- Joined
- Sep 3, 2000
- Messages
- 6,696
As many of you know already, I have been a part of bringing the technological revolution to the diamond trade. This is still in its relative infancy, but big things are going on behind the scenes.
When a gemologist color grades a diamond, the stone is examined under controlled lighting and looked at several times as it is rolled around or moved while being compared to master stones.
In a proper color grading device one has far more choices. Of course, the light is well controlled and the diamond can be viewed as many times as one wishes, and at every degree of rotation. The trick is to determine how many times to take the color grade information from the stone and at how many degrees of rotation, to provide not only reliable, but repeatable data. This is not an easy task. The guys with PHD's have to compute these things, not gemologists.
The other trick is repeatability once the diamond is removed from the machine and later re-graded. The position of the diamond needs to be highly similar to its original position to obtain highly similar and repeatable color grades. There are several ways to do this, but it isn't of such great importance to discuss that issue. The main thing is to be aware that it is possible to do the work by machine with the proper refinements to the programming.
When a gemologist grades the color they are almost always pretty sure their grade is correct. Since up until now, no one's grade was based on repeatable data, there was no way to know who was correct or who was a grade off. To make up for this problem, gemologists and the GIA say a tolerance of one grade is acceptable and allowed. That's not such a bad thing with honest people. The problem has been the ABUSE of "one grade tolerance". There are several well known entities that see a diamond which honest graders would grade H or I over and over, yet these places grade it G and they get away with it for years, decades.
They use the one grade tolerance as their excuse and no one has done anything about it. In fact, who can do anything about such a practice when one has no data to prove an abuse truly exists? Heck, they are only a grade off, right?
I believe in the next year or so, we will have by then become familiar with the DATA to prove how a color grade has been objectively chosen. Places that have abused the 1 grade tolerance will find it increasingly difficult to withstand objective proof, repeatable data, that shows their lack of care, diligence, or negligence. While I occasionally have used the one grade tolerance excuse, I believe I have never knowingly abused it. Few independent appraisers would abuse this situation, but we all know who does. The sad thing is the amount of money made by creating false information. Every one of those dollars should have gone to honest practitioners. The world is not always a fair place.
If technology does not give us back the good old days of honesty and integrity, it may well serve to usher in new days of accuracy and objectivity. When you give up the old for the new, there will be changes, benefits and some old things you miss. When horses were replaced by cars, things changed forever. It was for the better, but some things about horses are a lot nicer than cars.........
Its going to be quite a trip in the coming year!.
When a gemologist color grades a diamond, the stone is examined under controlled lighting and looked at several times as it is rolled around or moved while being compared to master stones.
In a proper color grading device one has far more choices. Of course, the light is well controlled and the diamond can be viewed as many times as one wishes, and at every degree of rotation. The trick is to determine how many times to take the color grade information from the stone and at how many degrees of rotation, to provide not only reliable, but repeatable data. This is not an easy task. The guys with PHD's have to compute these things, not gemologists.
The other trick is repeatability once the diamond is removed from the machine and later re-graded. The position of the diamond needs to be highly similar to its original position to obtain highly similar and repeatable color grades. There are several ways to do this, but it isn't of such great importance to discuss that issue. The main thing is to be aware that it is possible to do the work by machine with the proper refinements to the programming.
When a gemologist grades the color they are almost always pretty sure their grade is correct. Since up until now, no one's grade was based on repeatable data, there was no way to know who was correct or who was a grade off. To make up for this problem, gemologists and the GIA say a tolerance of one grade is acceptable and allowed. That's not such a bad thing with honest people. The problem has been the ABUSE of "one grade tolerance". There are several well known entities that see a diamond which honest graders would grade H or I over and over, yet these places grade it G and they get away with it for years, decades.
They use the one grade tolerance as their excuse and no one has done anything about it. In fact, who can do anything about such a practice when one has no data to prove an abuse truly exists? Heck, they are only a grade off, right?
I believe in the next year or so, we will have by then become familiar with the DATA to prove how a color grade has been objectively chosen. Places that have abused the 1 grade tolerance will find it increasingly difficult to withstand objective proof, repeatable data, that shows their lack of care, diligence, or negligence. While I occasionally have used the one grade tolerance excuse, I believe I have never knowingly abused it. Few independent appraisers would abuse this situation, but we all know who does. The sad thing is the amount of money made by creating false information. Every one of those dollars should have gone to honest practitioners. The world is not always a fair place.
If technology does not give us back the good old days of honesty and integrity, it may well serve to usher in new days of accuracy and objectivity. When you give up the old for the new, there will be changes, benefits and some old things you miss. When horses were replaced by cars, things changed forever. It was for the better, but some things about horses are a lot nicer than cars.........
Its going to be quite a trip in the coming year!.
Could it be that I haven’t used the “Benefit of the Doubt” methodology that you seem to “bless” elsewhere?
300x240.png)