Help with Emerald Treatment

[mewing]

Hi Fellow Pricescoper(s),

I need help here. I bought this Columbian emerald 2-3 years back? It's a 12.18ct emerald which I sent for certification recently. It came back as moderate oiling with minor resin. I am slightly irked to say the least because I bought this emerald on the basis that it had only gone through traditional oiling with no resin. Does anyone know what exactly is this "minor resin"? Can it be gotten rid of? What kind of impact would it have on the price of the stone? Can i recut my emerald safely in this case?

Many thanks in advance!

 

[lilmosun]

Personally, I would not try to get rid of the resin. It's minor and if I understand the report correctly, only used as clarity enhancement. Plus I am guessing that cavity filling means it is embedded (i.e. not the surface reaching fissures). Maybe someone more familiar with emeralds and treatments can chime in.

Some purists would argue that "oil" is more acceptable because it is "natural" (loosely speaking). But many modern (resin) treatments are more stable and do not evaporate like oil can. I think both are considered acceptable for clarity enhancement (only) in the industry.

I found this article which explains a lot about treatments:

Emerald Enhancements: A Consumer and Trade Guide - Gem Society

Almost all cut emeralds have had clarity enhancements. Learn how these emerald enhancements work, what substances are used, and how to detect them.

www.gemsociety.org

My emerald was evaluated by AGL has being "Minor Modern (resin)" clarity enhanced. AGL seemed confused that I was unhappy to learn it was Resin vs Oil. In their eyes one wasn't less acceptable. And then I did my research and satisfied that it was a stable acceptable treatment and better yet, required no maintenance.

I've seen quite a few PSers insist that "oil" is the only acceptable treatment but I would argue it's a matter of personal preference.

I am not familiar with ICGA reports but you might be able to call them to better understand what your report means in terms of quality/stability. I am not an expert.

But in terms of oil vs resin when used for clarity enhancement only, I would not let it distract from the enjoyment of your lovely (huge) emerald.

 

[Bron357]

An untreated emerald is rare.
A big untreated emerald is very rare.
one reason is the crystal structure, it’s full of flaws / fissures. It’s just how emeralds are formed.
In older times oil was used to help make the crystal imperfections less apparent but over time it leeches out.
These days, oil is still traditional but Opticon is becoming more widely used even if people are still a little “freaked” by it.
I think it’s because of the negativity around ”coloured glass filled rubies” and Grade C Jade (being bleached and then filled with coloured resin). Some gemstones and some treatments are totally invasive and not desirable.
Opticon is better than traditional oil because it’s permanent.

 

[nutellakitty]

Minor resin to me is like solid filling to the fissures. It cannot be taken off.

 

[mewing]

Personally, I would not try to get rid of the resin. It's minor and if I understand the report correctly, only used as clarity enhancement. Plus I am guessing that cavity filling means it is embedded (i.e. not the surface reaching fissures). Maybe someone more familiar with emeralds and treatments can chime in.

Some purists would argue that "oil" is more acceptable because it is "natural" (loosely speaking). But many modern (resin) treatments are more stable and do not evaporate like oil can. I think both are considered acceptable for clarity enhancement (only) in the industry.

I found this article which explains a lot about treatments:

Emerald Enhancements: A Consumer and Trade Guide - Gem Society

Almost all cut emeralds have had clarity enhancements. Learn how these emerald enhancements work, what substances are used, and how to detect them.

www.gemsociety.org

My emerald was evaluated by AGL has being "Minor Modern (resin)" clarity enhanced. AGL seemed confused that I was unhappy to learn it was Resin vs Oil. In their eyes one wasn't less acceptable. And then I did my research and satisfied that it was a stable acceptable treatment and better yet, required no maintenance.

I've seen quite a few PSers insist that "oil" is the only acceptable treatment but I would argue it's a matter of personal preference.

I am not familiar with ICGA reports but you might be able to call them to better understand what your report means in terms of quality/stability. I am not an expert.

But in terms of oil vs resin when used for clarity enhancement only, I would not let it distract from the enjoyment of your lovely (huge) emerald.

Thank you! I felt vaguely better after hearing from you. I bought it a couple of years back and I contacted my vendor and they shared that they would be happy to give me a full refund. The current jewellery store (an international coloured diamond jewellery store) that helped me send my emerald for certification and possible recutting also felt that it was okay and that I should keep it. I'm slightly torn right now. I got my emerald for a bargain price ($12,000 USD), but I'm very bothered by the resin still.

Should I call the lab to find out if the resin used was hard resin?

 

[chrono]

Minor resin to me is like solid filling to the fissures. It cannot be taken off.

Disagree. It can be removed.

The thing to also watch with oil is that it can be dyed so oiling is not that straightforward either. Ofc resin can be dyed too but I think the newer resins have a bad reputation from the carry-over of the terrible old resins.

 

[mewing]

Minor resin to me is like solid filling to the fissures. It cannot be taken off.

I just spoke to an emerald expert and basically you are right. It is a hard type resin that is like glue. So in the best case scenario the emerald just has a few issues here and there on the surface, but in the worst case scenario the emerald might fall apart if placed in acid etc. Anyway the emerald is in Thailand now to be recut, I'll see what the experts there say. If they think the stone has issues, I'll claim my refund.

 

[chrono]

If the filling is minor, the emerald should not fall apart. If it does, then the filling is far greater than the lab stated. Any mention of the type of resin used?

 

[mewing]

If the filling is minor, the emerald should not fall apart. If it does, then the filling is far greater than the lab stated. Any mention of the type of resin used?

Ya. So our original plan was to send it to a cheap but relatively reputable lab to get it certified. Once we know what we are working with, we would send it to be recut then off to GIA or GRS. So this is what I learnt, if the stone receives a minor resin filling with ICA GemLab, then it is likely that it would receive a moderate filling with GRS. Anyway, I was told that the gem cutters would be able to accurately assess the emerald.

How bothersome this entire experience has been