Tiffany Sapphire Ring

[SB621]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tiffany-Co-2-53ct-Natural-Sapphire-Diamond-Ring-Platinum-GIA-MINT-/181097145509?pt=US_Fine_Rings&hash=item2a2a3b24a5

What does everyone think? I'm IN NO WAY INTERESTED in purchasing this ring. Just found it on ebay and actually really liked the color. I sort of thought the price wasn't bad for a 2.5ct plus sapphire with a GIA certificate and a Tiffany setting.

 

[chrono]

A few things bother me about the listing:
1. Heating of blue sapphire never ever leaves a residue. Not sure why the listing had it in capital letters.
2. No direct frontal view of the sapphire. Why? Because it is windowed. You can see it if you know what to look for, plus it's there in the GIA memo.
3. All the pictures look overblue. I am unsure how the sapphire will look on a more neutral background (aka in person). The picture on the GIA memo looks very unattractive (dark and extinct). I would want it verified that the stone in the ring matches the memo.
4. Tiffany has no qualms nor open disclosure that they sell diffused sapphires. The GIA memo only noted that it is heated. Testing for diffusion is extra.

 

[SB621]

A few things bother me about the listing:
1. Heating of blue sapphire never ever leaves a residue. Not sure why the listing had it in capital letters.
2. No direct frontal view of the sapphire. Why? Because it is windowed. You can see it if you know what to look for, plus it's there in the GIA memo.
3. All the pictures look overblue. I am unsure how the sapphire will look on a more neutral background (aka in person). The picture on the GIA memo looks very unattractive (dark and extinct). I would want it verified that the stone in the ring matches the memo.
4. Tiffany has no qualms nor open disclosure that they sell diffused sapphires. The GIA memo only noted that it is heated. Testing for diffusion is extra.

And in 1 post you squish my hopes of a pretty ring (not that I would have bought it at all).

 

[pokerface]

@Chrono, GIA DOES test for diffusion in its colored stone reports. It is also my understanding that diffusion would leave residue, so in saying no residue, the vendor is emphasizing that the stone has NOT been diffused, per the GIA report.

GIA colored stone reports:

"These reports document the results of a full gemological examination of a material, identifying the material examined and detailing such characteristics as color, transparency, shape, cut, and dimensions weight and a color photo. The full report states whether the material is natural or synthetic and if it has been treated to enhance its appearance by an identifiable treatment. The report also notes whether the material is a simulant with no known natural counterpart, or if it has been assembled from two or more separate components.

GIA Colored Stone Identification Reports are issued on any polished or rough, loose or mounted gem material. Natural Ruby, Sapphire, Emerald, Tourmaline and Alexandrite received a report format tailored to the specific gem material."

 

[chrono]

SB,
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm a bit slow on the uptake today so I hope you don't mind explaining. Is it because of the heating or that if the vendor doesn't know what he's talking about, it makes the sale doubtful? Or is it because you feel the "residue" part is misleading?

Pokerface,
I could be wrong but my understanding is that testing for diffusion is extra and not part of the normal testing. This is because it costs $$$$$ to get it tested using LA-ICP-MS which is a very expensive piece of equipment. When the stone is suspect as a result of the normal testing, the owner will be notified and offered the option for further diffusion testing. Please point me to a reputable source showing that diffusion leaves a residue as I've never heard of this. If you check GIA's website, testing for diffusion is a separate option for an added fee. The list you showed does not include LIBS or LA-ICP-MS. Looks like BE testing is more affordable than I anticipated at $30 per stone.
http://www.gia.edu/lab-reports-services/colored-stones/colored-stone-services/index.html
http://www.gia.edu/lab-reports-services/fees_payment/lab_fees/IdentFeeSchedule_USD_Oct2012[1].pdf

 

[pokerface]

I certainly do not consider myself an expert on diffusion, so I will leave that part of it to someone with more knowledge.

However, I looked through GIA's website and I see no mention of an option anywhere for paying extra for diffusion testing (in terms of the full lab report). When they say, "the full report states whether the material is natural or synthetic and if it has been treated to enhance its appearance by an identifiable treatment," I would assume that diffusion would qualify as an identifiable treatment.

The links you identified give the consumer an option to submit a stone for Be testing ONLY.

 

[chrono]

The GIA website link I shared shows the diffusion service offered together with pricing.

 

[pokerface]

@Chrono, in no way am I a hawk for GIA (to the contrary, I had a negative customer service experience with them), but it does frustrate me to see you provide this community with incorrect information.

You have stated multiple times that GIA will not test mounted colored stones. This is false.

You have also stated that the GIA full lab report for colored stones does not test for diffusion. This is false. The full lab report tests for diffusion. You also have a cheaper option, if you are confident about the color/origin/etc of the stone, paying ONLY for Be testing for a limited fee.

 

[chrono]

Pokerface,
I stand corrected on two counts. I just got off the telephone with GIA in CA.
1. YES, diffusion testing is part of their full lab report.
2. YES, they test stones that are already mounted. Better yet, unlike AGL, there is no added fee.

GIA also confirmed that diffusion of corundum leaves NO residue.

Sarahbear,
Rest assured that the sapphire in the listing isn't diffused. I still question the picture accuracy though and the fact that the vendor claims that the stone has no residue.

 

[VapidLapid]

All those different fee schedules on the gia site are confusing, and somewhat ambiguous. They do say the identification report will state, "whether an identifiable treatment has been used to enhance its appearance" but they are unclear, by leaving unsaid, what treatments are identifiable by them, or whether they will tell you the extent of treatments. Stating that a stone has been treated is not quite the same as stating the type and extent of treatment. And while they may actually do that, the language in the fee schedule do not convey as much. Also adding to the confusion in their fee schedule are the different "packages" eg. Identification Report, Analytical Report, Re-Identification and Verification Report, and then the a la carte offerings and Quality Assurance Report(s). The Analytical Report compared to the Identification Report looks to be the same thing, except the Analytic report will document the tests performed and give the data collected in those tests, the Identification Report presumably does those same tests but only gives one the gemologist's interpretation of the data, not the data itself. The analytic report is twice the cost of the identification report.

Residues, as I understand them, are traces of flux used to promote the healing of fractures, or flow and bonding of glass fillers during heating.

 

[SB621]

SB,
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm a bit slow on the uptake today so I hope you don't mind explaining. Is it because of the heating or that if the vendor doesn't know what he's talking about, it makes the sale doubtful? Or is it because you feel the "residue" part is misleading?

Pokerface,
I could be wrong but my understanding is that testing for diffusion is extra and not part of the normal testing. This is because it costs $$$$$ to get it tested using LA-ICP-MS which is a very expensive piece of equipment. When the stone is suspect as a result of the normal testing, the owner will be notified and offered the option for further diffusion testing. Please point me to a reputable source showing that diffusion leaves a residue as I've never heard of this. If you check GIA's website, testing for diffusion is a separate option for an added fee. The list you showed does not include LIBS or LA-ICP-MS. Looks like BE testing is more affordable than I anticipated at $30 per stone.
http://www.gia.edu/lab-reports-services/colored-stones/colored-stone-services/index.html
http://www.gia.edu/lab-reports-services/fees_payment/lab_fees/IdentFeeSchedule_USD_Oct2012[1].pdf

Chrono- In my first post I stated I had no interest in the ring at all in purchasing. I just thought it was a pretty color and was interested in seeing what others would say. I know Tiffany's as a scrupulous policy with their colored stones so this was purely curiosity killed the cat type of question.

My comment was meant to be a light jest- not at all taken seriously! Don’t read too much into it There was definitely no deal on the table. If a sapphire is ever in my future (near or far) it will be from Jeff

 

[minousbijoux]

Way off the beaten track, I realize, but my biggest takeaway was how incredibly overpriced the ring is; I wouldn't buy it for half the price!

But I agree, Sarah, the color is pretty

 

[SB621]

Way off the beaten track, I realize, but my biggest takeaway was how incredibly overpriced the ring is; I wouldn't buy it for half the price!

But I agree, Sarah, the color is pretty

I was actually surprized how much I liked the color. I thought I always leaned towards a more med. blue color but I think I'm really liking the violet/ purple in there- or at least that is what I see! I never took that color test so who knows.

 

[minousbijoux]

My sense, knowing you from the neighborhood so to speak, is that you would do very well on the color test. As you know, blue with a slight violet modifier is the trade preference for sapphire. At some point, I'm going to have to break down and risk it with a high quality tanzanite, as many of my favorite sapphires are tanzanites

 

[pregcurious]

Minou, I've also noticed that I'm drawn to tanzys, but I'm to scared of the chipping.

Sarahbear, I wonder what price that ring will actually sell for.

 

[aaronl]

Same ring, right? (More pictures here).

 

[T L]

Something about the quality of the prong work, and the shank design doesn't look like "Tiffany" to me. Does anyone else agree?

 

[pregcurious]

JewelFreak, are you out there?

 

[GregS]

None of the photos show the stone straight on, very strange.

 

[T L]

That's because there's a noticeable window in the stone which is evident in the GIA report photo of it.

 

[chrono]

Yup, there is no straight on picture of the ring so that those who don't know how to read pictures cannot spot the window. The GIA memo picture shows the window. I'm not well versed in hallmark verification so I have no clue if this is a real Tiffany ring. Presuming that the picture is untampered with, the medium dark slightly violetish blue is the trade ideal colour.

Aaron,
The ring in your first link looks the same other than the sapphire. I do think the colour of the sapphire in this one matches more closely to the GIA memo picture.

 

[JewelFreak]

I have real doubts that this thing is Tiffany. If it is, their work has shot downhill from somewhat above average to yeccchh.

1. While Tiff sells treated stones & some of so-so quality, I'd be astonished to see them flog one with an obvious window like that.

2. The style doesn't look like Tiffany to me; more like something from a mall store (well, actually, they are a mall store too, but you get the idea).

3. The workmanship is pretty awful. On their mass market stuff, Tiffany's work is not the perfection you'd expect for the price, but it's better in the high-end jewels & this baby is just sloppy.



Prong placement is irregular, even allowing for perspective. Horrible where the prongs meet the base. I put an arrow toward what looks to me like a manufacturing flaw at the bottom of the shank -- I enlarged & sharpened the photo & it isn't a glob on camera or ring & looks too deep to have happened during wear. Notice there are no scratches around its edges; there would be if it were the result of an accident. In fact, this messy stuff would probably not pass their QC & if it did, the ring would end up in the Employee Store at a big discount.

4. I'm a little uncertain about the hallmark. It should be cleaner: the downshaft of the T, and the indistinct O are possible but not probable.



Basically, you would not see a stone like that in a Tiff ring. It could be treated within an inch of its life but they would not sell one so obviously windowed. Hard to be sure about the setting from photos, but I have doubts.

Now for a cup of espresso!

--- Laurie

 

[LD]

The heating with no residue means it has been heated but NOT filled. Nothing to do with diffusion (which as GIA have clarified leaves no residue). HTH.

I only read the first few posts so forgive me if this has been clarified elsewhere.

 

[VapidLapid]

so now I'm just "elsewhere"

 

[SB621]

JF if you ever decide to become a private eye I would hire you in a minute! I never even noticed some of those issues and once you point them out- they are rather glaring aren't they!

 

[LD]

JF - Unfortunately you WOULD see a stone like that in a Tiffany ring. Their stones can be diabolical.

The hole at the bottom is due to porosity I think - this can happen in cast rings. It's not a manufacturing fault so to speak but it is sloppy.

I defer to you, as always, on the hallmark.


VL - you are of course not "elsewhere". Mega apologies.

 

[JewelFreak]

Have you ever seen one w/a window like that at Tiff's, LD? Their stones have plenty of problems, but I sure never saw any so un-miss-able (new word). I only worked in one store, so only saw what we had there. I also think they'd be too smart to put a windowed stone in a setting with an open under-gallery like that, where the window would be so obvious.

Agree about the casting flaw, and we saw that stuff often in their silver jewelry but not in the high-end platinum or gold stuff. Not to mention the other sloppy work.

I'm far from defending Tiffany's gems -- the days when you could trust them are long gone. I don't have much good to say about the company or their practices, just haven't seen a window this glaring there myself.

--- Laurie

 

[T L]

Well, the setting could be Tiffany, and the stone from somewhere else. Even so, I really highly doubt that's a real Tiffany setting, it just doesn't seem kosher, especially with everything JewelFreak pointed out. JMO.

 

[chrono]

Sadly, they do sell windowed gems but these are the exception. Most of the more expensive stones are decently cut.
http://www.tiffany.com/Shopping/Item.aspx?fromGrid=1&sku=29683662&mcat=148204&cid=287466&search_params=s+5-p+1-c+287466-r+101323340-x+-n+6-ri+-ni+0-t+
http://www.tiffany.com/Shopping/Item.aspx?fromGrid=1&sku=30036204&mcat=148204&cid=287466&search_params=s+5-p+3-c+287466-r+101323340-x+-n+6-ri+-ni+0-t+