A screening tool for diamond grading

[oldminer]

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/54/1/A-screening-tool-for-all-diamond-grading.aspx

A new article in the Pricescope Journal which will help consumers to make valid judgments about how much to rely upon grades of diamonds in the many reports which are currently in the market.

When one looks at the rather large zone of low confidence, it is easier to see how full of potential problems the process is. Keeping the score to the higher end, will help insure consumer happiness with the end result.

Appraisers can use this standardized format to transmit the level of confidence they are providing in any reports they may provide clients, too.

Of course, it is a bit simplistic. We could argue over tiny adjustments, but in the overall, this will be a good bit of further advice offered to those in the hunt for the one "right" diamond.

Contructive criticism is always welcomed.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I like it Dave
May I submit it to the Australian Gemmologist and / or the Australian Valuer Journal ? (Aussie for Appraiser)

 

[Fred333]

Great article.

 

[aljdewey]

Dave, when you say "how to rely upon grades of diamonds in the many reports which are currently in the market....", are you referring to the lab grading reports or to appraisal reports?

 

[oldminer]

I''m giving a way to get a handle on lab grading reports and also to appreciate the range of accuracy from appraisers and smaller labs, too.

Since the tool applies to both mounted and set diamonds, the use is for lab reports and for appraisal reports.

What I discovered by graphing it out is the large red zone of danger for consumers. I knew it intuitively, but this was a physical way to transmit the large danger zone which is out there swallowing up naive consumers every day.

Garry: I''d be very pleased to see this published elsewhere.

 

[strmrdr]

I posted my comment in the comment thread:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/a-screening-tool-for-all-diamond-grading.74074/
I love the article but have some questions.