Thoughts on this Ruby?

[Huldak]

 

[Huldak]

I previously posted about finding a Montana Sapphire; along the way I decided to include rubies. A trusted vendor has found me the above. At $580 plus shipping, it appears to be the true red color I want and the perfect size for my existing setting, which is not easy to find.

I'd appreciate from the community any concerns or questions I should ask before purchasing, which I'm inclined to do if I go ruby (I'm waiting for the pics of the two Montana Sapphires they found for me). Any thoughts? TIA!

It's 4.8 mm, 2.8 mm deep, .53 cts
Origin is Mozambique.
Heated.
VS clarity.

 

[T L]

I previously posted about finding a Montana Sapphire; along the way I decided to include rubies. A trusted vendor has found me the above. At $580 plus shipping, it appears to be the true red color I want and the perfect size for my existing setting, which is not easy to find.

I'd appreciate from the community any concerns or questions I should ask before purchasing, which I'm inclined to do if I go ruby (I'm waiting for the pics of the two Montana Sapphires they found for me). Any thoughts? TIA!

It's 4.8 mm, 2.8 mm deep, .53 cts
Origin is Mozambique.
Heated.
VS clarity.

For $500, you're not going to get a very high quality ruby. Unfortunately, with rubies, you have to spend a lot of money to get something with very good color, or you have to buy something so highly treated, that it's good color, with the caveat you know it's all from the treatments.

I personally don't think rubies are a good buy, and it's a rather dark unsaturated stone. I would spend my $500 on something that would be a better value. You can get decent sapphires for $500, but not a decent ruby I'm afraid. Others may disagree, but that's my opinion, and I'm sticking with it. Ruby is the one gemstone I don't own because of all the treatments, and I don't like 99% of what is out there because I don't have the money to afford the color I like. Sorry to be such a party pooper.

 

[chrono]

It looks like a reasonably priced ruby. Is it great? No, because the colour is dark and the saturation isn't high. That said, $500 will not net you a great looking ruby, which is why I think it's a good stone for the price. This is not a stone I would bezel or set in an enclosed type of setting.

 

[Huldak]

I previously posted about finding a Montana Sapphire; along the way I decided to include rubies. A trusted vendor has found me the above. At $580 plus shipping, it appears to be the true red color I want and the perfect size for my existing setting, which is not easy to find.

I'd appreciate from the community any concerns or questions I should ask before purchasing, which I'm inclined to do if I go ruby (I'm waiting for the pics of the two Montana Sapphires they found for me). Any thoughts? TIA!

It's 4.8 mm, 2.8 mm deep, .53 cts
Origin is Mozambique.
Heated.
VS clarity.

For $500, you're not going to get a very high quality ruby. Unfortunately, with rubies, you have to spend a lot of money to get something with very good color, or you have to buy something so highly treated, that it's good color, with the caveat you know it's all from the treatments.

I personally don't think rubies are a good buy, and it's a rather dark unsaturated stone. I would spend my $500 on something that would be a better value. You can get decent sapphires for $500, but not a decent ruby I'm afraid. Others may disagree, but that's my opinion, and I'm sticking with it. Ruby is the one gemstone I don't own because of all the treatments, and I don't like 99% of what is out there because I don't have the money to afford the color I like. Sorry to be such a party pooper.

Not at all, I appreciate your input TL. Since first looking around this forum a week or so ago I've been enthralled by how much there is to learn about colored stones, and I'm afraid even with all the reading I've done most times I'm still just at a loss. So, dark and unsaturated -- good to know. If I do decide to buy, I want to know what I'm getting.

 

[T L]

I previously posted about finding a Montana Sapphire; along the way I decided to include rubies. A trusted vendor has found me the above. At $580 plus shipping, it appears to be the true red color I want and the perfect size for my existing setting, which is not easy to find.

I'd appreciate from the community any concerns or questions I should ask before purchasing, which I'm inclined to do if I go ruby (I'm waiting for the pics of the two Montana Sapphires they found for me). Any thoughts? TIA!

It's 4.8 mm, 2.8 mm deep, .53 cts
Origin is Mozambique.
Heated.
VS clarity.

For $500, you're not going to get a very high quality ruby. Unfortunately, with rubies, you have to spend a lot of money to get something with very good color, or you have to buy something so highly treated, that it's good color, with the caveat you know it's all from the treatments.

I personally don't think rubies are a good buy, and it's a rather dark unsaturated stone. I would spend my $500 on something that would be a better value. You can get decent sapphires for $500, but not a decent ruby I'm afraid. Others may disagree, but that's my opinion, and I'm sticking with it. Ruby is the one gemstone I don't own because of all the treatments, and I don't like 99% of what is out there because I don't have the money to afford the color I like. Sorry to be such a party pooper.

Not at all, I appreciate your input TL. Since first looking around this forum a week or so ago I've been enthralled by how much there is to learn about colored stones, and I'm afraid even with all the reading I've done most times I'm still just at a loss. So, dark and unsaturated -- good to know. If I do decide to buy, I want to know what I'm getting.

Most people that first come here look for rubies and sapphires because that's what they know. When you really get into colored gems, as many of us, you'll find there's a lot of choices out there, and some great buys. For example, $500 will get you a great chrysoberyl, but how many people have heard of chrysoberyl?

Good luck!

 

[Huldak]

It looks like a reasonably priced ruby. Is it great? No, because the colour is dark and the saturation isn't high. That said, $500 will not net you a great looking ruby, which is why I think it's a good stone for the price. This is not a stone I would bezel or set in an enclosed type of setting.

Thanks Chrono, I was hoping you'd pop in too. It will be prong set. Will the difference between a great ruby and this one, at this size (4.8 mm), be noticeable? Is it like a well cut diamond that makes a big difference even in a little size?

 

[Huldak]

So ... I think this is pretty cool.

http://www.litnon.com/index.php?page=viewgem&id=10020

 

[chrono]

A coloured stone with excellent colour will catch the eye, even if it is small. I know there are many PSers with small stones with high saturation that just pop, and hope that they will share pictures of their rings.

 

[Niel]

Contact brad at the gem trader. Ask him if he has any red spinel. Last I spoke with him recently and he had a 5.9x4 spinel for under 600

 

[Niel]

A photo.

 

[austinj]

Ok so can someone explain to me what they mean by saturation? I guess in my mind I'm thinking the more saturated the more color it has but I think that's wrong because this stone is very dark and you guys say it is not very saturated. Sorry this is off the topic but maybe the OP can benefit as well

 

[chrono]

Colour is broken down into 3 main categories:
Hue which is the purity of colour be it pure red, orangish red, purplish red, etc.
Tone which is how light or dark it is. Too light and red will become pink. Too dark and the stone will approach looking blackish.
Saturation which is how much the colour pops. The less saturated, the browner or grayer the stone looks. The more saturated, the more neon it looks.
https://www.palagems.com/quality_4cs.htm

 

[austinj]

Ok thanks chrono! So then I take it this one is not very saturated because it's leaning towards brownish red right? It's not a very bright red.

 

[chrono]

Correct, in addition to it being a little bit dark.

 

[T L]

You should also read this thread too. It's really important to be educated about sapphires and rubies.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-to-coloured-gemstone-buying-read-this-first.174284/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-to-coloured-gemstone-buying-read-this-first.174284/[/URL]

 

[T L]

Colour is broken down into 3 main categories:
Hue which is the purity of colour be it pure red, orangish red, purplish red, etc.
Tone which is how light or dark it is. Too light and red will become pink. Too dark and the stone will approach looking blackish.
Saturation which is how much the colour pops. The less saturated, the browner or grayer the stone looks. The more saturated, the more neon it looks.
https://www.palagems.com/quality_4cs.htm

Also notice that in that chart, strong and vivid saturation does not exist for the very light and dark tones because they just cannot hold color well. If a stone is too dark, it will "black out," and if a stone is too light, it will not have much color.

That's why it's good to stick to medium, medium light, and sometimes medium dark tones IMO, unless you like very greyish or brownish gems. Cool colored gems tend to be greyish (like blues, greens, violets, purples), and the warmer colors tend to be brownish (reds, oranges, some yellows), unless they're highly saturated.

 

[LD]

I agree with everything that has already been said but I also understand the lure of owning a Ruby.

For $500 it's not a bad buy but it's not a great Ruby. As has been mentioned, it's too dark, and don't forget when you set it, even with prongs, it'll appear slightly darker again.

If you're stuck with budget and wanting a Ruby then it's worth getting to see if you like it. If you're stuck with budget but are willing to look at other stones then you can find a lovely stone for your money BUT it's unlikely to be red. Red is the most difficult colour to find in gemstones because nothing really matches how a Ruby looks.

 

[austinj]

Awesome thanks for being so helpful with the saturation question! It makes much more sense now. I think someone already said this but have you considered red spinel? It is still very expensive for top color stuff but I think still half the price of a top color Ruby right now.

 

[T L]

Awesome thanks for being so helpful with the saturation question! It makes much more sense now. I think someone already said this but have you considered red spinel? It is still very expensive for top color stuff but I think still half the price of a top color Ruby right now.

Spinels are also not as invasively treated like rubies. While they do try to treat them with heat occasionally, it really doesn't do much for spinel, unlike ruby.

Spinels tend to be more orangy than fine rubies as well.

 

[Huldak]

Thanks everyone so very much, I appreciate all the feedback and the learning. They have it up on their website now, along with the Montana Sapphires they found for me. The sapphires are in the fifth row down on their page.

http://www.gemfix.com/sapphire_montana.html

The one on the right looks the prettiest to me, but the one in the middle is more green, which I like.

 

[pregcurious]

It looks like a reasonably priced ruby. Is it great? No, because the colour is dark and the saturation isn't high. That said, $500 will not net you a great looking ruby, which is why I think it's a good stone for the price. This is not a stone I would bezel or set in an enclosed type of setting.

+1

Some "red" spinels also tend to be pink. A lot of the top rubies also look hot pink in some light, but super saturated.

 

[Huldak]

Contact brad at the gem trader. Ask him if he has any red spinel. Last I spoke with him recently and he had a 5.9x4 spinel for under 600

Thanks Niel!

 

[Huldak]

You should also read this thread too. It's really important to be educated about sapphires and rubies.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-to-coloured-gemstone-buying-read-this-first.174284/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-to-coloured-gemstone-buying-read-this-first.174284/[/URL]

I am looking at this again ... easier to understand now. To anyone who cares to answer, the green stone I posted above, are those dark spots extinction?

 

[Huldak]

I wonder if I just sold those sapphires. Two of the three now "sale pending."

 

[PieAreSquared]

You should also read this thread too. It's really important to be educated about sapphires and rubies.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-to-coloured-gemstone-buying-read-this-first.174284/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/new-to-coloured-gemstone-buying-read-this-first.174284/[/URL]

I am looking at this again ... easier to understand now. To anyone who cares to answer, the green stone I posted above, are those dark spots extinction?

Without seeing the stone from more angles I would not assume the dark facets are extinction. From the photos, they appear to be shadows, facets the light source is not currently hitting. Extinction can be best described as "dead" spots, areas that never reflect the light and therefore always stay dead, extinct. Normally a cutting issue when a stone is not cut at the proper critical angles for its optimal refraction, or light reflection. Although some low refraction stones like iolite (bleh), always seem on the verge of extinction to me.

By the way, if you are looking for something in the 4mms, you are moving into the "melee" category, very small faceted stones. It may be more of a challenge to find well cut stones in that size, since most precision cutters don't bother to cut things that small.

Are you looking at rubies and sapphires for the corundum-toughness factor? Or are these stones you prefer?

 

[Huldak]

Thank you, so I guess I will take a look in person as I ordered that stone and the Ruby. The Ruby vendor volunteered that the stone was not dark or unsaturated, just difficult to photograph. If neither works, back to square one and yes other stones will be in the mix. I started with sapphires and rubies because I knew of them, and knew them to be hard, but I'm not stuck on them.

 

[T L]

The extinction you see in the green stone above could be from the camera shadow. While many gems have some extinction due to facet shadows, it's not an issue unless the stone has so much extinction, it looks almost black. Some elongated shaped stones, such as ovals, tend to also show some extinction on one half. People here coined the term, "half and half extinction" to describe that. Some gems also go more extinct in some lighting. For example, I had a tourmaline once that looked almost black in sunlight, but had more sparkle in artificial light. I ended up returning it to the lapidary.

Here's a ruby with large dark areas of extinction, and I would not want such a stone.

 

[userangl28212003]

A coloured stone with excellent colour will catch the eye, even if it is small. I know there are many PSers with small stones with high saturation that just pop, and hope that they will share pictures of their rings.

Here is a example of small stones with great color pic of mine, my red spinel and yellow diamond are 5mm or under and they pop really nicely

Red spinel set and yellow diamond pop


Here is the red spinel loose on my hand that captures the redness I see IRL


Although darker in my pics for some reason and in dim lighting in outdoor natural sunlight and my work/subway lighting(for some reason) it show a bright royal blue. Again only 4mm

 

[Huldak]

The extinction you see in the green stone above could be from the camera shadow. While many gems have some extinction due to facet shadows, it's not an issue unless the stone has so much extinction, it looks almost black. Some elongated shaped stones, such as ovals, tend to also show some extinction on one half. People here coined the term, "half and half extinction" to describe that. Some gems also go more extinct in some lighting. For example, I had a tourmaline once that looked almost black in sunlight, but had more sparkle in artificial light. I ended up returning it to the lapidary.

Here's a ruby with large dark areas of extinction, and I would not want such a stone.

Awesome illustration, thanks TL. The demantoid above was described as having an old cut, so I thought it might be extinction, but it sounds as though I can't jump to that conclusion. I'm looking forward to seeing it in person.