Unscrupulous?! Scandalous?! Status Quo?!

[E B]

Date: 3/3/2010 3:13:54 PM
Author: RockHugger

2. In a full day’s work one full time employee they usually can properly finish photographing and editing FIVE to SIX gemstones. So in the case of pairs if the 2 stones look identical in hand, yet we still physically photo and edit each image we would be hard pressed to finish 3 pairs a day. When the stones look identical we find it useless and massively time consuming to duplicate an image that already looks exactly as the first one.

Seriously, NSC? A poor, poor excuse.

 

[E B]

Indeed, Freke. Another comparison of an "identical pair." I wonder which one they photographed face up.

 

[FrekeChild]

Date: 3/3/2010 3:39:01 PM
Author: E B
Indeed, Freke. Another comparison of an ''identical pair.'' I wonder which one they photographed face up.

WOWZA. Holy cow. I am at a loss for words.

 

[LD]

Date: 3/3/2010 3:13:54 PM
Author: RockHugger

Sent an e-mail to NCS regarding our descussion and asking about the photoshopping. My antagonstic line was about the NCS''s word on treatment being more accurate then the pictures of the stones.

Here is the responce I recieved...


Thank you for your email.


There are 2 reasons why we occasionally duplicate a 2nd stone image in some of our pairs.


1. This is the main reason: Almost all of our pairs are in fact identical. Diamond cut gemstones with flawless clarity and exact color match do in fact look Exactly the same.


If one stone is slightly different color tone yet exactly the same faceting we will adjust one of the images colors.


There is no way to photograph a pair of gemstone in the most optimal way unless they are photographed separately and then put together in software editing

2. In a full day’s work one full time employee they usually can properly finish photographing and editing FIVE to SIX gemstones. So in the case of pairs if the 2 stones look identical in hand, yet we still physically photo and edit each image we would be hard pressed to finish 3 pairs a day. When the stones look identical we find it useless and massively time consuming to duplicate an image that already looks exactly as the first one.

3. We have never had a complaint from anyone ordering our pairs that they were misrepresented. Our quality standards speak for themselves, we are a leader in full disclosure in this industry and proper representation of what we offer for sale


You are more than welcome to visit our showroom in person and do an inspection for yourself if you wish. We are very confident in our quality control in what we offer for sale.

I’m sorry to read the last line of your email, it seems a bit antagonistic.

Thank you,

Michael Arnstein

The Natural Sapphire Company

What a load of tosh.

The whole point is that these are two separate gemstones and of course will show some differences (especially when magnified). A much better salespitch instead of the downright deceipt being practiced by mirroring gemstones would be to say "these photos are magnified and therefore you will see differences in the gemstones but they have been matched by us and we are confident that you will not notice any difference in person. Should you do so, we would be more than happy to refund your purchase".

See Michael - it''s not that difficult to be honest is it?

 

[Arcadian]

LD, you need to stop making sense.

-A

 

[VapidLapid]

Certainly it takes less time and is easier to keep track of files if the pairs were to be photographed together. Also saves the photoshoping time. Three pairs a day for your photo editor? Surely you have the photographer confused with the Lapidary who CUTS three pairs a day. This is a huge crock. I was a photo major in college and taught photography at a University art school in the 90''s. Photoshoping images is very time consuming; shooting a prepared table-top set up over and over with changing object in the middle is super easy and fast! and surely more representative of the pair in real life. Their response just adds injury to the contempt for their customers they have already displayed.

 

[VapidLapid]

LD your good sensibility is an outrage to the rule of duplicity!

 

[Arcadian]

Vapid Lapid, you also need to stop making sense.

-A

 

[RockHugger]

So far no responce to my last e-mail from micheal.

That purple sapphire photo is just out right fraud. They look exacly alike???!!! Maybe if I had no depth preception.

 

[FrekeChild]

Date: 3/3/2010 3:46:25 PM
Author: VapidLapid
Certainly it takes less time and is easier to keep track of files if the pairs were to be photographed together. Also saves the photoshoping time. Three pairs a day for your photo editor? Surely you have the photographer confused with the Lapidary who CUTS three pairs a day. This is a huge crock. I was a photo major in college and taught photography at a University art school in the 90''s. Photoshoping images is very time consuming; shooting a prepared table-top set up over and over with changing object in the middle is super easy and fast! and surely more representative of the pair in real life. Their response just adds injury to the contempt for their customers they have already displayed.

Agreed. I take tons of photos (as you guys know) and often of multiple gems. Yes it''s true that it''s hard to get one of two stones that shows both stones at their best, but the stones aren''t always going to look their best anyway!

And at least then the stones ARE THE STONES YOU''D BE GETTING!

Man, it takes me a couple of minutes to get a few decent/good shots of a stone or two. Apparently stones at NSC need a LOT of photo editing?

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Date: 3/3/2010 3:39:01 PM
Author: E B
Indeed, Freke. Another comparison of an ''identical pair.'' I wonder which one they photographed face up.

I would be very, very upset if I bought those as a matched pair.

 

[E B]

Date: 3/3/2010 3:35:32 PM
Author: Arcadian
RH, thats the dumbest BS I ever heard. They are very clearly misrepresenting their product, even saying thats what they do in point number 2!

And point #1, too, if the 'identical' part was true.


1. This is the main reason: Almost all of our pairs are in fact identical. Diamond cut gemstones with flawless clarity and exact color match do in fact look Exactly the same.

If one stone is slightly different color tone yet exactly the same faceting we will adjust one of the images colors.

 

[Barrett]

What they are forgetting is to the layperson or just weekend warrior gem buyer..aka. Susy up the street the stones may look identical but to colored gem nuts and folks like here on PS who know stones and buy lots of stones even a little tone or color difference or just the tiny little nuiances in the stone will most likely be noticed..that type of deal with the mirror image will work for the husband who buys a set of stones for his wife for Christmas but not to the core customers who buy many stones a year..sigh

 

[vinkalmann]

For someone that likes the NSC, this makes me very SAD! Boooooo...

This is nothing short of lame.

 

[RockHugger]

Recieved an e-mail back!!! This is regarding the blue sapphire with the photoshopped center.....
Questioning his stones being untreated? I mentioned the fact misrepresenting his stones in pictures raises questions about his disclosure of treatment.
****************************




The pair that you have referenced are 2 different images.

The stones are completely separate – the table size is different.

You’ve found a great example to the lengths we go to give full disclosure.

No photoshop/reusing images is anywhere in this pair.

We can fully please everyone, yet we please most people.

I’m not sure how many people you are referring to when you say ‘a lot of people’?

We have thousands of people visit our website every single day, and literally in the many years I have run this company I have never received an email about this issue.

Do you know of any other company that sells natural untreated pairs of blue sapphires in this size online?

I would like to compare our standards with theirs.

We test every one of our sapphires with the same exact machines as GIA, check out our lab, not a single other private company has what we have:

http://www.thenaturalsapphirecompany.com/Sapphires/Company/Sapphire_Gemstone_Laboratory/

I think questioning if our stones are untreated is really unfair.

I need to get back to the hard work we do each day.

Thank you,

Michael Arnstein

 

[T L]

I also wonder why they stopped making videos of the stones as well. Perhaps good visual interpretation on their website is not important to their sales.

 

[enbcfsobe]

Date: 3/3/2010 4:01:11 PM
Author: E B

Date: 3/3/2010 3:35:32 PM
Author: Arcadian
RH, thats the dumbest BS I ever heard. They are very clearly misrepresenting their product, even saying thats what they do in point number 2!

And point #1, too, if the ''identical'' part was true.


1. This is the main reason: Almost all of our pairs are in fact identical. Diamond cut gemstones with flawless clarity and exact color match do in fact look Exactly the same.

If one stone is slightly different color tone yet exactly the same faceting we will adjust one of the images colors.

i assume he is referring to round brilliants...which doesn''t explain anything about the ovals and cushions.
none of this passes the laugh test.

 

[RockHugger]

I guess we are crazy and we are imagining things.

 

[vinkalmann]

After reading this post I went back to check on an email I had gotten from NSC for a pair of earrings that I had gotten for my fiance for Christmas. What do you know? They're flipped images. To be honest I never even noticed.

In real life the stones are very accurate to the pictures, BUT they aren't exactly the same. Personally I would have liked to have known this ahead of time, even though at the end of the day we both love the set.

I'm curious, has anyone noticed whether the flipping is only being done on the less expensive pairs, or it is across all price ranges? I can see it being more acceptable for less expensive sets (like the ones I got) since the labor cost of photographing factors more in for less expensive pairs.

edit: I wanted to add that the earrings were already made, I didn't order a loose pair and then have them mounted. I don't think that makes a difference though.

 

[VapidLapid]

I actually do think the round blue pair could be separate stones in the same cut. Only 3 contiguous facets look the same to me and that''s not enough. However, that exception in no way explains or excuses the balance which is the majority of their pairs. And his last response was more than a little incoherent.

 

[RockHugger]

New e-mail from Micheal at NCS. Dont worry about my name being exposed...he didnt get my name right. I agree, his last e-mail seemed a bit..frazzled.
*****************************
Helen can you piece together my correspondence with Kathy here and post it on pricescope.

I fear what precedence this sets, as anyone in the general public will now demand we respond to them on pricescope as it is becoming some informal trial/judge/jury.

In this case I feel very confident in our position and I am glad to make it public, yet I fear about how much time this will take of our working resources.

Please do this during your regular working hours here, but I am asking you not to spend anytime checking the site for more issues after this.

Thank you,

Michael Arnstein

The Natural Sapphire Company

 

[enbcfsobe]

Date: 3/3/2010 4:36:47 PM
Author: vinkalmann
After reading this post I went back to check on an email I had gotten from NSC for a pair of earrings that I had gotten for my fiance for Christmas. What do you know? They''re flipped images. To be honest I never even noticed.

In real life the stones are very accurate to the pictures, BUT they aren''t exactly the same. Personally I would have liked to have known this ahead of time, even though at the end of the day we both love the set.

I''m curious, has anyone noticed whether the flipping is only being done on the less expensive pairs, or it is across all price ranges? I can see it being more acceptable for less expensive sets (like the ones I got) since the labor cost of photographing factors more in for less expensive pairs.

edit: I wanted to add that the earrings were already made, I didn''t order a loose pair and then have them mounted. I don''t think that makes a difference though.

i understand what you''re saying, but the cost of taking accurate pictures and accurately representing what you''re selling is part of the cost of doing business online.

 

[Stone Hunter]

Date: 3/3/2010 3:39:01 PM
Author: E B
Indeed, Freke. Another comparison of an ''identical pair.'' I wonder which one they photographed face up.

Since these stones are clearly NOT identical a photo of one stone used to represent both is just not OK.

No problem for me I won''t be buying from them.

 

[vinkalmann]

Date: 3/3/2010 4:41:32 PM
Author: enbcfsobe

Date: 3/3/2010 4:36:47 PM

Author: vinkalmann

After reading this post I went back to check on an email I had gotten from NSC for a pair of earrings that I had gotten for my fiance for Christmas. What do you know? They''re flipped images. To be honest I never even noticed.


In real life the stones are very accurate to the pictures, BUT they aren''t exactly the same. Personally I would have liked to have known this ahead of time, even though at the end of the day we both love the set.


I''m curious, has anyone noticed whether the flipping is only being done on the less expensive pairs, or it is across all price ranges? I can see it being more acceptable for less expensive sets (like the ones I got) since the labor cost of photographing factors more in for less expensive pairs.


edit: I wanted to add that the earrings were already made, I didn''t order a loose pair and then have them mounted. I don''t think that makes a difference though.

i understand what you''re saying, but the cost of taking accurate pictures and accurately representing what you''re selling is part of the cost of doing business online.

I definitely agree with you, I''m in no way trying to justify what they''re doing. I don''t think it''s ok at all. I think was more trying to guess at THEIR justifications for doing that.

 

[VapidLapid]

"Let them eat Tanzanite!"

 

[E B]

Date: 3/3/2010 4:44:20 PM
Author: vinkalmann

I'm curious, has anyone noticed whether the flipping is only being done on the less expensive pairs, or it is across all price ranges? I can see it being more acceptable for less expensive sets (like the ones I got) since the labor cost of photographing factors more in for less expensive pairs.

Doesn't seem to be limited to the less expensive pairs. The pink half moon pair on page two of this thread is priced at over $2300.

 

[Arcadian]

Date: 3/3/2010 4:01:11 PM
Author: E B

Date: 3/3/2010 3:35:32 PM
Author: Arcadian
RH, thats the dumbest BS I ever heard. They are very clearly misrepresenting their product, even saying thats what they do in point number 2!

And point #1, too, if the ''identical'' part was true.


1. This is the main reason: Almost all of our pairs are in fact identical. Diamond cut gemstones with flawless clarity and exact color match do in fact look Exactly the same.

If one stone is slightly different color tone yet exactly the same faceting we will adjust one of the images colors.

You''re right, I should have said 1 and 2.

I can totally understand having a bit of studio lighting, its the way of the world if you''re selling stuff, but seriously???

Taking pictures of a single stone, when they''re sold in pairs? THEN going back into photoshop, matching up the stones, then coloring the stones so that they match in tone?

Maybe he mant to say that if the stones were photographed together it would bee seen how far off in tone they really are! Gotcha

That purple pair...omg wtf??? That right one was humongus!

Rock Hugger, you should have sent back an email that said ''Don''t pee on my leg then tell me its raining.''




-A

 

[vinkalmann]

From a consumer stand point, I would be personally ok with having a duplicated picture if I was made aware of the fact. After all, NSC does allow customers to preview the stones at home with no risk (ie send them back for a refund). Personally it''s just that there''s no disclaimer that bothers me.

 

[Burberrygirl]

Date: 3/3/2010 4:45:12 PM
Author: VapidLapid
''Let them eat Tanzanite!''

Hahaha, that''s hilarious! VL, I love your signature too.

Oh NSC, how sad...

 

[LD]

Message to Michael / Helen

If I am in the market to buy a pair of gemstones, I want to see each gem advertised and represented correctly and accurately. I do not expect to see one image altered so that it appears to be two different gemstones.

If you are duplicitous in this regard, it is not unfair to wonder what other short cuts you take in order to save time?