- Joined
- Sep 3, 2000
- Messages
- 6,743
I think I have a good suggestion to make to bring improvment in color grading on lab reports while not alienating the most influential lab clients, diamond dealers. Why not always report the body color, as viewed from the side, as we do now for near-colorless diamonds and then also report the apparent color grade from the face-up view, too?
As it stands now, the labs supply and we accept face-up color grading on all fancy color diamonds and as a slight modifier of a color grade when a diamond looks more than a bit darker than its side view body color due to intensifications or cut style. For the majority of commercially sold diamonds, the near colorless ones, the convention for color grading has been to report side view body color, but at some nearly unknown, gray zone, switch for face-up view color grading to allow fancy color diamonds to be as strongly represented as possible to consumers. This is all understandable, but not at all scientific. It is laughable that with all the talk about making the system more reliable, we can accept this switch from side to top view because this is the method which makes the diamonds worth more. When openly reviewed, it is a failed system of grading, but the diamonds are still worth what their quality and appearance command in the market. Grading does not have any effect on the diamond itself and should have little effect on what diamond someone selects. Unfortunately consumers are misled by the crazy method of grading the trade has grown to accept. We could do better.
Wouldn''t consumers buying fancy colors like to know the actual color of the stone plus the apparent color created by the craft of the cutter as well? Woudn''t consumers buying an H color body color diamond like to know that as a result of cutting, their diamond appeared to anyone who would look on it in a ring as H, I or J? What the consumer sees in the finished jewelry, face-up, is what they will have to enjoy for years to come. Would a consumer want to buy an H color pear shape which had a I/J color appearance if it was competing with another with an H/I appearance at the same price? What if the I/J look was a lot less costly, or way more money? Wouldn''t they want to know these facts before making a choice?
With fancy colors, wouldn''t a consumer want to understand that of two Vivid Yellows one was light fancy yellow from the side and another was fancy yellow from the side? They would better understand the nature of each diamond and of the choice they were making. Would anyone be harmed? Would the market dictate a lower value for the light fancy yellow than for the fancy yellow if they both looked identical face-up? I don''t know for sure about the market for the finished diamond and the value in such an instance, but the value of the rough was definitely different before the cutter did his magic. Why shouldn''t the final value be diffrent too? Why should it be the same? Different perspectives will bring disagreements, I''d suspect.
Just how difficult would it be to report side view and top view body colors on reports? I don''t see it as a huge challenge. Would the trade accept it or why not? Would consumers want independent appraisers to report such details?
The trading of rough diamonds would not be affected by such a change in lab reporting. It would add to the risk and burden placed on cutters to make the face-up color acceptable depending on what outcome was desired. You generally want to darken or intensify fancy colors face-up while you generally want to mitigate color in the near colorless stones face-up. Is this additional risk the kind of thing a cutter can''t accept? It seems to me that the skill is already in place to make this "risk" very small and that the cutter already accepts it, but maybe I am naive about this element.
THANKS.
As it stands now, the labs supply and we accept face-up color grading on all fancy color diamonds and as a slight modifier of a color grade when a diamond looks more than a bit darker than its side view body color due to intensifications or cut style. For the majority of commercially sold diamonds, the near colorless ones, the convention for color grading has been to report side view body color, but at some nearly unknown, gray zone, switch for face-up view color grading to allow fancy color diamonds to be as strongly represented as possible to consumers. This is all understandable, but not at all scientific. It is laughable that with all the talk about making the system more reliable, we can accept this switch from side to top view because this is the method which makes the diamonds worth more. When openly reviewed, it is a failed system of grading, but the diamonds are still worth what their quality and appearance command in the market. Grading does not have any effect on the diamond itself and should have little effect on what diamond someone selects. Unfortunately consumers are misled by the crazy method of grading the trade has grown to accept. We could do better.
Wouldn''t consumers buying fancy colors like to know the actual color of the stone plus the apparent color created by the craft of the cutter as well? Woudn''t consumers buying an H color body color diamond like to know that as a result of cutting, their diamond appeared to anyone who would look on it in a ring as H, I or J? What the consumer sees in the finished jewelry, face-up, is what they will have to enjoy for years to come. Would a consumer want to buy an H color pear shape which had a I/J color appearance if it was competing with another with an H/I appearance at the same price? What if the I/J look was a lot less costly, or way more money? Wouldn''t they want to know these facts before making a choice?
With fancy colors, wouldn''t a consumer want to understand that of two Vivid Yellows one was light fancy yellow from the side and another was fancy yellow from the side? They would better understand the nature of each diamond and of the choice they were making. Would anyone be harmed? Would the market dictate a lower value for the light fancy yellow than for the fancy yellow if they both looked identical face-up? I don''t know for sure about the market for the finished diamond and the value in such an instance, but the value of the rough was definitely different before the cutter did his magic. Why shouldn''t the final value be diffrent too? Why should it be the same? Different perspectives will bring disagreements, I''d suspect.
Just how difficult would it be to report side view and top view body colors on reports? I don''t see it as a huge challenge. Would the trade accept it or why not? Would consumers want independent appraisers to report such details?
The trading of rough diamonds would not be affected by such a change in lab reporting. It would add to the risk and burden placed on cutters to make the face-up color acceptable depending on what outcome was desired. You generally want to darken or intensify fancy colors face-up while you generally want to mitigate color in the near colorless stones face-up. Is this additional risk the kind of thing a cutter can''t accept? It seems to me that the skill is already in place to make this "risk" very small and that the cutter already accepts it, but maybe I am naive about this element.
THANKS.
, just thinking loud
300x240.png)