Few better stones, or more lesser stones?

[kenny]

I'm considering the future of my collection.
I have to decide whether I want fewer better stones or a larger collection of lesser stones.
How does one decide on a vision for a collection?

Am I the only one who struggles with this?

 

[Arcadian]

of course not, I think plenty do. I know I've evaluated my buying habits and am have been trending toward much higher quality stones. . That of course means I can't buy as often as I used to and its a struggle sometimes. I think being busy with work and life and not living on the boards helps with that.

My tastes have changed over the years as my knowledge has deepened which also plays into my decisions too. So when I look at the must haves over the want to haves, though I sometimes struggle with letting "the good stuff get away" I also look at the fact that my must haves may not be bought already. It helps to put things into perspective for me.


-A

 

[kenny]

I think time is an important element.
No matter what your budget is, tiny or humongous, you can't have it all today.
It will take time.
Even if your budget was in the millions a large selection stones like that aren't just sitting in the store waiting for you.

I have 5 stones now.
I love them and the quality of most of them is very pleasing.
I don't regret the purchases, but for the same price I could have followed a different strategy.
I could have bought one particular really killer stone that I've had my eye on, then be patient and add more good stones very gradually as they come along and I have the budget.

Then again if I had bought that one super duper stone, I'd probably think. .. Hey, I'm an idiot; for the same price I could have those 5 cool stones.
I find myself going in circles in my mind.

Okay, don't listen to me me.
Someone shoot me please.

 

[Pandora II]

No choice for me - fewer better stones.

 

[JewelFreak]

Aw, Kenny, you're gonna have to shoot yourself!

Your question is one that serious collectors of anything wrestle with. Essentially, what is my goal in collecting? As high quality as possible, of course. You can get there 2 ways: buy more lesser things & trade up over time, or build slowly with as great quality as you can; and they are not mutually exclusive. As you mentioned, your knowledge, experience & therefore tastes change so of whatever you bought early on, no matter how good, some will be weeded out & replaced. Another consideration is what kind of collection do you want -- do you only want things you can set & wear or to have many you can simply look at & be happy?

Personally, I prefer buying fewer stones of the best quality I can squeeze out the shekels for. You're ahead of me, I have only 2 stones, but they make my heart pitty-pat every time I look at them. My Ed Bristol green tourmaline lives on my desk in front of me in its clear box -- as the light changes during the day, this stone knocks me out. BUT I already have a regret: wish I had gotten a tad bigger one. So I learned that about my preferences.

In order not to go nuts, which is HAAARD, I remind myself when I see a stone that makes me drool, that there will ALWAYS be the next one that does the same. Can't buy them all. So I try to pick things that will thrill me for a long time. There's no single best answer, even in one collection. And moving on from many beautiful gems is a real exercise in self-discipline for me.

--- Laurie

 

[Edward Bristol]

Kenny,

I lately started a collection with a customer who asked a similar question in the beginning.

Here is how it went:

- First we decided to sacrifice size over quality.

- Secondly we wanted to go for width rather than for depth, meaning to get one gem of each big variety (not to collect all types of spinel, or all blue, or only gems from Africa or such).

- Thirdly we planed to keep the value of each stone under 2k but all should have at least jewelry sizes.

She bought a 24 stones box to fill over the next years as an heirloom to her daughter.

The budget for the complete collection came out with around $30k. I made the following working table:

(Uh, I can't find a way to copy a table in here without shredding it, so here is a link, admin, I hope its OK, any advice welcome...)

http://wildfishgems.com/collection

We skipped emerald and alexandrite, and some other extra expensive varieties like pads or chrome or paraiba.

I wanted to throw out the diamond too but she wanted one. I’d always buy two colored gems for one diamond. Obviously all had to be untreated.

We have selected the first 4 stones and so far we met the budgets.

I think it will be a delicious heirloom and the lady has great fun too.

 

[ooo~Shiney!]

WOW that is really cool, Ed!

Kenny, I don't think I have enough discipline!
I tend to be impulsive and enthusiastic! I have (what I consider to be) a small collection,
but I am still learning what I like and for me, that is taking some time.
So far, I like just about everything!

I guess when I have done this for longer, I will start to narrow it down
to what I REALLY love, and then I will prob start collecting just very very
nice specimens of that particular stone....

I have envied your collection SO MUCH!!!!!!
I really love what you are doing, and have often wished I was more like YOU!!!!

 

[chrono]

This is a question many struggle with themselves. Collecting fine quality stones requires $$$$$, patience, discipline and a good bit of luck to be able to find the right stone. Sometimes, the budget will not permit it no matter how much we save (untreated Burmese ruby of over 3 carat with that super red colour) so we do what we can within our means. Over time, I became fussier about the quality of gemstones I like and purchased. I also prefer to have fewer gems than many so I don't need to worry about space (storing) issues, less stones to set if I chose so, plus I just like to ogle eye popping stones. The stones I collect are now much larger than when I started out. Initially, they were around 1 ct, then 2 ct and now 5 ct. Of course, sometimes these stones just aren't that large naturally so I make a few rare exceptions but never sacrifice the colour quality.

 

[movie zombie]

Pandora said it all for me.

Ed, nice thing for your client to do for her daughter.

MoZo

 

[icekid]

No choice for me - fewer better stones.

Yes, yes, yes!

 

[VapidLapid]

more better.

a collection of many mediocre X's is a mediocre collection regardless of size. A few well selected X's makes a stronger impact.

A running joke (or number one guiding creative principle) in the art world goes;
If you cant make it good, make it big. If you cant make it big, make a lot of them.

 

[T L]

I'm kind of in the middle. If I see a gem that's got great pricing, not necessarily the best color in the Universe, but it's very attractive to me, or I think it will go well with another gem, I cave in. The spinel trillion in my bypass ring is an example of such a stone, and there's others. I guess I like good deals, and while I do think color is important, I'm willing to cave in if a stone has less than perfect color, but other fine qualities (nice tone, cutting, luster, etc. . . ). It should have good color though.

With FCD's, if you want fine color, you better start saving. As many know, FCD's are a very expensive habit. I'm glad my lastest fascination has been with spinels.

 

[LD]

I'm kind of in the middle. If I see a gem that's got great pricing, not necessarily the best color in the Universe, but it's very attractive to me, or I think it will go well with another gem, I cave in. The spinel trillion in my bypass ring is an example of such a stone, and there's others. I guess I like good deals, and while I do think color is important, I'm willing to cave in if a stone has less than perfect color, but other fine qualities (nice tone, cutting, luster, etc. . . ). It should have good color though.

With FCD's, if you want fine color, you better start saving. As many know, FCD's are a very expensive habit. I'm glad my lastest fascination has been with spinels.

Ditto.

When I first started collecting I wasn't as picky and learned about gemstones along the way so I do have a large collection but probably 25-35% will never be set and are just for "fun". Am I disapointed with them? No, because I've liked them enough to keep them and as a result I've got a very varied and extensive collection and it's fun to see all the different stones and I'm happy that I have them.

 

[colorluvr]

I used to be in the "more lesser stones" camp and am currently transitioning over to the dark side. I've decided to use some of my "not that great stones" as experiments in my photo shoots! Inclusions make great photos I'm hoping it will keep me from wanting to buy stones I can afford now, so I can save for those stones that require some "saving up". I doubt I'll ever have a $25,000 stone, but I'd love to transition to that "over $1,000 but don't have to mortgage the house" area.

My problem with obtaining really nice stones is that I want to have them set, (which then involves even MORE money) whereas the "nice but not exquisite stones" can sit happily in my collection without me wanting to wear them, if that makes sense.

 

[Arkteia]

I started with a few better stones and made a costly mistake. Now I buy what I like and my "stone box" is full with good and not-so-good stones. Because of my (mild) OCD I can not stand the sight of too many stones, so I need to set them. After I have worn them for a while, I want to upgrade. So I probably end up with a couple better stones instead of dozen cheaper ones.

Problem emerges with stones that I do not know much about (emeralds) because I want to buy a nice one but absolutely refuse to overpay for something of so-so quality. So I am in the process of taking GIA classes, maybe it will help.

 

[m76steve]

"We skipped emerald and alexandrite, and some other extra expensive varieties like pads or chrome or paraiba"-from Edward-these stones dont have to b skipped-they can b had at approachable money- u just have to look for it a little longer than usual-the stuff is out there for the collector-steve...

 

[Largosmom]

I am in the learning stage, and for me that means hands on the stones, which means more lesser for now. As I am learning what to look for, my price range is starting to ease up. I don't let it worry me. I have a few female relatives who I love giving something new and different to on the holidays, so I can learn and enjoy the stones and then pass them on to say, my nieces or my sister, who don't spend much on jewelry, but who enjoy them for what they are. I enjoy each stone for what it is. Some will be set, some have wonky inclusions, or I like just to have something different. Most have a story. I do not collect things which require dusting, these I can enjoy and wear some of them.

Laura

 

[movie zombie]

"We skipped emerald and alexandrite, and some other extra expensive varieties like pads or chrome or paraiba"-from Edward-these stones dont have to b skipped-they can b had at approachable money- u just have to look for it a little longer than usual-the stuff is out there for the collector-steve...

steve, ed is in the color stone business. he's a respected vendor here....not a novice collector. he's been in the business of buying and selling color stones for i don't know how long. personally, i believe him if he says they needed to be skipped due to cost.

MoZo

 

[jstarfireb]

I'm a more/lesser stone person. I like variety above all else, have a mental block to spending more than $200 on one stone, and would be concerned about damaging an expensive colored stone. So none of my colored stone pieces are really high-quality (ETA: or at least the nicest ones are quite small due to cost), but my collection is exactly what I want it to be.

 

[Harriet]

Few better stones. Kenny, are you primarily interested in fancy coloured diamonds? How about a gorgeous one of each colour? That would be a stunning collection.

 

[Edward Bristol]

Thanks, MoZo, but I don't think Steve meant it badly.

It is true: any variety can be found on a reasonably low budget if you have time to search and can go down in the size (except for untreated emerald perhaps).

However, in this case we wanted to have untreated top-end stones under 2k but stay within jewelry size, so some varieties had to be excluded (also we had a total budget to mind; not every specialty could come on board).

I’d say 0.5 ct is the lower limit that can be used solitary in jewelry. In cabochons I think 1 carat is the limit.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Started with fewer better, than started buying more lesser, now back to fewer better.

 

[movie zombie]

ed, i know he didn't mean it badly.....

i felt the need to point out your part in the color stone world after having participated in this thread:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ceylon-blue-spinel.155336/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ceylon-blue-spinel.155336/[/URL]

i wanted to avoid an awkward situation should he perhaps decide to give you advice. my intent was merely to let him know that you absolutely do know how to get stones....


MoZo

 

[Aoife]

I'm in the "a little bit of both" camp. I have lesser stones that I have collected that I set in jewelry to give as gifts, or that I have set in what I'd call everyday casual jewelry. I like well cut gems, and good color, but these everyday gemstones don't need to be top color, or impressive size, they just need to be good stones at a reasonable price. These are the ones I don't stress about if they get lost or knocked about a bit, either by me or by one of the family to whom they've been given as gifts. Then I have a smaller and more expensive collection of better quality stones. These are the stones that either sit in the safe or safe deposit box waiting for a high end setting, or that, if I've already set, I wear occasionally for more dressed up social occasions. Both types of gemstones give me (and my family!) a lot of pleasure, and as far as I'm concerned, that's the bottom line.

 

[LaurenThePartier]

I'm kind of in the middle. If I see a gem that's got great pricing, not necessarily the best color in the Universe, but it's very attractive to me, or I think it will go well with another gem, I cave in. The spinel trillion in my bypass ring is an example of such a stone, and there's others. I guess I like good deals, and while I do think color is important, I'm willing to cave in if a stone has less than perfect color, but other fine qualities (nice tone, cutting, luster, etc. . . ). It should have good color though.

With FCD's, if you want fine color, you better start saving. As many know, FCD's are a very expensive habit. I'm glad my lastest fascination has been with spinels.

Ditto.

When I first started collecting I wasn't as picky and learned about gemstones along the way so I do have a large collection but probably 25-35% will never be set and are just for "fun". Am I disapointed with them? No, because I've liked them enough to keep them and as a result I've got a very varied and extensive collection and it's fun to see all the different stones and I'm happy that I have them.

Ditto to both of you.

I've become much more picky over the years, but as a result of my impulse purchases in the past, I have a ton of unset mediocre stones. I think my more recent pieces have evolved with my taste and education, though, I still don't own many 3 or 4 ct.+ gemstones. As much as I hate to say it, I'm not a big stone kind of person, so I tend to go for the colour I love in a more modest size.

I have way too many pieces that don't see the light of day, so recently, I've started trimming the fat on those pieces I don't wear or gemstones I'll never set.

 

[LD]

Ed - I've only just seen your thread and love the story. Are you allowed to share what your client has already and what stones you've suggested?

What a wonderful heirloom it'll be for her daughter.

 

[Edward Bristol]

Ed - I've only just seen your thread and love the story. Are you allowed to share what your client has already and what stones you've suggested? What a wonderful heirloom it'll be for her daughter.

She picked three so far:







As you see, she has already departed from the plan. But that is what plans are for, aren't they?

 

[minousbijoux]

So for those of us who don't know off the top of our heads, can you tell us what these are?

 

[smitcompton]

hi,

I think there is a distinction to be made by what one calls a collection. I have heard it said that 3 or more items in the same category can be called a collection. I have never thought i was amassing a collection of jewelry or stones. Collecting, to me means you expect an increase in value to your items. In gems and jewelry we are told this would be an incorrect way of viewing buying them. When you collect fine specimens of gems, I think you want an increase in value.

My son collects and he has his books to check prices and through the yrs his collections have increased in value. But he doesn't buy anything without checking his price guides and going on line to check.

In a loose sense, most of us have collections, but Kenny, if I were you, I would also look to expect an increase in value in any collection. I was very surprised that someone scooped up that blue stone. I couldn't believe it was $40,000. I know you love your stones, I love some of my stones even if they aren't the best, but if I were really collecting, I want an increase in value along with the beauty. So, a few or many, beauty and increased value are my criteria for you.

Did you ever get to Pala . When I think of Pala, I know I don't have a collection, I have stuff.Of course some of it is nice)

Annette

 

[kenny]

hi,

I think there is a distinction to be made by what one calls a collection. I have heard it said that 3 or more items in the same category can be called a collection. I have never thought i was amassing a collection of jewelry or stones. Collecting, to me means you expect an increase in value to your items. In gems and jewelry we are told this would be an incorrect way of viewing buying them. When you collect fine specimens of gems, I think you want an increase in value.

My son collects and he has his books to check prices and through the yrs his collections have increased in value. But he doesn't buy anything without checking his price guides and going on line to check.

In a loose sense, most of us have collections, but Kenny, if I were you, I would also look to expect an increase in value in any collection. I was very surprised that someone scooped up that blue stone. I couldn't believe it was $40,000. I know you love your stones, I love some of my stones even if they aren't the best, but if I were really collecting, I want an increase in value along with the beauty. So, a few or many, beauty and increased value are my criteria for you.

Did you ever get to Pala . When I think of Pala, I know I don't have a collection, I have stuff.Of course some of it is nice)

Annette

Yeah, I'm bummed that FVB radiant slipped away.
I was one day from pulling the trigger on it but someone grabbed it first.
I'm trying to look on the bright side and remind myself that I really wanted a 3.85mm round or 4 x 3 mm emerald cut FVB anyway.
Those would match my round green and PP emerald cut.
Oh and I want it to be at least VS2 and have VG or EX Sym and Polish, and to be 0.24 ct.
I don't want much.

It is interesting to hear how some people define the term collection.
Definitions, official or not, don't phase me one way or the other.
It's not like some academy is going to award you with some statue when it qualifies as a "true" collection.
I just have a few FCDs and that's groovy by me.

Selecting to optimize financial return isn't a high priority, though it is a consideration that attracts me to the most rare FCDs.
Mostly, I go more for what looks and feels good to me.
Some day it may shrink down to only one pure red diamond or it may grow to many less-expensive FCDs.
It just is what it is, but it makes me happy.