Can you identify a cz from a diamond by the naked eye?

[4CSinquiries]

can you identify a cz from a diamond by the NAKED EYE at 1 carat?
please don't give me those you need to scratch it with knife, turn it upside down and all... i made thorough research on that...

i have some diamonds studs and rings and i am seeing a lot of good mounted CZs on 14k/18k settings and i think they are reasonably priced and far more practical if they ought to say that they "exactly" look like diamonds... my question is for most of you who like jewelry can you identify it right away? i personally can identify a russian/swiss diamond by merely a glance due to it being "too white" however this CZ thing is something i don't see often in jewelry stores here or mentioned (at our place though it's not)... it's either russian/swiss diamond but not CZ or cubic zirconia. your answers would help a lot...

 

[Dancing Fire]

I can smell a CZ from across the room..

 

[Dee*Jay]

I'm going to do my best to describe this... CZs look much more dense/solid to me than diamonds do. Does that make ANY sense? The colors off of a CZ are also more vivid in direct light when the CZ is super clean.

 

[JulieN]

Yes. At a glance, I can only suspect. Looked at closely, I can be certain.

 

[Circe]

Nope.

I took the GIA diamond grading course, I have oodles of experience, and assuming it's a well-cut CZ, no, you can't tell the difference with the naked eye off the bat. (With a loupe, it's a lot easier.) It's generally the cheap setting that gives it away.

 

[arkieb1]

Depends on where it has come from ie who made it. Most CZs yes you can tell they look different and reflect light differently. There are now higher end ones that look much more like a diamond. Usually the colour, the sparkle and lack of inclusions give it away, I agree you probably need a loupe for the really high end ones then you can tell.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Nope.

I took the GIA diamond grading course, I have oodles of experience, and assuming it's a well-cut CZ, no, you can't tell the difference with the naked eye off the bat. (With a loupe, it's a lot easier.) It's generally the cheap setting that gives it away.

That's a very valid point -- Maybe once I realize the setting isn't up to par (especially if it's a "large" stone in a cheap setting), the bells start to go off from that standpoint and I begin to *look* for it not to be a diamond. Who knows; maybe I've been misassessing real diamonds as CZs just because they are in lousy settings.

 

[perry]

Of course I can.

All I have to do is look at the price tag - its a dead giveaway....

Perry

 

[4CSinquiries]

i can't deny it... there are some really nice settings on ebay... i have purchased some diamonds on ebay and it's not often enough that you get lucky to get a natural one or synthetic one at a bargain price simply because there were 2 or 3 of you bidding on one item... so why not if they ought to be "exactly" how they claim they are

 

[4CSinquiries]

i really can't say, i haven't seen an actual CZ because stores don't carry it here... if you meant it looks like russian diamond then i may understand

 

[Circe]

What do you mean by Russian or Swiss diamond? I've seen this used as a euphemism for simulants, but I'm not sure if that's what you mean ....

 

[4CSinquiries]

by Circe » 03 May 2013 20:07
Nope.

I took the GIA diamond grading course, I have oodles of experience, and assuming it's a well-cut CZ, no, you can't tell the difference with the naked eye off the bat. (With a loupe, it's a lot easier.) It's generally the cheap setting that gives it away.

this is a very good insight! i haven't given thought on the setting... to be honest, the reason i am thinking of getting the CZ is ifthey ought to look like the real thing as they claim is because what i have noticed is that, when you purchase a brand new jewelry as an investment for instant cash in case of an emergency and brought it to a pawnshop; most pawnshops do not equate the value of the diamond to a "reasonable" price when they appraise it and say that it's the gold/platinum that matters more to them. i tried taking a ring with me with diamonds and the actual cost of that ring was over $2000++ and they can only give it at $700 mainly for the gold and not so much consideration to the stones... so it's really quite a big big loss not unless of course you sell the ring instead of taking it to the pawnshop but that may take awhile as well to dispose specially when you need it to be liquidated right away,.

I also noticed that when some diamond rings are sold as second hand because the owner didn't claim it anymore, the rings are not sold anymore at a "diamond price". Say for example my $2000++ ring, if in case i pawn it and get around $700 for it and wasn't able to pay the interest and retrieve the item, after 3 months they sell it at more or less $1000++ (considering the 3 month time allowance to claim it equivalent to the interest, establishment's maintenance aka rental, salary, electricity manpower etc). So I feel that, if pawnshops don't consider the value of the diamond and mainly the gold content, I'm thinking of getting a CZ if it looks exactly the same - just being realistic and pratical.

 

[4CSinquiries]

by Circe » 03 May 2013 23:18
What do you mean by Russian or Swiss diamond? I've seen this used as a euphemism for simulants, but I'm not sure if that's what you mean ....

it's an alternative to real diamonds... they were made to look like diamonds just like the CZs but the thing is when looking at it, it's milky white to almost white tone which makes it a giveaway that it's not real diamonds but an alternative. a well cut topaz can somehow be mistaken for a diamond compared to these russian alternative

 

[4CSinquiries]

Of course I can.

All I have to do is look at the price tag - its a dead giveaway....

Perry

of course dear that's called common sense. i am asking based on seeing someone else's hand across the room or someone sitting next to you in a room

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Nope.

I took the GIA diamond grading course, I have oodles of experience, and assuming it's a well-cut CZ, no, you can't tell the difference with the naked eye off the bat. (With a loupe, it's a lot easier.) It's generally the cheap setting that gives it away.

And the often unrealistic sizes.

 

[TC1987]

I don't think cz looks exactly like diamond. It has to be absolutely spotlessly clean in order to maintain the performance, and you really can't keep one that clean. There really is nothing like a diamond, and although the stimulants have improved enormously, they don't match a superideal H&A diamond, exactly.

 

[CharmyPoo]

To most people at a glance, they won't be able to tell a difference. For experienced people, on closer examination it is very different. I find that CZ lack the depth of a diamond. Sort of like glass versus crystal.

 

[yssie]

by Circe » 03 May 2013 20:07
Nope.

I took the GIA diamond grading course, I have oodles of experience, and assuming it's a well-cut CZ, no, you can't tell the difference with the naked eye off the bat. (With a loupe, it's a lot easier.) It's generally the cheap setting that gives it away.

this is a very good insight! i haven't given thought on the setting... to be honest, the reason i am thinking of getting the CZ is ifthey ought to look like the real thing as they claim is because what i have noticed is that, when you purchase a brand new jewelry as an investment for instant cash in case of an emergency and brought it to a pawnshop; most pawnshops do not equate the value of the diamond to a "reasonable" price when they appraise it and say that it's the gold/platinum that matters more to them. i tried taking a ring with me with diamonds and the actual cost of that ring was over $2000++ and they can only give it at $700 mainly for the gold and not so much consideration to the stones... so it's really quite a big big loss not unless of course you sell the ring instead of taking it to the pawnshop but that may take awhile as well to dispose specially when you need it to be liquidated right away,.

I also noticed that when some diamond rings are sold as second hand because the owner didn't claim it anymore, the rings are not sold anymore at a "diamond price". Say for example my $2000++ ring, if in case i pawn it and get around $700 for it and wasn't able to pay the interest and retrieve the item, after 3 months they sell it at more or less $1000++ (considering the 3 month time allowance to claim it equivalent to the interest, establishment's maintenance aka rental, salary, electricity manpower etc). So I feel that, if pawnshops don't consider the value of the diamond and mainly the gold content, I'm thinking of getting a CZ if it looks exactly the same - just being realistic and pratical.

1. It's always poor policy to buy diamonds as an investment unless perhaps you're talking about a 2ct Fancy Vivid Argyle pink... the exchange you describe re. selling on the secondary market is part of the parcel. Buy diamonds because you enjoy diamonds.

2. It's IMO almost never a good idea to finance a diamond if you'll actually be paying interest (ie. not a 0% for X months to build credit if you don't have house/car/etc. debt).
Actually IMO financing useless luxuries is an absolutely terrible idea, but saying "almost never" seems more PC.

2. This is a diamond forum. You aren't going to find a lot of people who suggest simulants over the real thing on here, arguments of realism and practicality be damned

 

[ChristineRose]

I don't believe anyone can tell under normal viewing conditions. Of course if it's small, low-color, or not eye-clean it is likely a diamond.

This is a test that would convince me. Get a friendly jeweler to find you 20 diamonds. Pair each diamond with a CZ--1 ct. princess D IF to 1 ct. D IF princess. They can be in settings so long as they are in the same settings. CZ don't come in included and badly cut (as in cut for weight, not as in poor symmetry) though, so you have to look at a pretty limited range of diamonds.

Get 20 index cards, number them one to twenty, flip a coin twenty times, heads the diamond goes on the card, tails it goes back in the safe. The person who did the flipping and anyone familiar with the stones leaves the room. (Getting someone to agree to this is probably the hardest part of the test!) If someone can label 17 of 20 correctly I'd be convinced. Even better if you can do this from across the room.

Maybe some jeweler who posts here would be cool enough to actually set this test up for those of you who are sure you can tell.

 

[Snowy]

I think I've only seen one once in real life and I was not able to tell whatsoever from a couple feet away. I heard that nowadays it's much harder to tell with the higher quality CZs but I have not seen one of them in real life.

 

[CharmedOne]

Cz seem to sparkle a rainbow of colors and are very very bright (when cleaned of course) while diamonds seem to be a little darker and have more grey flashes. That's just what I have noticed. But I'm by no means an expert, just my opinion.

 

[Laila619]

Nope, with just the naked eye, it's hard to say for sure.

 

[4CSinquiries]

To most people at a glance, they won't be able to tell a difference. For experienced people, on closer examination it is very different. I find that CZ lack the depth of a diamond. Sort of like glass versus crystal.

i think this i understand... so i guess i have a picture of how it looks like from a distance... thank you

 

[Madam Bijoux]

I can. Looking at them from the top, they look too good to be true and they go completely lifeless when you look into them at an angle.

 

[iLander]

I can, very easily. IF the ring is clean.

If it has the typical dirt/dust on it from wearing, no, not really.

 

[KaeKae]

No, though I've made some assumptions, based on setting or stone size and color. That's not right to do, but when I spot a woman wearing a honker, I can't help but wonder. For me, there is no judgement about it, we should wear what we like, but the thoughts are there, mainly because I love to see any kind of pretty sparkle, and I can't help but wonder about the details

 

[AprilBaby]

I agree a cz has no depth. It like looking thru a glass table at faceting where a diamond has more depth and you don't look right down into it as clearly if that makes sense. But no, I can't tell at a distance unless its in a cheap setting.

 

[TravelingGal]

cheap mall stuff, yes, easily. Better stuff, from a distance, nope. Upon closer inspection, possibly. But I've seen plenty more diamonds than good CZs..only have seen one IRL.

 

[ChristineRose]

I agree a cz has no depth. It like looking thru a glass table at faceting where a diamond has more depth and you don't look right down into it as clearly if that makes sense. But no, I can't tell at a distance unless its in a cheap setting.

Diamonds have a higher refractive index. Refraction is caused by light slowing down as it passes through an object. You can see refraction in the kid's science experiment where you put a spoon in a glass of water and it looks divided. Refraction is desirable in gemstones, less so in glass windows and tables. This is why a well-cut diamond sparkles more than a well-cut rhinestone.

However CZ actually do have a high RI. It's higher than most gemstones and certainly higher than in all gemstones that are hard enough to be used in everyday jewelry. Zircon's pretty good but it is still lower than CZ and it's doubly refractive. That means that if you shine a single pinpoint of light through it you will see two pinpoints coming out and the separation of the pinpoints will vary as you shift the stone. This is actually one of the easiest ways to tell whether you're looking at a diamond or a Moissanite. And a Zircon will be ruined after a few months of daily wear in a ring anyhow.

CZ also have more dispersion--the tendency to turn a white light into colored light, like prism. The problem with all this is that dispersion and sparkle have a lot to do with the cut as well. While it's true that an identically cut and colored diamond and CZ will not look alike, the different is slight, and in practice nothing is ever identically cut. Saying a diamond looks better is kind of moot because a poorly cut diamond will not look good and most diamonds in the wild are poorly cut. If it's cut poorly enough so that you can see the poor quality by looking at the proportions--not the actual sparkle, but the shape--then of course you will know it's a real diamond because nobody cuts CZ for weight.

Dirt's a similar issue. Diamonds are dirt magnets but CZ are magnetic dirt sucking fiends. But in the wild, most stones are dirty anyhow, so who knows?

I've not been able to find any evidence that anyone can reliably tell a diamond from a CZ at distance once you remove these various cues. Moissanite, yes. CZ? I'm waiting for someone to actually run my tests.

 

[4CSinquiries]

Diamonds have a higher refractive index. Refraction is caused by light slowing down as it passes through an object. You can see refraction in the kid's science experiment where you put a spoon in a glass of water and it looks divided. Refraction is desirable in gemstones, less so in glass windows and tables. This is why a well-cut diamond sparkles more than a well-cut rhinestone.

However CZ actually do have a high RI. It's higher than most gemstones and certainly higher than in all gemstones that are hard enough to be used in everyday jewelry. Zircon's pretty good but it is still lower than CZ and it's doubly refractive. That means that if you shine a single pinpoint of light through it you will see two pinpoints coming out and the separation of the pinpoints will vary as you shift the stone. This is actually one of the easiest ways to tell whether you're looking at a diamond or a Moissanite. And a Zircon will be ruined after a few months of daily wear in a ring anyhow.

CZ also have more dispersion--the tendency to turn a white light into colored light, like prism. The problem with all this is that dispersion and sparkle have a lot to do with the cut as well. While it's true that an identically cut and colored diamond and CZ will not look alike, the different is slight, and in practice nothing is ever identically cut. Saying a diamond looks better is kind of moot because a poorly cut diamond will not look good and most diamonds in the wild are poorly cut. If it's cut poorly enough so that you can see the poor quality by looking at the proportions--not the actual sparkle, but the shape--then of course you will know it's a real diamond because nobody cuts CZ for weight.

Dirt's a similar issue. Diamonds are dirt magnets but CZ are magnetic dirt sucking fiends. But in the wild, most stones are dirty anyhow, so who knows?

I've not been able to find any evidence that anyone can reliably tell a diamond from a CZ at distance once you remove these various cues. Moissanite, yes. CZ? I'm waiting for someone to actually run my tests.

[/quote]

Thank you very much for this very very very informative thought. so basically.. in a way can we say that one can be assumed as a CZ when the "rainbowish" color goes insanely rainbowish compared to a diamond since a very well cut diamond that can be as "rainbowish" as a CZ would be quite costly and having that for an average person is not believable