Chatham stones?

[Shappy]

I saw Chatham stones on jewelry zone. Says they are "created" does this mean fake? I feel dumb for asking this but the wording seems ambiguous--do these creative stones have the same physical properties as natural ones?-their wording seems to imply this.

 

[mike04456]

Chatham sells synthetics. A synthetic is a man-made version of the natural stone, i.e., it has the same physical, chemical, and optical properties. Manufacturers just prefer the word "created" because people equate synthetic with "fake," which is a little inexact. In contrast, a "simulant" is just something that looks like the real thing. CZ is a diamond simulant. It is zirconium oxide, not diamond, and has different properties. It would be fair to call a simulant "fake." A synthetic diamond is a real diamond; it's just grown in a lab instead of the ground.

 

[Nicrez]

According to some sources on the net (I think it's Chatham's own words on their process) that they crete the crystal formations from water sources containing Carbon and supposedly with pressure and heat at extreme temps and pressures, they build on those crystals creating lab induced stones that did not get mined from the ground. These are actually popular with those with problems with conflict diamonds...here's the blurb:




"With a few exceptions, all natural gemstones are crystals. They possess a regular arrangement of atoms throughout the entire crystal. It is the task of the crystal grower to provide the environment and conditions that will permit this regular arrangement to form.

There was a period when natural gemstones were considered to have magical properties originating from supernatural origins. Duplication by man was incompatible with such a belief. By the mid eighteenth century, through chemical analyses and growing simple crystals from water solutions, the duplication of natural gemstones became a reality. The more complicated crystals representing the rarest gemstones cannot be grown in a simple fashion like "rock candy", or sugar crystals are, but take many months in a very extreme environment replicating conditions 100 miles or more beneath the surface of the earth."

 

[valeria101]

Chatam "stones' could be diamonds or a bunch of others.... Talking about Chatam 'others" they do look alike some of the best quality stones of natural origin.

For example, a small (below 2cts) Burma ruby of top color and flawless clarity (one of the few GIA certs giving "internally flawless" grade to a colored stone - an exception from the tenet of the lab that this grade is not awarded to colored gems) did look too good to be true... Aside such bad jokes (surely the owner of the ruby was not thrilled with the "fake" look of his unique treasure), artificial stones look better than commercial quality naturals. Otherwise, no problem with them. If set in a high quality setting - something that would make people expect that the stone is natural, given the overall look of the jewelry - decent artificial stones look extremely convincing, in my opinion.

 

[elmo]

For some gemstones like ruby and emerald, the best synthetics such as Chatham will look almost as good as a museum piece, so good that many folks myself included hardly ever get to see one as nice in person other than in a museum

. That is unless you're like LawGem and get to go to the AGTA show in Tucson every year

. For instance the only emerald I've ever seen specifically at a jewelry store that I'd want to own for its beauty was a Chatham synthetic.

 

[Nicrez]

I saw a HoNkEr of an emerald at tiffany's set with diamonds around it in a ring, and it was actually so clear, I had to do a double take! The other two by it had the usual emerald inclusions visible, but if anyone has recently been to the NYC Tiffany's (2nd fl) by the Lucidas, tell me it's not BEAUTIFUL!!!

 

[Shappy]

Wow, you all are so helpful. I don't know anything about colored gems but since I've caught this diamond fever from you all I think it would be nice to get a diamond ring with some colored stones, either side or center. I'm thinking of sapphires. When I started looking the natural sapphires seemed a bit difficult to buy, I mean there are pretty few round sapphires. It seems easier to buy better cut synthetics. Am I right? There's some sentimental value too, since the first ring my hubby bought me was a beautiful star sapphire, which I lost of course. I'm thinking now of just plain blue sapphire.
Would these Chatham stones look nice enough to put in a quality ring with a diamond?
BTW maybe by next week I'll be in expert ,LOL, I finally was able to book at tour at the Carlsbad GIA, can't wait.

 

[valeria101]

Sure so... Small stones near a diamond... the top color and typically better cut od synthetics would just look good without any fuss. Natural stones would probably not be too expensive given the small size, but if you do not find some with good color & cut, it may take a while.

Just wanderting about this route