Fancy Pink Diamond: GIA vs IGI

[AN0NYM0US]

I bought this diamond late last year. It had an IGI report.



When it comes to diamonds, I'm totally a GIA guy. I asked the vendor to send the diamond to GIA. They obliged, I waited...

and waited...

GIA can be sloooow.

after 6 weeks or so, I got the results.



I didn't really know what to expect, but I knew there would probably be a difference between the two labs. I wasn't surprised at the fancy pink vs fancy light pink, I expected IGI to be soft, but the difference in clarity was a little surprising. I was fully expecting the same (SI2) or worse (I1) from GIA, not a better grade.

Overall I feel like I got a fair price for this stone. It was discounted due to the IGI report. The bid I made to the vendor was what I would have paid for a FLP I1. I feel like it was a gamble that paid off.

I just wanted to share, as there are not a lot of examples of diamonds (or FCD) with two or more lab reports.

 

[movie zombie]

it is my understanding that when it comes to fancy color diamonds GIA is NOT the go-to source for evaluation but that EGL is the preference.

congrats on your FCD!

 

[tyty333]

Interesting...are you going to share some pictures of this lovely stone or can you provide a link if you have
already posted it?

 

[chrono]

Very lucky gamble you made on the FCD, so congrats are in order! Now then....where are pictures of this new pink diamond?

MZ,
I've not heard of EGL being the it lab for FCDs. My understanding is that GIA is the way to go.

 

[minousbijoux]

I'm sure Kenny will be along soon to weigh in.

I second the need for pics.

 

[AN0NYM0US]

sorry for the small reports. Here's the info.

IGI

Number F1N93714
Date Antwerp, December 13th 2011
Description Natural Diamond
Shape and Cut Cushion Brilliant
Weight 0.34 Carat
Measurements 4.16 x 3.50 x 2.48 mm
Clarity Grade SI2
Color Grade Natural Fancy Pink
Fluorescence Very Slight

Finish
Pol and Sym Good
Table 65%
Crown 13.5%
Pav 35.5%
Girdle Thick to Very Thick
Culet pointed



GIA

GIA Report 2145393585
Cushion Modified Brilliant
4.14 x 3.49 x 2.48 mm
Carat Weight 0.34 carat
Color: NATURAL, Fancy Light Pink, Even
Clarity SI1
Total Depth: 70.9%
Table Size: 66%
Girdle: Very Thick to Extremely Thick, Faceted
Culet: None
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Fluorescence: None
Comments: None

Crappy, blurry pic time!!

 

[AN0NYM0US]

Guys I'm really sorry for the crappy pics, I'll post some better ones very soon.

MZ - In my experience it's GIA for FCD's. I think it depends on where you are from though. Some vendors from Israel and Europe do like to use EGL and IGI for FCD's, just as they like HRD for colorless diamonds. I do tend to like HRD's grading, but good luck finding a vendor in North America that uses them, or has even heard of them! In my experience EGL is soft.

Thanks again everyone.

 

[acebruin]

if i were to spend thousands of dollars on a fancy colored diamond, i would NOT get it without a GIA report... the stone looks lovely... although without any kind of report, you could tell it's not saturated enough to get a fancy pink from GIA... very nice stone!

 

[kenny]

Everything I have read points to GIA being the most respected lab for grading FCDs.
The more-valuable FCDs are usually sent to GIA, I assume because buyers spending large sums don't trust the grades from other labs as much. I don't.
I suppose in theory it's possible we are all being snowed, but there it is.

Also with all due respect a sample size of one, while interesting, does not change the big picture.
Nature does not place diamonds in the middle of each clarity or color grade.
It gives us diamonds in a continuum of colors and clarities.
(That's why I wish they'd grade them on a 1 - 100 scale instead of ten or so distinct grades.)
Even GIA has been known to change a grade when the owner disagrees with a borderline grade.

BTW, contrats on that beautiful pink diamond.

 

[movie zombie]

confusion reigns: .....AGS is the no-go.....

pretty little pink, btw.

 

[kenny]

confusion reigns: .....AGS is the no-go.....

AGS does not grade colored diamonds.

 

[AN0NYM0US]

Everything I have read points to GIA being the most respected lab for grading FCDs.
The more-valuable FCDs are usually sent to GIA, I assume because buyers spending large sums don't trust the grades from other labs as much. I don't.
I suppose in theory it's possible we are all being snowed, but there it is.

Also with all due respect a sample size of one, while interesting, does not change the big picture.
Nature does not place diamonds in the middle of each clarity or color grade.
It gives us diamonds in a continuum of colors and clarities.
(That's why I wish they'd grade them on a 1 - 100 scale instead of ten or so distinct grades.)
Even GIA has been known to change a grade when the owner disagrees with a borderline grade.

BTW, contrats on that beautiful pink diamond.

I'm not sure who you are replying to, but I have to say I agree. I sent the stone to GIA because I don't trust IGI (or any other labs when it comes to FCDs) and the results I received tend to support the idea that GIA is the "go to lab". I would have been much happier with a FP SI2 grade compared to the FLP SI1. The stone looks like a FLP. GIA got it right IMO.

BTW I really like the idea of a 1-100 grading scale.

 

[AN0NYM0US]

if i were to spend thousands of dollars on a fancy colored diamond, i would NOT get it without a GIA report...

Neither would I, but I would spend hundreds