AGS Grading on Flouresence Inaccurate

[thall005]

I recently purchased an ideal cut, 2+Ct RB, G, VS2 diamond that I absolutely have fallen in love with. The AGS report describes flouresence as "Negligible." However, the appraisal conducted by an independent GG found it to be Medium Blue. There is no doubt in my mind about the presence of flour., as the stone displays a really pretty, blue hue in the sunlight.

Experts: 1) How often does a discrepancy like this occur? 2) Would I be correct in thinking the price I paid the vendor did not take into account the flouresence? If so, I will need to be more careful in the future (with any upgrade, that is).

Mo

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 2/21/2006 1:19:36 PM
Author:Diamond Mo
I recently purchased an ideal cut, 2+Ct RB, G, VS2 diamond that I absolutely have fallen in love with. The AGS report describes flouresence as ''Negligible.'' However, the appraisal conducted by an independent GG found it to be Medium Blue. There is no doubt in my mind about the presence of flour., as the stone displays a really pretty, blue hue in the sunlight.

Experts: 1) How often does a discrepancy like this occur? 2) Would I be correct in thinking the price I paid the vendor did not take into account the flouresence? If so, I will need to be more careful in the future (with any upgrade, that is).

Mo

The affect of fluoresence in a diamond is individual for that stone. What did the appraiser say? Did he feel the fluoresence was a negative or a positive, or possibly not an issue.

How often does it happen. Occasionally.

Price/value wise generally speaking fluoresence doesn''t have a negative influence in a G color stone. But one has to see the stone to render an opinion. Since your appraiser saw the stone, he or she is the best person to provide an answer for you.
There are some diamonds that are an exception, but only personal examination will be required.

However, if in daylight the stone takes on a blue hue, that may well be a negative factor. But some people like that look, and if you do, then you got something you like.

A simple test of this is to go in sunlight, when the stone does show the bluish "tint" - then get a 1/4" piece of lexan and note how much the appearance changes. If it is a significant change then it MIGHT be a negative property of the stone.

Rockdoc

 

[oldminer]

If you really like the diamond, then its characteristics should have met your visual approval. The looseness of UV fluorescence grading is quite prevalent and matters little to consumers provided they like the looks of the diamond. Moderate is a subjectively slight amount more than Negligible, meaning a little UV fluorescence was present.

When it comes to diamond value however, ANY arguable issue will eventually come around in the haggling process dealers go through to the "difference", if any, in value. One should assume that this issue was addressed inside the actual price you were asked to pay for this particular diamond. One should assume no negative is neglected and no positive is forgotten, either.

The word, Moderate, may mean little to the value, but if it is a problem for you, then RockDoc''s test will give you a clue as to the actual change in appearance. Likely as not, the change will be minuscule, but it up to YOU to make a decision about whether you like the stone as it is or choose to try again.

 

[RockDoc]

Getting a piece of lexan is NOT expensive...

Only need a piece maybe 3"x 4" and most plastic dealers might even have a "scrap piece" they would give to you.

Even if you have to buy it, probably would cost less than $ 5-10.

When your appraiser examined the diamond, did he show you the stone in a UV cabinet? IF so how blue did it appear to your eyes?

Rockdoc

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 2/21/2006 10:05:47 PM
Author: XChick03


My diamond was also graded as 'negligible' but looks blue in sunlight. Is that normal?

Do the Lexan test on it. Normal ? Not usual for a negligible fluor. stone.

____

Maybe if you have too many "ludes"...

Rockdoc

 

[thall005]

Thank you RockDoc and oldminer for your information. I will try the lexan test;great idea.

I am not clear about your answers to my question concerning the value of the stone. If the AGS report indicated
negligible, would the vendor even know it was in fact, medium blue? The vendor website also listed it as negligible.

I should have been more direct in asking my question in my first post: If I paid a small fortune for the stone, should I have paid a little less for the flouresence factor? It''s a done deal at this point.

 

[JulieN]

I should have been more direct in asking my question in my first post: If I paid a small fortune for the stone, should I have paid a little less for the flouresence factor? It's a done deal at this point.

According to Rich, no.

 

[oldminer]

Assume that diamond dealers know everything about the diamonds they are selling. While this might not be totally true in all cases, diamond dealers are generally quite astute and know their subject very well. Don''t assume a diamond dealer is unaware of the details.

Also assume that if you know all the facts that you would be better prepared to NEGOTIATE. If you had asked about the fluorescence, in spite of what was in the report, the dealer might have admitted he saw more than a bit. It would have opened up the opportunity for you to have haggled over the "problem". In almost all other societies, this is how haggling and negotiating happen. In the USA, we are fat, dumb and ignorant, when it comes to being sharp about prices, discounts and haggling. Maybe it is a symptom of having enough or even too much money......... I hate haggling and tend to deal with people who ask fair prices to begin with. Sure, thare are many people who do question prices and have skills at obtaining a better price, even in the USA, but the majority of long time citizens just don''t play the haggling game as well as folks in many other parts of the globe. It can be a fun game when done politely and with integrity. Never haggle when the price is right and fair.

Hope this helps you to better understand your own position.

 

[thall005]

JulieN,

I can''t thank you enough for the direct answer from Rich, and I''m good with it. I tend to obsess sometimes, and did not have as fun a day, in general, yesterday, as I might have allowed myself to have. Heh heh.

OldMiner,

Thanks for well explaining my position. And, I''ve haggled only once in my life, at an art festival; bought a coin pearl necklace for 60 dollars less than asking price (after laying down cash on the counter). I can tell you, that was fun. Anyway, it''s live and learn, no? It''s all good.

Thanks so much to you both!!

Mo

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Hi Mo. We had quite a conversation going on your thread last night, but Irina (iron fist in a velvet glove) erased it all because we got rowdy.

If you like, I can post the file photo I have of your diamond under UV lighting next to a non-fluorescent stone. I''d be curious what the other experts thought of it.

My opinion is that the fluorescence did not affect the diamond in a negative manner either visually or in value, and that it would quite possibly enhance it''s appearance very slightly in natural daylight.

 

[thall005]

Hi Rich. Wow, if Irina dumped ya''ll, it must have been REALLY scary. I just emailed you at your shop, by the way. I bet I was in the full throes of hyperventilation about the time you guys were having your "conversation" about my thread.

It would be very cool if you posted my pictures. I got a little crazy yesterday because I thought I saw a funny look in my stone. I was outdoors and the sky was bright. I am working on loving the flour; I read a lot of posts on flouresence in the wee hours this morning. (But, in all honesty, I think Ellen''s posts I read within the last few days about her stone turning blue got me really going, too. She ended up returning her stone.) Arrggh.

Be talking to ya. Mo

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Usually the "blue" that people see outside in sunlight is a reflection of the sky within the diamond.

Here''s the photo of the fluorescence in your stone next to a non-fluorescent comparison stone. Bear in mind that this is close to a concentrated source of UV light in a dark viewing box. Any UV excitation seen outdoors would be very, very slight. Just a hint of what used to be called "blue white", if any.

I think Ellen had other issues going on there rather than fluorescence.

 

[Mara]

Now THAT is a lovely picture of a two stone comparison Rich!

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Don''t get me started, Mara...

 

[JZMINBNEE]

sorry I don''t see pictures anyone else?
Joni

 

[belle]

here''s a pic i took of an ''h'' colored no fluor. diamond under the clear blue sky

(at least i hope that''s what shows up!)

 

[JZMINBNEE]

oooh now I see it!

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Excellent example of what most people incorrectly think is fluorescence, Belle.

That''s why RockDoc''s lexan test is a good idea. It will focus the individual on what, if any, difference in appearance fluoresence causes.

 

[oldminer]

That''s a pretty diamond photo, fluorescent or not. One would be hard pressed to say it was not an attractive looking stone in that photo.