Cushion Feedback with Report & Photos

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 8/7/2009 8:20:30 PM
Author: strmrdr
AGS would ding this stone for the large edge patches of green.
One of the things AGS expects from fancies is edge to edge brightness.
It is possible to cut a cushion with RB like brightness but often they will be a brilliant style look.
It is very possible to get AGS0 princess level brightness from the older style cushions.
This one will not hit that level because of the large green areas.
Why large green patches around the edges are not that good is evident in the picture shown here:

There are large dark zones where the lack of side lighting is evident.
In some lighting such a stone can be stunning but it is not an all around performer.
In this case both the regular picture and the ASET show that there are better combinations possible.

I am not liking the rudeness shown in this thread.
PS is better than that and has community standards both written and unwritten that it is not acceptable behavior.
If you want to have a technical discussion about the merits of ASET kewl but don''t attack people trying to help.
That is totally unacceptable and any point you may be trying to make will be lost.

Dear All,

First of all I think I will get a better response if I change my tone and make it less attacking in nature so your points are taken. I don''t particularly like my posts corrected in the way Ellen and Lorelei have done here or in other threads but I will learn to react differently. I have noticed I am not using the correct vocabulary due to inexperience and this causes my posts to be misinterpreted and tangents on theory seem to develop which are unrelated to the OPs intention or questions.

However, my message is still the same here, we should be careful not to reject these cushions or any fancy, Prima Facie based on excessive green in an ASET or a Photograph and a general thumbs down just on this basis is unfair to the vendor and may not be in the best interests of the original poster.

The 6 cushions ASETs I posted above in the "cushion game" above are all modern cushion brilliants in the same category as this one. All but one has been given Lifetime Guarantees and described as having excellent optics as vouched for by PS vendors. 3 have lifetime warranties from Jon at GOG and 2 are Whiteflash Premiums hand selected for light return.

Videos of some of them can be found here http://www.vimeo.com/6010981 and a thanks to Jon for doing this video recently "Cut for light performance" was one of his comments in describing the two modern stones in the video.

In addition the Cushette, another signature cut has already been spoken about positively see example here http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/4489/ (notice all the green and white) http://www.vimeo.com/2308814 for what they look like.
To quote Jon "The reflections of light in these types of diamonds are of a completely different flavour".

Many of these Modern Cushion Brilliants have significant green and leakage areas(black or white) in the ASET, some more than others, and the skeptics on this site would probably make the same comments about all of them as they did on Brian''s stone.

Boxster came here on the edge and highly interested in this stone in the first place and the appearance of this thread at the beginning and throughout has been overall quite negative. I hope if you are still reading this take this thread with a grain of salt and view the stone in person and make your own judement.

CCl

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

There are large dark zones where the lack of side lighting is evident.
In some lighting such a stone can be stunning but it is not an all around performer.
In this case both the regular picture and the ASET show that there are better combinations possible.

Storm,

I have trouble understanding this comment. Doesn't that just mean the photograph was taken without sufficient side lighting?
I have seen dark areas in a photographed stone, which were bright in real life and also corresponded to red areas in the ASET and this was explained as a poor lighting setup or obscuration of light by the proximity of the camera lense to the stone.
In these particular shots I would expect the dark areas to be bright in real life and the lighter clearer areas to show leakage like on the corners.

Here is another picture of two of these prototypes from BGD(taken by Brian) which I think suffers from the same camera problem.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/9/2009 7:39:38 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

There are large dark zones where the lack of side lighting is evident.

In some lighting such a stone can be stunning but it is not an all around performer.

In this case both the regular picture and the ASET show that there are better combinations possible.

Storm,


I have trouble understanding this comment. Doesn't that just mean the photograph was taken without sufficient side lighting?

I have seen dark areas in a photographed stone, which were bright in real life and also corresponded to red areas in the ASET and this was explained as a poor lighting setup or obscuration of light by the proximity of the camera lense to the stone.

In these particular shots I would expect the dark areas to be bright in real life and the lighter clearer areas to show leakage like on the corners.


Here is another picture of two of these prototypes from BGD which I think suffers from the same camera problem.

This shows why one image is not enough to show what is going on with a diamond.
The dark areas could be leakage or obstruction or green areas in ASET that are not getting light.
The ASET will show what is happening.
Do you have the ASET images for those 2 diamonds?
Based on the ASET already posted if they follow the same pattern a large part of the dark areas are from green in ASET.
ie: they are not getting light from the direction they draw light from.
This happens all the time in the real world.
In conditions where the diamonds get the side lighting they can look awesome but without it they can look blah.
Green is not always bad what is less than optimal are large patches of green particularity out to the edges of the diamonds because it makes them look small in some lighting.
Smaller patches of green broken up by red and blues can be advantages in fancies.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 8/9/2009 7:57:00 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 8/9/2009 7:39:38 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

There are large dark zones where the lack of side lighting is evident.

In some lighting such a stone can be stunning but it is not an all around performer.

In this case both the regular picture and the ASET show that there are better combinations possible.

Storm,


I have trouble understanding this comment. Doesn''t that just mean the photograph was taken without sufficient side lighting?

I have seen dark areas in a photographed stone, which were bright in real life and also corresponded to red areas in the ASET and this was explained as a poor lighting setup or obscuration of light by the proximity of the camera lense to the stone.

In these particular shots I would expect the dark areas to be bright in real life and the lighter clearer areas to show leakage like on the corners.


Here is another picture of two of these prototypes from BGD which I think suffers from the same camera problem.

This shows why one image is not enough to show what is going on with a diamond.
The dark areas could be leakage or obstruction or green areas in ASET that are not getting light.
The ASET will show what is happening.
Do you have the ASET images for those 2 diamonds?
Based on the ASET already posted if they follow the same pattern a large part of the dark areas are from green in ASET.
ie: they are not getting light from the direction they draw light from.
This happens all the time in the real world.
In conditions where the diamonds get the side lighting they can look awesome but without it they can look blah.
Green is not always bad what is less than optimal are large patches of green particularity out to the edges of the diamonds because it makes them look small in some lighting.
Smaller patches of green broken up by red and blues can be advantages in fancies.

The bigger one is the same diamond Boxster posted. I have nothing else as and can''t really ask for an ASET(I''m not the customer) but if Brian reads this he might post it himself.

 

[strmrdr]

It doesn''t line up perfectly because of tilt but it is clear....

 

[neatfreak]

Having seen one of these stones from BGD TODAY I can say that if it was anything like the one I saw it will be STUNNING.

Very much rivaled my ex/ex modern cushion from ERD.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 8/9/2009 11:57:39 PM
Author: neatfreak
Having seen one of these stones from BGD TODAY I can say that if it was anything like the one I saw it will be STUNNING.

Very much rivaled my ex/ex modern cushion from ERD.

Neatfreak,

Just looked back at your thread on your stone and the facet structure.

Is it similar to this one? http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/4837/ and seen in this video http://www.vimeo.com/6010981 (One on the left)

Also in what lighting did you look at the BGD stone?

Regards,

CCL

 

[VRBeauty]

Date: 8/9/2009 11:57:39 PM
Author: neatfreak
Having seen one of these stones from BGD TODAY I can say that if it was anything like the one I saw it will be STUNNING.


Very much rivaled my ex/ex modern cushion from ERD.

Having seen the same cushion in person today, all I can say is... yummy! Wonderful flashes of light -- all colors you could hope to see -- all over the place. It was like a beautiful blend of the old world chunky facet look and the more recent "crushed ice" look.

Boxter, I hope this rather spirited discussion hasn''t discouraged you from calling in one of these stones for a look-see.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 8/9/2009 10:58:21 PM
Author: strmrdr
It doesn't line up perfectly because of tilt but it is clear....

I get what you are saying and your illustration just put us on the same page.
However, Bryan said that in the picture I posted the dark should be areas of brightness and the lighter areas are those of contrast and leakage. Not sure what lighting he is making these comments under though but the light areas do match the leakage areas in the Idealscope.

This would be an example of it in another stone.

Dark in the picture where there is intense light return(ASET RED) (red arrows). Light coloured where there is leakage(black arrow).
Picture and ASET are tilted, and I couldn't resize pictures well, and lighting is not head on in the picture but it does illustrate the point.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 8/10/2009 1:01:52 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 8/9/2009 11:57:39 PM
Author: neatfreak
Having seen one of these stones from BGD TODAY I can say that if it was anything like the one I saw it will be STUNNING.

Very much rivaled my ex/ex modern cushion from ERD.

Neatfreak,

Just looked back at your thread on your stone and the facet structure.

Is it similar to this one? http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/4837/ and seen in this video http://www.vimeo.com/6010981 (One on the left)

Also in what lighting did you look at the BGD stone?

Regards,

CCL

ASET''s are distinctly different. I would not base a conclusion upon that diamond unless its ASET was identical.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 8/10/2009 2:10:24 AM
Author: Rhino

Date: 8/10/2009 1:01:52 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 8/9/2009 11:57:39 PM
Author: neatfreak
Having seen one of these stones from BGD TODAY I can say that if it was anything like the one I saw it will be STUNNING.

Very much rivaled my ex/ex modern cushion from ERD.

Neatfreak,

Just looked back at your thread on your stone and the facet structure.

Is it similar to this one? http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/4837/ and seen in this video http://www.vimeo.com/6010981 (One on the left)

Also in what lighting did you look at the BGD stone?

Regards,

CCL

ASET's are distinctly different. I would not base a conclusion upon that diamond unless its ASET was identical.

The diamond(4837) and the video are both yours and match an I missing something?

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 8/10/2009 1:56:56 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 8/9/2009 10:58:21 PM
Author: strmrdr
It doesn''t line up perfectly because of tilt but it is clear....

I get what you are saying and your illustration just put us on the same page.
However, Bryan said that in the picture I posted the dark should be areas of brightness and the lighter areas are those of contrast and leakage. Not sure what lighting he is making these comments under though but the light areas do match the leakage areas in the Idealscope.

This would be an example of it in another stone.

Dark in the picture where there is intense light return(ASET RED) (red arrows). Light coloured where there is leakage(black arrow).
Picture and ASET are tilted, and I couldn''t resize pictures well, and lighting is not head on in the picture but it does illustrate the point.

Actually wrong picture, I''ll snap another one soon. But maybe that general appearance in photographs/aset has been duplicated.

 

[loveloveloveit]

Hi Boxster, me thinks you''re getting more than you bargained for with this thread ... if I were you I would take Brian''s expert opinion and make sure it''s the best you can get - if he says it is I would trust his judgement but when you see it you''ll know for sure. I thought it looked like a lovely stone and I think BGD will be doing everything they can to get you a great outcome. Good luck!

 

[strmrdr]

Let me back up a bit here and clarify.
The original comment was that more red would be better.
That is correct.

In a lot of lighting it will very likely be stunning.

As prototypes these have a lot of potential.
Brian is known for his not only optical but technical perfection.
I feel these as cut don''t live up to his reputation yet.
That does not mean they are not as good as or better than a lot of cushions out there.
With some tweaking they have the potential to live up to Brian''s reputation.

 

[diagem]

Date: 8/10/2009 8:13:40 AM
Author: strmrdr
Let me back up a bit here and clarify.
The original comment was that more red would be better.
That is correct.

In a lot of lighting it will very likely be stunning.

As prototypes these have a lot of potential.
Brian is known for his not only optical but technical perfection.
I feel these as cut don''t live up to his reputation yet.
That does not mean they are not as good as or better than a lot of cushions out there.
With some tweaking they have the potential to live up to Brian''s reputation.

Well, it looks like a ''new'' interesting creature in the making...
Two pavilion mains on each corner (IMO)...., interesting facet design, would be nice to hear from Brian on (t)his innovation...

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 8/10/2009 1:01:52 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 8/9/2009 11:57:39 PM

Author: neatfreak

Having seen one of these stones from BGD TODAY I can say that if it was anything like the one I saw it will be STUNNING.


Very much rivaled my ex/ex modern cushion from ERD.

Neatfreak,


Just looked back at your thread on your stone and the facet structure.


Is it similar to this one? http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/4837/ and seen in this video http://www.vimeo.com/6010981 (One on the left)


Also in what lighting did you look at the BGD stone?


Regards,


CCL

Mine is similar...not sure if it''s exactly the same. But regardless, Brian''s stone performs in person. I saw it next to ideal rounds in jeweler''s lighting, in restaurant lighting, and in outdoor lighting (indirect sun and shade).

It''s gorgeous. Period.