Any major gem labs actually grading rubies?

[drruby]

Does anyone know if any major gem labs are actually grading rubies?

That means a clarity score

I know there's no standardized ruby grading system like like GIA's 4C's

But so far all of these big labs don't have any clarity scores

GIA
AGL
GRS
SSEF
GAAJ

I have certs from all of them and they just give an opinion as to origin on some and if it has any heat treatment

When it's lead glass filled it just says LGF or something

No percentage of what is real ruby in the case of LGF etc

Thanks

 

[chrono]

If going with AGL, you may want to consider the full prestige report, which grades the colour, clarity and cut. It also gives you more information about the treatment.
http://aglgemlab.com/the-prestige-report/

 

[drruby]

Actually the prestige on Rubies doesn't give clarity

I have a AGL report, nothing about Clarity

Diamonds yes

Rubies no

Look at the cert, the clarity stuff is related to enhancements such as heat or beryl or LGF

Not a clarity grade

Since almost all natural rubies that are 100% real ruby have inclusions the few that try to say a grade usually consider VS to be included

Minor inclusion not easy to see with eye

But that's usually dealers no labs saying an included Ruby is VS

It seems that if a universal grade system for rubies could be agreed upon VS would be like SI in diamonds

So dealers do often say what they think

But not one lab is saying

VS
SI
I

As to rubies but AGL does have a clarity enhancement opinion if clarity was enhanced with heat or LGF for rubies

But it's not a grade per se IMO

 

[chrono]

I am curious why clarity grading is very important to you because eye clean is the standard for coloured stones.

 

[drruby]

That's just it, eye clean in Rubies is often well almost eye clean.

Having invested for over 30 years in rubies, I guess my version of VS is could be eye clean but most probably no major inclusions easily seen with the eye.

Most of my rubies are from way back and I was thinking of getting a major lab to grade them but so far no such service.

IMO the top feature is color and brilliance, and if it has minor eye issues, well it's a ruby, the big factors for me is does the color pop and does it have brilliance.

Then the issue of eye visible inclusions is a factor and if you are into rubies you know very, very few are even close to eye clean once you have any weight on the stone.

 

[Cognition]

This month, suddenly, way too many thread about ruby popping up here

I am not sure which AGL are you talking about. the AGL that I know called American Gemological Laboratories, and they DO have clarity grade for rubies in their full prestige report. However, I do not know Mr smith got struck by lightning and decide to take off their clarity grading (along with their famous color grading).

Having invested for over 30 years in rubies, I guess my version of VS is could be eye clean but most probably no major inclusions easily seen with the eye.

Just saying, unless you have a really deep pocket (by this, I mean 10% of Bolkiah like pocket), I do not think you can get any rubies as good as they are today. I have been collecting rubies for awhile, and I remember the market was flooded by iron rich thai ruby before the discovery of mong shu mine. At that time, Mogok and other mogok type rubies are as rare as high quality alexandrite before the discovery of brazilian alexandrite. Most mogok and mogok type ruby are either have a unattractive color or have a bad clarity. It was not until the discovery of the ruby on marble mine in mozambique that I finally see more higher quality ruby with better clarity in the market.

Note: just submit your ruby to Gubelin. if they give predicate "pigeon blood" it means that the color and clarity are extremely fine, and the cutting, for the very least, descent

 

[drruby]

Gubelin is better than GIA but still no clarity grade.

Anyone know if Sotheby's had a cert on the Graff Ruby?

It would be interesting to see if they used an outside gemologist or just stuck with in house opinion.

 

[drruby]

Graff ruby had two certs

one from first auction years ago and a new one

SSEF
Gubelein

No GIA for sure

LOL

 

[MollyMalone]

Yes, I was surprised you asked since one has long been able to view the independent lab reports -- Sotheby's does not use "certificate" or "certified" (and most of us here don't either) -- posted on the online catalogue pages without being a registered user of Sothebys.com.

Perhaps his perspectives have changed, but Richard Wise himself observed here on this forum that loupe-clean rubies do not command a premium:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ruby-clarity-question.123549/#post-2160716#p2160716

 

[drruby]

Well many dealers do attempt to give a grade to clean rubies and clean is usually very slight eye inclusions, so that is usually the so-called VS in Rubies.

Anyway, if a major lab would attempt to standardize eye clean as VS, then VS could eventually be a high end grade for Rubies almost equal to IF for a diamond.

The most interesting thing about the Graff is it is said to be 'almost' loop clean.

That is indeed very, very rare. Usually if a ruby is just half way decent to the eye as soon as you loop it, it's usually very included if it has any type of size.

So as to Wise saying no one pays a premium for eye clean rubies, well the two sales of Rubies that were over 1 Million a carat means the upper end of the market does consider eye clean and almost loop clean to be a 'premium'.

It would be nice to see a major lab finally set the bar as to what clarity a Ruby can be, granted very few are even VS in the Ruby world, that being 'almost' or eye clean.

Just read his definition of clarity, 'eye flawless' is what he considers a top grade. That's what many dealers call VS for rubies, eye clean or pretty much eye clean to most that view it.

Now Wise may think no one cares about how rubies loop out, but the fact the Graff was 'almost' loop clean was part of why it went for over 1 Mil a carat, so ultra high end does consider clarity a major factor.

Now that I see Wise is saying eye clean is the top end, ok, call it eye flawless or vs but call it something in the trade so labs can then use a consistent measurement to grade rubies.

But Wise on his site is just saying what I've been saying here, almost eye clean is usually the top end of Rubies and Sapphires and Emeralds. So why do not major labs have a clarity score for eye clean colored gems and name it something so clarity grades can begin be on lab reports for rubies.

The aspect of clarity grading is setting a clear bar or definition so then a cert can state what it is.

Ruby is EC (eye clean) or AEC almost eye clean) call it VS or EF (eye flawless but call it something.

As to Wise's opinion no one pays a premium for above eye clean, the Graff example shows that's not true, most eye clues rubies are a mess in a loop so the Graff was the very rare exception, eye clean almost loop clean and nature just doesn't make rubies that way.

 

[MollyMalone]

Actually the prestige on Rubies doesn't give clarity
I have a AGL report, nothing about Clarity
Diamonds yes
Rubies no
Look at the cert, the clarity stuff is related to enhancements such as heat or beryl or LGF
Not a clarity grade
* * *
AGL does have a clarity enhancement opinion if clarity was enhanced with heat or LGF for rubies
But it's not a grade per se IMO

Perhaps you did not adequately specify the nature of the report you wanted. Here are a couple of AGL reports -- one in the old format -- reflecting a clarity grade of the rubies submitted that is independent of the assessment of the presence of heat-other enhancements; clarity grade is found in far right panel of both:
http://www.preciousgemstones.com/214burucert.jpg
http://box304.listingfactoryhosting...34/images/ad2dd7de12e84b6a8299f1792_large.jpg

 

[drruby]

I've seen many AGL reports and none had a clarity grade section like the old one you show and not even the newer prestige reports I've seen have the clarity sections on them.

If AGL is trying to establish a Clarity grading system I'm all for it, but all the AGL reports I've seen with rubies have no such clarity sections as your examples show.

I'm not even sure AGL still offers their clarity grade and I've never heard any ruby dealer us their terms.

Most use a variation of GIA, VS being the top end, very slight inclusions, that's usually the top mark for any natural ruby.

SI is most of the higher end rubies, slight inclusions.

I is most rubies Inclusions easy to see

It may be AGL has given up on it's own system using MI and other terms I've never heard any ruby dealer use.

But granted your certs which are not on AGL servers do have a clarity section and from the AGL certs I've seen, none have such info.

I don't see examples of such grading now on AGL servers nor in their pricing data, so I'm not sure AGL even tries to use their modified grading lingo on newer prestige certs.

It just may be dealers that actually buy such reports don't want the info, so they can pump their opinions as to how clean the stone is they are hawking.

 

[MollyMalone]

Oh for Pete's sake, there's a clarity grade section on the sample Full Grading report on the AGL page Chrono first gave you -- and yes, those are priced differently, as set forth on AGL's fee page.

 

[drruby]

AGL ALERT

If you are thinking of using AGL to grade a CG you need to consider this.

The lab was owned by CU Collectors Universe.

CU owns PCGS and PSA.

Guys with serious dough in ancient coins and the oldest rare sports cards do not use CU to grade anything for one reason, they have been known to certify as authentic FAKE ancient coins and FAKE sports cards.

Now I know why they moved into CG grading.

LOL

So bottom line I now won't even consider AGL a legit gem lab due to who it is owned by and his connection to CU.

Period, you can use AGL but I honestly wouldn't trust them to even grade glass.

AGL is now privatized by a guy that was a VP in CU.

http://aglgemlab.com/about-us/

I don't invest in ancient coins nor sports cards.

I know some major players in both niches of collectibles and CU is a joke in their opinion.

 

[MollyMalone]

I've been debating with myself as to whether to respond to Ruby, J.D.'s post. Think those of us who have read his 49 posts since he made his PS debut yesterday will put little-no stock in his opinion, even if you're unaware of AGL's fine reputation & the continuing research and other work they have done -are continuing to do that redounds to our collective benefit.
But because this post of his might show up on internal searches of PS or via Google, etc., I've decided that it should not stand as is.

* AGL was founded in 1977 by C.R. "Cap" Beesley

* Nearly 30 years later, in August 2006, Beesley reached a $3.5 million agreement with Collectors Universe, with the possibility of an additional $1 million after 3-1/2 yrs & another $2.5 million after 5 years -- if AGL met certain "performance markers". At the time, Beesley anticipated AGL would benefit in additional ways from the deal with CU. See, e.g., this August 2006 Rapaport interview of Beesley:
http://www.diamonds.net/Magazine/Article.aspx?ArticleID=17458&RDRIssueID=6

* Beesley wooed Chris Smith away from GIA in December 2006 to become AGL's Vice-President (not a CU Veep) and Chief Gemologist:
http://www.jckonline.com/2006/12/01/internationally-renowned-gem-expert-chris-smith-joins-agl

* On the heels of the collapse of the economy in 2008, CU announced, on March 1, 2009, that it was exiting the diamonds-colored gem world, effectively immediately. 4 weeks later, the announcement was made that Chris Smith was purchasing AGL.
http://www.jckonline.com/2009/03/02/collectors-universe-exits-jewelry-grading-business
http://www.jckonline.com/2009/03/28/agl-to-reopen-under-smith-s-leadership

* in his newfound zeal to tar AGL-Chris Smith with a baseless brush of guilt by association, Ruby, J.D., conveniently overlooked, e.g.,
http://www.barrons.com/article_emai...4576329081143859922-lMyQjA1MTAxMDIwMzEyNDMyWj

* Ruby, J.D., has suggested here on PS that people submit stones to SSEF or "Gubelein". Gubelin hired Chris Smith away from GIA; he worked there for 11+ years & Gubelin saw fit to make him the Managing Director of its Laboratory. See the 2009 Accredited Gemologists Association's summary of his professional bio here on its Antonio Bonnano Award for Excellence in Gemology page:
http://accreditedgemologists.org/bonanno.php

 

[lovedogs]

I've been debating with myself as to whether to respond to Ruby, J.D.'s post. Think those of us who have read his 49 posts since he made his PS debut yesterday will put little-no stock in his opinion, even if you're unaware of AGL's fine reputation & the continuing research and other work they have done -are continuing to do that redounds to our collective benefit.
But because this post of his might show up on internal searches of PS or via Google, etc., I've decided that it should not stand as is.

* AGL was founded in 1977 by C.R. "Cap" Beesley

* Nearly 30 years later, in August 2006, Beesley reached a $3.5 million agreement with Collectors Universe, with the possibility of an additional $1 million after 3-1/2 yrs & another $2.5 million after 5 years -- if AGL met certain "performance markers". At the time, Beesley anticipated AGL would benefit in additional ways from the deal with CU. See, e.g., this August 2006 Rapaport interview of Beesley:
http://www.diamonds.net/Magazine/Article.aspx?ArticleID=17458&RDRIssueID=6

* Beesley wooed Chris Smith away from GIA in December 2006 to become AGL's Vice-President (not a CU Veep) and Chief Gemologist:
http://www.jckonline.com/2006/12/01/internationally-renowned-gem-expert-chris-smith-joins-agl

* On the heels of the collapse of the economy in 2008, CU announced, on March 1, 2009, that it was exiting the diamonds-colored gem world, effectively immediately. 4 weeks later, the announcement was made that Chris Smith was purchasing AGL.
http://www.jckonline.com/2009/03/02/collectors-universe-exits-jewelry-grading-business
http://www.jckonline.com/2009/03/28/agl-to-reopen-under-smith-s-leadership

* in his newfound zeal to tar AGL-Chris Smith with a baseless brush of guilt by association, Ruby, J.D., conveniently overlooked, e.g.,
http://www.barrons.com/article_emai...4576329081143859922-lMyQjA1MTAxMDIwMzEyNDMyWj

* Ruby, J.D., has suggested here on PS that people submit stones to SSEF or "Gubelein". Gubelin hired Chris Smith away from GIA & he worked there for 11+ years & Gubelin saw fit to make him the Managing Director of its Laboratory. See the 2009 Accredited Gemologists Association's summary of his professional bio here on its Antonio Bonnano Award for Excellence in Gemology page:
http://accreditedgemologists.org/bonanno.php

Thanks for the accurate info! Glad you decided to post--especially for users who may just be google searching keywords and come upon this thread later.

 

[chrono]

Appreciate the facts as provided by Molly, complete with proper links to back them up.

 

[drruby]

This is all I need to know.

In 2009, AGL was purchased and re-privatized by Christopher P. Smith, who had been Vice President and Chief Gemologist of the laboratory while under Collector's Universe ownership.

So you post what he's GIA then he's Gubelein, etc.

AGL was owned by CU and in some circles I respect CU is a joke.

Smith was VP of AGL while CU owned them, that means CU VP.

Now I know why they're the only 'lab' with their own invented Ruby clarity system.

Gubelein, GRS, SSEF and even GIA doesn't attempt to do clarity grades.

When was clarity grades introduced by AGL probably when it was under CU control.

Like I said IMO I wouldn't send glass to AGL now that I know it was owned by CU and that Smith was a VP under the CU ownership.

AGL is off the radar IMO as a legit gem lab, for one reason, it was owned not too long ago by CU a grading service for worthless new sports cards that are not rare and for fake ancient coins.

CU in the gem lab biz is like Disney being a major Wall Street Investment house.

Disney does toy rides great and toy films.

Wall Street Investors are Wall Street Investors.

CU may be able to con the public into thinking their 'grade' on newly printed paper means something has value, but when you put that mentality into a gem lab you end up with the MI and other none sense they use to say something has inclusions or not.

Facts are facts Smith was VP under CU ownership, that means CU VP bottom line.

Now he's the owner, great, but CU was involved in the lab so it is not a lab IMO, that one fact is enough for me to say IMO do not use AGL for anything.

Gubelein, GRS, GAAJ, SSEF, okay labs IMO.

GIA after the 2005 FBI PAY FOR HIGHER GRADES SCANDAL they're worthless as a trusted lab IMO.

So GIA do not use for anything 2005 PAY FOR HIGHER GRADES SCANDAL destroyed them IMO
AGL being owned by CU means IMO worthless as a trusted lab.

Gubelein, GRS, GAAJ, SSEF are all trusted labs IMO.

Let's see who did Sotheby's have certifying the Graff Ruby?

Gubelein and SSEF.

Not GIA and not AGL.

So who should YOU use?

Anyone sayng AGL is a trusted lab for CG can us them, but if you have a high end ruby look some where else.

FACTS ARE FACTS

GIA had the pay for grades scandal
AGL had CU as owner

Both are out IMO as legit gem labs for those reasons.

It's just MY OPINION but if GIA or AGL was worth anything why weren't they on the Graff Ruby?

THAT IS A FACT

 

[smitcompton]

Hi Molly,


Thanks for the correct info. I thought it was Bear williams, but I see it was Cap Beasley. Good Work.

I suspect this fellow didn't get the results he wanted from a GIA report. Often an appraisal from an accredited appraiser will do for valuation of his "portfolio of rubies." They may want a lab report because they know it takes updated equipment to verify treatment levels. not just a look under a microscope. Dr.D doesn't know what he has. He has a big problem. Kill the messenger!


Annette

You think hes an attorney? --who would condemn a whole organization because a few people took bribes? Like this never happens in the real world. His experience in the Appellate court hasn't exposed him to much of real life.

 

[digdeep]

Smitcompton............that theory makes $en$e IF there is a real ruby collection somewhere.

MM thanks for the accurate AGL history vs the spun version by D.R. I'm glad to see the links for fact checking the relevant information. You, my dear, are judge, jury, and jailor on this one......

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

Dr. R: please share with "us" what Gubelein and SSEF said about your rubies compared to GIA and AGS. For one, I'd love to see the documents side by side....after all this is an educational AND consumer forum.

cheers--Sharon

 

[drruby]

Most of my rubies were acquired many years ago and are not treated.

Recent purchases have certs from several labs and the certs are a joke since not one has a clarity opinion.

When an insurance company was involved in issuing an update to my asset umbrella for things I owned, it's now their policy to have certs, so that's why I came here to ask if any labs I'm unaware are doing clarity grades since if I am going to have cert old rubies I may as well get an opinion as well on ruby clarity.

All GIA does with rubies is say useless info, Ct size, measurements and nothing about clarity and their transparency rating is a joke IMO.

Someone suggested AGL for clarity and having some new rubies with AGL I know my certs bought by a dealer from them have no clarity grades.

Someone said they do clarity, and they do on a higher level cert the dealers didn't bother to get.

However looking at their grading using terms NO ONE USES and then researching the background of AGL I publicly stated why IMO AGL is not a legitimate lab.

All the GIA would do if I sent them rubies agree with me the stone is not heat treated or it may be heat treated since in Rubies both are normal situations.

However, I would not agree with GIA on transparency and since GIA is mostly a common carbon certificate issuer, no major rubies have their certs, I wouldn't even bother to send a colored stone to GIA. I have bought and sold over the years lots of common carbon with GIA certs and for diamonds they are okay usually, but since 2005 I won't trust a GIA diamond cert myself.

I can look in a microscope and see all I need to see about any gem with my own eyes.

As to diamonds, if it's not IF or FL I don't waste my time on it.

As to GOLD if it's not a kilo bar I don't waste my time on it.

As to Rubies I prefer 3 carats and above, EC or AEC (eye clean or almost eye clean) then darker colors and heat or heat treated is the norm.

Now since I understand the real value of such rubies when I see people discussing buying a low grade ruby I usually suggest they start to look at high end LGFF instead of low grade 100% natural rubies since for the general public, that is probably a better buy unless they can actually buy an investment grade ruby which starts in the 25K to 50K ranges now.

Rubies are rare and the higher end rubies are even rarer, yet for someone to put 3K or 5K or even 10K into low end rubies with weight makes no sense to me, they would better off getting a nice mount with some value and then finding a quality high end LGFF at a fraction of what even bad rubies sell for, for the center stone. Then if their fortunes change and they can put 25K to 50K or even 100K into a center stone, swap the LGFF out for a 'nice ruby'.

So AGL was touted by some as the master ruby gem cert, I knowing rubies said AGL, hmm, I got some certs from AGL that came with recent buys and there's NO CLARITY, but now I have seen that is an 'option' and after looking at how they have a made up clarity lingo system and then finding out CU was connected to them, well AGL is not even a lab now IMO.

You only see GIA certs with dealers that are not major dealers, you go to the right guys in 47th or Antwerp for carbon and no one has GIA certs, NO ONE.

High end carbon dealers rely on their reputations, they don't need certs to sell high end carbon.

Yet you can find GIA certs on some dealers that are not the main players on 47th or Antwerp for carbon.

Just like in Bangkok dealers used to never give certs, now with all the problems with CG such as BI and LGFF, many dealers have certs just to say no LGFF or BI.

I'm actually one of the few guys that can loop (I know LOUPE to most people) a ruby and tell you if it was LGFF and most jewelers still can't do that.

If it wasn't for some idiot at an insurance company I wouldn't be thinking about certs for old CG, there's no need for ME to have them.

Yet insurance companies are machines and if the machine says all umbrella high value policies that list any CG must have certs, you need them now to satisfy insurance companies not high end collectors.

 

[chrono]

You are well aware that your word is insufficient and not trusted by the insurance company, and you think that all CS labs aren't doing a good job, so why bother insuring your CS? I doubt any insurance company will be be able replace any lost or damaged item to your satisfaction, and since you are a lawyer, I would presume that you have read the fine print and that you are well aware that getting money from an insurance company is almost a futile pursuit.

To me, insurance companies are more crooked than labs so I self insure.

 

[Cognition]

Hi drruby, out of curiosity, since you said you have your own private lab and you love ruby so much, I wonder if you have a machine called la-icp-ms in your lab? as you already know ruby treatment become major problems these day, thus most of major labs are using this machine to identify treatments they can't identify with microscope and raman alone. Since you said you have deep pocket and have an extensive knowledge around ruby, I assume you have this machine in your lab. anyone smart enough to get a degree in law and major ruby investors like yourself should be able to purchase and assemble this machine on your own right? I mean, you do not want to miss a new treatment because you want to spare some change from buying this machine. Am I right?

 

[drruby]

So you agree labs are crooked?

Which ones?

GIA?
AGL?

Me, I just think if a lab has lost it's trust factor, it's like a dealer in gems that is considered by others to be luft gesheft

As soon as GIA graders got caught bumping, that was it as far as my opinion about GIA, you do not get over that type of scandal.

Now Collectors Universe is pure luft gesheft, so I wouldn't consider ANYTHING they said to be valid.

Gubelein, SSEF, GAAJ a few others, yeah, they cert CG.

As to self insuring, so your home is self insured?

Your car is self insured?

Your life is self insured?

LOL

While no fan of many insurance companies, it's a necessary evil if you have assets.

Now when an insurance company doesn't pay a claim properly, THAT IS WHY YOU HAVE LAWYERS, to sue them and once a lawyer gets involved most claims are then settled more to the satisfaction of the person no happy with low ball settlements.

Lawyers keep insurance companies halfway legit.

 

[chrono]

No, I did not imply or say that I think labs are crooked. That is your opinion. If I am not required by law to insure my house, I would not do so. If I am not required by law to insure my car, I would not do so. If given the option, I would also not insure my life.

 

[drruby]

la-icp-ms

I'm not into quartz

Rubies you need to know if it has LGFF or is lab.

Heat, all rubies have been hit with heat, in the mines as soon as they are found, so low heat is on every ruby period.

High heat can change stuff like silk and a simple loupe can show you that.

LGFF if you know what to look for can be loupe found.

Higher powered analysis is usually done to determine POSSIBLE origin since every origin report is an OPINION just like color and even clarity are opinions.

As is transparency.

My lab is pretty simple, accurate scales, SG fluids, high powered microscopes with great lighting, digital microscope too.

Simple testers.

Some gold stuff and acids.

The most important thing in my lab is my eyes and my experience.

Most CG now comes with a cert from somebody and usually it's Gubelein or GRS or SSEF if you're in Bangkok you see more Asian certs like GAAJ.

So a loupe easily tells me if high heat or LGFF, now what else do you think rubies need to be analyzed for other than origin which high powered scopes show you the crystal structure to put a best guess on that which all any lab can do about origin, it's the most bs opinion gemology in my opinion as to what origin any gem has?

Guys like me the first thing they do is feel the ruby, rubies that are real have a unique FEEL, how many ruby investors do you know that the first thing they do is TOUCH the stone and close their eyes.

Then you LOOK with you eye in a decent light.

That alone makes 99% of rubies not worth owning to me, they usually pass the feel test but EC rubies are rare, so you don't even need a loupe to see the inclusions that make them worthless to me.

But what do I know, I'm just a Faynshmeker when it comes to rubies, most who want rubies are schnorers.

 

[chrono]

Rubies with low heat can show unbroken silk so it isn't a definitive test. What you have is insufficient to detect low heat and only FTIR spectroscopy will give you this information with 100% accuracy.

 

[Cognition]

la-icp-ms

I'm not into quartz

haha. you are slightly smarter than I thought. However... seriously??? la-icp-ms for quartz only? this is what you got from 5min googling the word "la-icp-ms" and hit the wikipedia button. There is only one mineral included in the wiki page. Guess what it is? QUARTZ!!!

In my knowledge this machine is used by some top of the line lab to determine alexandrite's origin for russian alex and be treatment.

Quartz... lol

I bet smaller lab require to buy the overly expensive la-icp-ms machine, coz I bet they receive tons of quartz everyday.

 

[drruby]

FTIR does not detect all low heat, the fact is EVERY RUBY has been hit with heat.

I'm not a guy that makes a huge fuss over heat in rubies, it's a con game, oh this ruby has NO HEAT.

Most labs don't use FTIR, a few do most test for high heat by looking at silk it's that simple.

So heat has various levels to dealers and collectors.

Now a low cost spectrometer can give you enough data today to say various 'levels' of heat, but that to me is fluff.

Heat is over blown in the ruby world IMO, if it was high heat you can see that with a simple microscope IF you have the knowledge.

The only real issue I have now with new CG is Beryl and that's why high end CG now gets a cert, you need at a minimum LIBS to detect beryl and for ten times the dough big labs are now getting into SIMS for one thing BERYL.

To me heat isn't the issue with rubies, if the silk is whole, it's been at least low heat IMO every ruby.

So the dividing line is HIGH HEAT and low heat, well it's pretty much accepted in the industry.

But if you want to say this stone or that stone had a FTIR check and you know it's not been heated, you're wrong in my opinion since the mine level low heat that hits all rubies is still not detected by FTIR certain lower level HT such as blowing in Sri Lanka is now being found with FTIR.

Now field hit and blowing have been done for ages, the new issues is LGFF which experienced gemologists can find with even a loupe and then the big problem is BERYL.

That's why all new CG I have have some level of cert and I prefer Gubelein and SSEF over the rest.

My old rubies have no chance of beryl or even lgff, new stuff have some type of cert and the only reason I need them on new CG is beryl.

I don't have a LIBS and if I were a big lab doing a ton of certs I would be using SIMS not old tech, cutting edge.