Opinion on Blue Sapphire

[mcmsinger]

and some more pictures

 

[mcmsinger]

Even more pictures

 

[mcmsinger]

The more pictures the better!

 

[mcmsinger]

more pictures for more clarity!

 

[mcmsinger]

FINAL BONUS SHOTS!... That's all folks!

 

[minousbijoux]

Thank you for taking all those pictures! How do you find it in hand? Were you surprised when you received it, or is it as you expected it to look based on the photos you saw online?

 

[mcmsinger]

Ok.

I've posted as many pictures I could in all different light conditions and as many different angles as possible.

I'm not a professional photographer but I did the best I could so you guys can get as much as a clear picture in your head as to what the stone is like in real life.

I will say honestly that the stone looks better in person than on camera but it's mostly accurate on camera.

The camera I used is a top of the line professional-grade canon.

So what do you guys think?

Does it look like a real untreated blue sapphire? How is the quality of the stone? The color? The clarity?

Did I get a good price, fair price or a rip-off based on the new pictures?

PS. These are completely unmodified original photos with no editing at all!

 

[mcmsinger]

Thank you for taking all those pictures! How do you find it in hand? Were you surprised when you received it, or is it as you expected it to look based on the photos you saw online?

I honestly think photos do not do this stone any justice. Seeing it in person in my unbiased opinion brings out the hidden beauty that a camera for some reason can't pick up.

It's mostly a accurate depiction on camera though but some aspect of it's beauty just can't be rendered on a camera for some odd reason.

Hard to describe really. You have to see the stone in person to really appreciate it but the photos I've taken are the most accurate I can get.

But you tell what you think based on all my photos? You can be honest...

I plan to pass this gemstone on to my future wife (along with a diamond of her choice) which will be either passed on to my daughter or my daughter-in-law.

What do you ladies think? Is it a decent quality blue sapphire for women?

 

[T L]

I'll get lab report from GIA or AGL too than and post the scanned reported results.

You should only have to send it to AGL for a gem brief (you don't need a prestige report). I wouldn't bother with GIA.

AGL is also probably less expensive as well, and they're very thorough. Good luck.

 

[pregcurious]

I have to chime in and say that I would also send this stone to AGL for a GemBrief. One of the mottos on there is "trust but verify". I don't know who came up with it.

 

[chrono]

I don't know if the unevenness of colouration I see in most of the photographs is a function of a zoning, cut, photography or just scintillation contrast. I am also not fond of the very large tilt window but I don't think there is a true window. What are the dimensions of the sapphire? LxWxD in mm is what I am looking for.

ETA
I found the measurements to be 8.89 x 7.04 x 4.4 mm which works out to be a shallow stone, hence the more easily seen tilt window. I think when you mentioned the stone being "too clear", you are seeing the colourless portion through the tilt-window. A better cut stone will not look as clear.

 

[minousbijoux]

It also appears to me that the saturation is not as intense in hand as it is in the vendor's photo (not an uncommon occurrence) so that the stone looks more washed out than it did in their photo.

 

[mcmsinger]

Thanks for the honest opinions.

I honestly felt the stone looked washed up and "windowey" (if that's a word) on camera but not in actual viewing.

I don't wear glasses by the way and have 20/20 vision.

It's color looked defined all throughout the stone in viewing in real life but on camera I noticed the color and saturation was changed differently.

Can this be caused by faulty camera equipment or camera-flash?

The stone actually looked like a different stone on camera than in real life....

Does this maybe have to do with a shallow cut perhaps? Can you always determine a shallow cut just by the dimensions?

Thanks for all your help and advice. I really appreciate it.

 

[mcmsinger]

I think when you mentioned the stone being "too clear", you are seeing the colourless portion through the tilt-window. A better cut stone will not look as clear.

I actually meant the clarity of the stone. As in the clarity was too good and made it look fake because such stones with that clarity are enormously expensive.

The saturation of the color compared to my citrine I felt however was much better.

 

[mcmsinger]

Excellent article explaining how different gemstones may look on camera.

https://www.pricescope.com/journal/camera_may_not_lie_it_tells_different_truths

 

[mcmsinger]

I just read that to determine if your stone has a window... A good way is to get some papers with texts and writing on them. If you can read clearly than it means it has a window but if you can't read pretty much at all than there is no window...

Maybe I should try this and report back?

 

[pregcurious]

You can definitely try it, but based on the dimensions, it is a shallow stone. Windows are caused by a stone not being deep enough. Even if there is no window, a shallow stone will more easily show a tilt window than a deeper stone.

 

[mcmsinger]

You can definitely try it, but based on the dimensions, it is a shallow stone. Windows are caused by a stone not being deep enough. Even if there is no window, a shallow stone will more easily show a tilt window than a deeper stone.

So based upon it's dimensions, carat size (2.22) and the pictures would you say it was a good deal, fair deal, slightly bad deal, bad deal or a really bad deal for $1600 a carat? (given that lab reports AIG confirm it to be a natural untreated VVS1 blue sapphire from sri lanka as well.)

Thanks once again! I appreciate the advice and opinions. I'm learning more about gemstones I didn't know from this forum.

 

[minousbijoux]

If its as it appears in the photos, then I would say you have an acceptable deal. If its better in hand as you indicate, then you did pretty well. But it is shallow and appears windowed, which detracts from its value.

 

[T L]

You can definitely try it, but based on the dimensions, it is a shallow stone. Windows are caused by a stone not being deep enough. Even if there is no window, a shallow stone will more easily show a tilt window than a deeper stone.

So based upon it's dimensions, carat size (2.22) and the pictures would you say it was a good deal, fair deal, slightly bad deal, bad deal or a really bad deal for $1600 a carat? (given that lab reports AIG confirm it to be a natural untreated VVS1 blue sapphire from sri lanka as well.)

Thanks once again! I appreciate the advice and opinions. I'm learning more about gemstones I didn't know from this forum.

So you're saying this stone cost $3,520? (1600/ct at 2.2 carats).

 

[mcmsinger]

So you're saying this stone cost $3,520? (1600/ct at 2.2 carats).

Correct. $3,552.00 to be precise.

By the way, I had a jeweler scale it and it actually came out to be 2.23 carats.

 

[chrono]

Did you take pictures using flash? If so, that will distort the colour of the gem in the photograph. Clarity of coloured stones are assessed by whether they are eye clean or eye visible. Most gems, including sapphires tend to be very clean. Having grading of VVS or IF does not add much additional value. Colour is what sets the price. Price-wise, $3500 is expensive for a very light coloured unheated 2.2 ct blue sapphire.

2.4 ct very well saturated medium dark unheated blue sapphire (close to trade ideal or the most expensive colour) for $3890
www.mastercutgems.com/index.php?page=viewgem&id=7050

 

[mcmsinger]

Did you take pictures using flash? If so, that will distort the colour of the gem in the photograph. Clarity of coloured stones are assessed by whether they are eye clean or eye visible. Most gems, including sapphires tend to be very clean. Having grading of VVS or IF does not add much additional value. Colour is what sets the price. Price-wise, $3500 is expensive for a very light coloured unheated 2.2 ct blue sapphire.

2.4 ct very well saturated medium dark unheated blue sapphire (close to trade ideal or the most expensive colour) for $3890
www.mastercutgems.com/index.php?page=viewgem&id=7050

There seems to be conflicting information on what constitutes a higher value blue sapphire.

I hear from the general consumer population usually that darker blue sapphires are more valuable but from many qualified gemstones experts I hear a light brighter slightly violetish blue with the tone of light to medium is the most highly prized blue sapphire and even more so if it is untreated as well as the size of the being minimum of 2 carats which immediately skyrockets it's value higher than a very good comparable 1 carat for example. . Kashmir originating sapphires of this description being the most expensive and than Sri Lanka being the second premium in price if I'm not mistaken.

There is even a thread on pricescope below here... Which compares one darker blue sapphire to a lighter violetish blue sapphire which is very significantly more pricey and even the members agreed the lighter sapphire was really worth the higher price.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/2-kashmir-blue-sapphires-why-the-huge-price-difference.146018/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/2-kashmir-blue-sapphires-why-the-huge-price-difference.146018/[/URL]

The gemstone you posted is about the same in darkness in the thread above comparing the lower-valued darker blue sapphire to the more valuable lighter blue sapphire.

But anyway...

By how much do you think I overpaid in your opinion? Maybe I should pretend to sell it and see how much it fetches in the offers?

Thanks a lot for your help and time. Much appreciated.

PS. Yes I used flash in the pictures above.

 

[mcmsinger]

Beautiful sapphire, its one of my favorite gems.

Thanks! Glad you liked it.

Also to be honest, I like BOTH darker blue sapphires and lighter blue sapphires. I think lighter blue sapphires are very suitable for women as they are more feminine looking especially it is slightly violetish. The darker blue sapphires are also good.

 

[T L]

As far as region goes, top Kashmir are the most expensive, then Burmese, and then Sri Lanka.

I think Madagascar has some gorgeous sapphires though, reminiscent of some Kashmir ones. I don't really go by location in the case of sapphires, but what I like the best despite location. However, some stones a premium on them because of location. As with any locale, it can have less desirable colors as well, so one shouldn't just go by location.

 

[ChrisA222]

I hear from the general consumer population usually that darker blue sapphires are more valuable but from many qualified gemstones experts I hear a light brighter slightly violetish blue with the tone of light to medium is the most highly prized blue sapphire and even more so if it is untreated as well as the size of the being minimum of 2 carats which immediately skyrockets it's value higher than a very good comparable 1 carat for example. . Kashmir originating sapphires of this description being the most expensive and than Sri Lanka being the second premium in price if I'm not mistaken.


What qualified gem experts made that statement? No way a light to medium is more highly prized than a medium-dark stone...at least, in terms of market value (assuming saturation, treatment, clarity, and cutting are all equal).

I think a huge contributing factor to Sapphire's value is the saturation of the stone, or, strength of color, even moreso than tone. If you look at the stone that Chrono posted, look at how vividly blue the color is. That is an example of a very strongly saturated stone.

I'm not bashing your stone, nor am I commenting on what its value is compared to what you paid.

 

[mcmsinger]

Maybe I misunderstood what was meant... but it's here:

http://www.gia.edu/sapphire-quality-factor

 

[mcmsinger]

If you look at the stone that Chrono posted, look at how vividly blue the color is. That is an example of a very strongly saturated stone.

Not really.

The color of the blue changes into a blackish blue. I don't think it's saturated as much as it's color is darker and a different shade. Clarity is also a slight notch down visually from the photos. (It is a VVS2.)

In fact, I even see a lack of saturation in that stone and uneven coloring.

 

[minousbijoux]

Maybe I misunderstood what was meant... but it's here:

http://www.gia.edu/sapphire-quality-factor

Here's the kicker, mcm: "Preferred sapphires also have strong to vivid color saturation. The saturation should be as strong as possible without darkening the color and compromising brightness. Sapphires with these qualities command the highest prices per carat."

If you look at the photos of your sapphire (sounds like its quite different in hand so this discussion is probably moot anyway), it appears in each photo to be lacking in saturation or intensity of color. As ChrissA said, this is separate from tone (lightness/darkness). So a strongly saturated stone will look like there is strong coloring agent; a lesser saturated stone will look like someone diluted it with water. We often refer to these lesser saturated stones as having a grey component. From your pictures, which is all we have to go by, your stone appears to be a shallow cut, medium saturated stone with a window. The stone that Chrono posted, while slightly darker in tone, shows close to vivid saturation and is exceedingly well cut. This is what accounts for a large price differential.

ETA: Part in quotes is also taken from the GIA site.

 

[mcmsinger]

This is a stone in my opinion with strong saturation.... Not the one chrono posted