AGS and GIA laser inscription

[Petalouda]

Hello all,

we bought a Canera H&A diamond and are having it set. I was looking at the AGS report today and noticed there was also a GIA number on there. I pulled up the GIA report and there are some slight discrepancies in the measurements. Could the two laser inscriptions be due to the diamond potentially having been owned by someone else prior? ( doesn’t bother me. Just curious ) I notice the reports were done about a year apart.

 

[flyingpig]

It is not unusual to see discrepancies. If you consider the tolerance and rouding practice by both labs, I think these differences are reasonable.

Regarding the old report, it is possible that the stone was once sold and then returned for upgrade, or it may have been sitting in the vault for a year (unlikely case since therebis always demand for 2.1c H VS1). Regardless, it is important that the stone was recently graded by AGS and there is no damage. The carat, color and clarity remain the same. This is reassuring and good.

If I were you, I would ask Victor for clarification.
1. Why was the diamond listed on Ebay by Wonder Jeweler since March until Aug 16?
2. What did he mean by the diamond was in the "vault" when you requested virtual viewing?

 

[Petalouda]

It is not unusual to see discrepancies. If you consider the tolerance and rouding practice by both labs, I think these differences are reasonable.

Regarding the old report, it is possible that the stone was once sold and then returned for upgrade, or it may have been sitting in the vault for a year (unlikely case since therebis always demand for 2.1c H VS1). Regardingless, it is important that the stone was recently graded by AGS and there is no damage. The carat, color and clarity remain the same. This is reassuring and good.

If I were you, I would ask Victor for clarification.
1. Why was the diamond listed on Ebay by Wonder Jeweler since March until Aug 16?
2. What did he mean by the diamond was in the "vault" when you requested virtual viewing?

Thank you for your reply! May I ask how you found out the diamond was listed on eBay?

 

[flyingpig]

Thank you for your reply! May I ask how you found out the diamond was listed on eBay?

I just googled the GIA number.

 

[Karl_K]

Its not as common as it once was but it could have been out on a long term memo. Or even a short term memo extended by covid.
The differences in the measurements is pretty typical

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

one or both labs need to look at their scanners, That is an appaling difference!

 

[Petalouda]

Its not as common as it once was but it could have been out on a long term memo. Or even a short term memo extended by covid.
The differences in the measurements is pretty typical

Interesting. I learn something new everyday here.

 

[Petalouda]

one or both labs need to look at their scanners, That is an appaling difference!

How could I go about this? Would I call the lab or Victor?

 

[Petalouda]

I called Victor and spoke to him about the stone. He said the diamond was reworked to make it a hearts and arrows and that is why the measurements are slightly off and the carat weight a tad lower. He left the GIA inscription on there because the color and clarity match AGS so it’s a double check on those two factors. He also said it’s not a preowned diamond. He was very patient and explained the process thoroughly.

 

[flyingpig]

I called Victor and spoke to him about the stone. He said the diamond was reworked to make it a hearts and arrows and that is why the measurements are slightly off and the carat weight a tad lower. He left the GIA inscription on there because the color and clarity match AGS so it’s a double check on those two factors. He also said it’s not a preowned diamond. He was very patient and explained the process thoroughly.

Duh.... He tweaked the pavilion..
Easy answer. Lol.
Enjoy the diamond and ring.

 

[stonehunter20]

Duh.... He tweaked the pavilion..
Easy answer. Lol.
Enjoy the diamond and ring.

very interesting. learned something new today. a quick follow-up question: is it common for vendors to "hack" a diamond like this? i'd imagine that the tweaked diamond would have better stats and better performance compared to "pre-tweaked". so the vendor probably bought the pre-tweaked diamond at a much lower cost and paid someone to cut it and "upgrade" the stone essentially, which may bring them bigger profits?

 

[Petalouda]

very interesting. learned something new today. a quick follow-up question: is it common for vendors to "hack" a diamond like this? i'd imagine that the tweaked diamond would have better stats and better performance compared to "pre-tweaked". so the vendor probably bought the pre-tweaked diamond at a much lower cost and paid someone to cut it and "upgrade" the stone essentially, which may bring them bigger profits?

Good question...would this affect diamond quality at all? Is there a difference between a stone that was cut Into HandA from the get go to one that was hacked?

 

[stonehunter20]

btw, another very interesting observation is how VC is being inconsistent about showing the diamond. in this post below:

Undecided on a diamond

I adore an orchid trilogy engagement ring from Victor Canera, and hope to have it made with pear sapphire sides. As the setting is unavailable for client supplied stones I have been searching VC’s collection. Nathan was most generous to offer the below comparison of diamonds in inventory. I’m...

www.pricescope.com

he took a side by side comp for like 6 stones. ..... are they not sitting in the "vault" and can not be shown???

 

[flyingpig]

Although I used the word "tweak", it is more appropriate to call it "rework", "recut", or "fine tuning", than "tweak" or "hack".

It appears that Victor found a good recut candidate and gave it a new life.
What I was afraid to hear was Victor re-branding a generic GIA XXX as Victor Canera Super Ideal. That is not the case here.

OP, I think you have nothing to worry about here. In fact, that stone is verified to be H VS1 by both labs.

BTW, that pre-worked stone was already going for 24k at retail. Victor invested and had it recut, re-graded, photographed and listed with full upgrad policy for 25k. I do not see Victor making a huge profit on this one.

 

[Petalouda]

Although I used the word "tweak", it is more appropriate to call it "rework", "recut", or "fine tuning", than "tweak" or "hack".

It appears that Victor found a good recut candidate and gave it a new life.
What I was afraid to hear was Victor re-branding a generic GIA XXX as Victor Canera Super Ideal. That is not the case here.

OP, I think you have nothing to worry about here. In fact, that stone is verified to be H VS1 by both labs.

BTW, that pre-worked stone was already going for 24k at retail. Victor invested and had it recut, re-graded, photographed and listed with full upgrad policy for 25k. I do not see Victor making a huge profit on this one.

btw, another very interesting observation is how VC is being inconsistent about showing the diamond. in this post below:

Undecided on a diamond

I adore an orchid trilogy engagement ring from Victor Canera, and hope to have it made with pear sapphire sides. As the setting is unavailable for client supplied stones I have been searching VC’s collection. Nathan was most generous to offer the below comparison of diamonds in inventory. I’m...

www.pricescope.com

he took a side by side comp for like 6 stones. ..... are they not sitting in the "vault" and can not be shown???

the diamond looked fantastic in the photo and video on his website. I trust that it will be a gorgeous diamond; just seems it had a bit of an unusual journey. We didn’t get to see the diamond on a face call but what put us at ease is Victor’s no questions asked return policy.

 

[Big Fat Facets]

What a gorgeous diamond!! Double certed by gia AND agsl to be h color!!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

While such situations are a bit unusual and generate some interest in their journey to market, the bottom line is that it is a precision cut diamond with all the bonafides of dual certification from the two best labs. Diamonds are usually not dual certified because it adds to the cost of the diamond and requires extra time-to-market. So that should be viewed as added value.

It's also interesting to see examples of agreement between the labs on color and clarity as there is always chatter about one lab or the other being "softer" based on anecdotal evidence. Normally that discussion revolves around the exceptions where the grading differs, when in fact the labs are in precise agreement in the vast majority of cases.

 

[Big Fat Facets]

While such situations are a bit unusual and generate some interest in their journey to market, the bottom line is that it is a precision cut diamond with all the bonafides of dual certification from the two best labs. Diamonds are usually not dual certified because it adds to the cost of the diamond and requires extra time-to-market. So that should be viewed as added value.

It's also interesting to see examples of agreement between the labs on color and clarity as there is always chatter about one lab or the other being "softer" based on anecdotal evidence. Normally that discussion revolves around the exceptions where the grading differs, when in fact the labs are in precise agreement in the vast majority of cases.

thank you, for your professional insight and expert & experienced opinion! i really appreciate it. like @Petalouda, i also have a diamond that is double certed with two laser inscriptions. i noticed that the gia inscription is larger, fuzzy and blurry whereas the agsl inscription is much smaller, crisp and clear. both labs graded it an f color. the diamond was graded by the two different labs, a decade apart. i am happy to learn that it is an added value. i am in agreement with you that agsl and gia grade comparatively, from first hand experience with two lab reports to substantiate.

haha, yes ... so much "chatter" about agsl being "softer" on color than gia ... "based on anecdotal evidence"

i enjoyed and learned alot from this article that you wrote:

A Guide to The AGS vs The GIA

An overview of the differences between The AGS vs The GIA diamond cut grades. Distinct systems that give significantly different results.

www.whiteflash.com

what i noticed was that the percentages were ever so slightly off. but more concerning, is that polish and symmetry from agsl was *ideal*, *ideal*. whereas polish and symmetry from gia was *very good*, *very good*. what might the possible reasons be??

 

[Texas Leaguer]

thank you, for your professional insight and expert & experienced opinion! i really appreciate it. like @Petalouda, i also have a diamond that is double certed with two laser inscriptions. i noticed that the gia inscription is larger, fuzzy and blurry whereas the agsl inscription is much smaller, crisp and clear. both labs graded it an f color. the diamond was graded by the two different labs, a decade apart. i am happy to learn that it is an added value. i am in agreement with you that agsl and gia grade comparatively, from first hand experience with two lab reports to substantiate.

haha, yes ... so much "chatter" about agsl being "softer" on color than gia ... "based on anecdotal evidence"

i enjoyed and learned alot from this article that you wrote:

A Guide to The AGS vs The GIA

An overview of the differences between The AGS vs The GIA diamond cut grades. Distinct systems that give significantly different results.

www.whiteflash.com

what i noticed was that the percentages were ever so slightly off. but more concerning, is that polish and symmetry from agsl was *ideal*, *ideal*. whereas polish and symmetry from gia was *very good*, *very good*. what might the possible reasons be??

Thank you @Big Fat Facets,
It is hard to say what might account for the variances between the reports on your diamond. It would be interesting to see and compare both reports if you can post them (or the report numbers). It is possible that it could have been put back on the wheel in those ten years. Sometimes small tweaks result in negligible changes in weight and dimensions, while still correcting a polish or symmetry fault.

 

[Big Fat Facets]

Thank you @Big Fat Facets,
It is hard to say what might account for the variances between the reports on your diamond. It would be interesting to see and compare both reports if you can post them (or the report numbers). It is possible that it could have been put back on the wheel in those ten years. Sometimes small tweaks result in negligible changes in weight and dimensions, while still correcting a polish or symmetry fault.

thank you, for taking a look at it!

this agsl report is from 2010



this gia report is from 2020


your professional, experienced insight is really appreciated.

for whatever reason, im not too bothered by the variances in number specifications and percentages. im a bit more concerned with it being certified 10 years ago as *ideal*, *ideal* at agsl. while ten years later, it is graded, *very good*, *very good* by gia.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I would not be at all concerned.

The variance in polish and symmetry is within tolerance for human calls.

The measurements are within tolerances of instrumentation.

Since weight agrees precisely, there is no question of it having been reworked or otherwise changed during those ten years.

Nomenclature of the cut style reflects the slightly different criteria for one term over another between the labs.

It is curious that the indented natural listed on the AGS report does not appear on the GIA. This could possibly be due to the feature being small and confined to the girdle.

Essentially you have cross validating documents. A good thing!

 

[Big Fat Facets]

I would not be at all concerned.

The variance in polish and symmetry is within tolerance for human calls.

The measurements are within tolerances of instrumentation.

Since weight agrees precisely, there is no question of it having been reworked or otherwise changed during those ten years.

Nomenclature of the cut style reflects the slightly different criteria for one term over another between the labs.

It is curious that the indented natural listed on the AGS report does not appear on the GIA. This could possibly be due to the feature being small and confined to the girdle.

Essentially you have cross validating documents. A good thing!

thank you so much! i am most appreciative.

i am thrilled to get to enjoy this new diamond. the only aspect that gave me minor pause was the variances by the two labs in the grading of symmetry and polish. i can see that even factoring in the "human aspect" the variances are negligible. i, now feel even better about this new diamond

the agsl report offers more detail than the gia report. in fact, a point of interest is that gia had to re-issue their report because they made an error on the agsl inscription number on the girdle of the diamond. so when alerted to this, gia promptly reissued another report to correct their error.

again, thank you for your help and reassurance.