunning Cushion Brilliant, (which was 1.01 carat, F/VS 1, L/W ratio: 1.14. I attach a pic of Boston Jeff''s....
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
geoffreysnow
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 238
Boston Jeff's was an OMC - perhaps ask the vendor you're working with to source some GIA graded OMCs in your specification range?
Here are his spec's by the way:
2.20 H/VS2 (8.23 x 7.47 x 5.01) [L/W=1.10]
Pol/Sym: G/VG
67.1% depth
53% table
slightly large culet
SB flour(!!!)
girdle: medium to thick, faceted
Here are his spec's by the way:
2.20 H/VS2 (8.23 x 7.47 x 5.01) [L/W=1.10]
Pol/Sym: G/VG
67.1% depth
53% table
slightly large culet
SB flour(!!!)
girdle: medium to thick, faceted
Diagem, Giraffe,
Thank you so much for your advice and information. I think that although I really like this little guy, I need to really look into the OMCs, they''re just such needles in haystacks! although I like the slightly splintery look of this one too, it is definitely worth a viewing. I have actually never seen a cushion in real life before(!) and am trying to educate myself on them in anticipation of a visit to NY. Like Rhino said, these fancy cuts need to be seen in person, but its definitely invaluable to gather as much info in advance as is possible.
Again, many thanks and no doubt I will have to draw on your expertise again at some point!
x
Thank you so much for your advice and information. I think that although I really like this little guy, I need to really look into the OMCs, they''re just such needles in haystacks! although I like the slightly splintery look of this one too, it is definitely worth a viewing. I have actually never seen a cushion in real life before(!) and am trying to educate myself on them in anticipation of a visit to NY. Like Rhino said, these fancy cuts need to be seen in person, but its definitely invaluable to gather as much info in advance as is possible.
Again, many thanks and no doubt I will have to draw on your expertise again at some point!
x
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
I feel you are a bit confused on the type of appearance you prefer coming out of your potential future Cushion
I suggest to walk some of the B&M''s in NY to better get the feel of the various appearances the market offers.
Just make sure you are able to identify the different ones when you see them IRL. Thats where PS is at help.
Good luck on your Cushion hunt!
Hi there, following on from my posts of a few days ago, I have located two more cushions and I would be really grateful for any opinions on them. Their specs are as follows:
Cushion A:
GIA certified
Cushion Brilliant
dimensions 8.23 x 7.27 x 4.6
2.01 carat
J colour (a good J, closer to I)
VS2 clarity
Polish VG
Sym G
Flour None
54% Table
63.3% Depth
Medium Culet
Ratio 1.13
Cushion B:
GIA certified
Old Mine Brilliant
dimensions 7.83 x 7.18 x 4.78
2.09 carat
J colour
SI 1 clarity
Polish VG
Sym G
Flour None
61% Table
66.6% Depth
Large Culet
Myself and the vendor favour Cushion A. It appears that Cushion A
is more chunky faceted than Cushion B, but yet B is an old mine brilliant and A is a cushion brilliant. However, based on this photo, A is closer to the look I am aiming for.
I have tried to attach a photo to this post, but it may be too big - if so, I''ll attach it to a separate post. In the photo, Cushion B is on Left and Cushion A is on Right (a sign perhaps???). Anyhow, I''d be most grateful for any of your thoughts or opinions....
Cushion A:
GIA certified
Cushion Brilliant
dimensions 8.23 x 7.27 x 4.6
2.01 carat
J colour (a good J, closer to I)
VS2 clarity
Polish VG
Sym G
Flour None
54% Table
63.3% Depth
Medium Culet
Ratio 1.13
Cushion B:
GIA certified
Old Mine Brilliant
dimensions 7.83 x 7.18 x 4.78
2.09 carat
J colour
SI 1 clarity
Polish VG
Sym G
Flour None
61% Table
66.6% Depth
Large Culet
Myself and the vendor favour Cushion A. It appears that Cushion A
is more chunky faceted than Cushion B, but yet B is an old mine brilliant and A is a cushion brilliant. However, based on this photo, A is closer to the look I am aiming for.
I have tried to attach a photo to this post, but it may be too big - if so, I''ll attach it to a separate post. In the photo, Cushion B is on Left and Cushion A is on Right (a sign perhaps???). Anyhow, I''d be most grateful for any of your thoughts or opinions....
- Status
How Are Diamonds Made? Natural vs Lab-Created Explained
How Are Diamonds Made? Natural vs Lab-Created Explained - 08/05
Top Wedding Ring Brands for Every Style and Budget
Top Wedding Ring Brands for Every Style and Budget - 08/05
Where to Buy Lab Grown Diamonds: Best Places Compared
Where to Buy Lab Grown Diamonds: Best Places Compared - 08/05
300x240.png)