"Gems Sparkle"..How far will it go?

[ccuheartnurse]

Helloooo

I was lucky to have been the one who got Brad's marquise Tsavorite from his drop this past week. It's not often you find a marquise shaped Tsavorite & a large one at that. I love the Medium Dark colour, although I understand IRL, that might change a bit. At 1st I didn't notice the "fingerprint", as Brad puts it, on the left side of the gem. Once I read his description, I could easily see it. Did others notice that blemish right away? And would it be the equivalent of a white inclusion in a white diamond, unnoticeable? I'm not sure Brad will provide them, but I've asked for another pic or 2 of the stone. I also want to see the belly region straight on.

http://www.thegemtrader.com/Jul15TsavoPage.htm

I'm not that familiar with a "gems sparkle" but is this enough to mask this inclusion? Will it in fact "hide" amongst the brilliance? I understand that a diamond does this well, but even a diamond has it's limitations. Other vendors have made this reference as well with other coloured gems. I'm curious about that. Does Refractive Index play a role this?

For those more familiar with coloured gems, or even Fancy coloured diamonds, how far do you think a gems sparkle will go? I imagine it would be dependent on how large the blemish is, the location, & the nature of it similar to a diamond.

Thank you... Judy

 

[minousbijoux]

Adding photos of the stone so its easier for people to help you out.

 

[Michael_E]

It's not often you find a marquise shaped Tsavorite & a large one at that.

Absolutely correct, a stone of this color and size is not going to come up for sale very often. Also remember that, as a natural stone, it is bound to have some "features" that remove it from the realm of synthetic perfection. In other words, that fingerprint is a mark of where the stone came from and should not be looked at as if it's a flaw.

Did others notice that blemish right away? And would it be the equivalent of a white inclusion in a white diamond, unnoticeable? I'm not that familiar with a "gems sparkle" but is this enough to mask this inclusion? Will it in fact "hide" amongst the brilliance?

It's not a blemish, it's a mark indicating it's natural pedigree. No, it's not like a white inclusion in a white diamond. It's a lighter green flash against the darker green body color of this gem. No, the sparkle available in the tips of a marquise cut gem of medium deep saturation will not hide this inclusion. It will actually make the inclusion a bit more noticeable at some angles. This is because the optics of a marquise cut make the saturation of the stone appear darker as you approach the tips of the stone. Since the fingerprint is out towards one tip it will show a reflection against the darker color at some angles. This is NOT something which should be of any concern to you, as it's a feature of a large natural gem and if anything it whispers, "I am the real deal. I'm rare and I'm valuable".

I understand that a diamond does this well, but even a diamond has it's limitations. Other vendors have made this reference as well with other coloured gems. I'm curious about that. Does Refractive Index play a role this?
For those more familiar with coloured gems, or even Fancy coloured diamonds, how far do you think a gems sparkle will go? I imagine it would be dependent on how large the blemish is, the location, & the nature of it similar to a diamond.

Refractive index plays a very small role in how noticeable an inclusion is. What matters most is the contrast between the inclusion and the body color of the stone. If the inclusion is a reflective one and it's reflecting at an angle close to that of a facet, then it will hide well. Likewise if the inclusion is vertical to your average line of sight, then it will hide well, (for instance the inclusion in your tsavorite will be almost impossible to see from one end, since it's nearly in line with the viewer's line of sight from that end). If a stone has a darker body color and the inclusion is larger, then it will be impossible to hide.

Really though, it's a natural stone and nature is not perfect, (at least not at this scale). Well I suppose that it could look perfect if you cut that stone in half and used only the perfect, and much smaller portion of it. But why? It's a display of beauty and rarity as it is, not something to be concerned or apologetic about. These gems are kind of like children, you have to treasure them just as they are.

 

[minousbijoux]

Now I'll provide my answer!

If its what looks like a lightning bolt on the left hand end of the stone in both pics, I believe, based on the color and shape of the stone, that you will be able to see the feather (looks more like a feather than a fingerprint) if you are up close (say within 12-18 inches) and looking for it. Due to its rich color, its cut, and the placement of the feather, you will likely not be able to see it from farther away - unless the light hits it a certain way. If it really is only a fingerprint and not a feather, it will likely be even less noticeable. Any sparkle will certainly reduce its appearance even more. Its funny, but I don't think of tsavs as terribly sparkly. Yes, if well cut, with excellent polish and luster they can be, but not so much as some others. You are right, though, that any sparkle the stone has will further reduce the appearance of the inclusion.

If the photos are accurate, the stone is excellent color - medium dark with some of the sought after blue modifier. The price is outstanding, particularly if the stone appears eye clean from any reasonable distance. Congrats - it is a lovely stone!

 

[minousbijoux]

I'm just now seeing Michael's response - cross post. I basically agree with Michael about the transmission of light, but I do think the sparkle will hide it unless the inclusion blocks the refracted light.

 

[ccuheartnurse]

Thanks both of you for answering, I really appreciate it. Brad responded he was going to try to take a picture to highlight the stones birthmark. ** Fingers crossed **

Hi Michael. It's been quite some time since I've spoken with you! I hope all is going well. Huge thanks for your thoughtful & insightful response. I agree, that the very nature of a marquise shape will concentrate colour at the tips as does a diamond. I am completely more eye clean than I am a mind clean kind of person & while a black chunk of carbon on my diamond isn't something I can live with, this fingerprint seems to be one I can. As reassuring as it to know it's an earth mined gem, I just want to make sure it's not too distracting.

Thanks Minou for posting a picture. You're correct, it's easier to visualize it that way. Lol. What a noob move. Lol. I hope this is a blemish & not a feather, but as long as it's not distracting & an integrity issue, I suppose it doesn't matter really. I'm relieved you 've given the stone a thumbs up, if it checks out. Lol.

Do either of you feel this stone would be best in an E-W or N-S setting or idoesn't matter? I had considered a N-S halo setting but I'm not 100% set on that. If you experts think the stone should be set E-W because of the reflection of the blemish, I'm ok with that. I had thought of bezeling the Tsavorite, but since The ring will be an occasional ring, I'll do some kind of fancy prongs. Pinterest, here I come!

 

[Michael_E]

Do either of you feel this stone would be best in an E-W or N-S setting or idoesn't matter? I had considered a N-S halo setting but I'm not 100% set on that. If you experts think the stone should be set E-W because of the reflection of the blemish, I'm ok with that.

The setting direction for this stone really doesn't matter much when considering how noticeable the inclusion is. I think that
minousbijoux is correct in that this inclusion will be impossible to see from farther away than arms length. How many people are you going to let get close enough to inspect the ring in that sort of detail? As for you being able to see it, well it might be best to set it N-S and then always wear the ring so that the inclusion is closest to you with the reflection from it pointing the other way...poof it disappears. One thing to think about with an E-W setting is that this stone is pretty long and adding a halo to it could make the top of the ring wider than your finger, (on the plus side it would never be able to roll over). Sounds like a great stone and a really fun ring, guaranteed to get noticed for sure!

 

[Niel]

I'll leave the other aspects of the discussion to the expert but in my opinion the best colored stone marquise settings I've seen are with a plain shank halo, either larger white diamonds to give that antique diamond daisy cluster feel or with that then an addition of green in between the spaces of the melee in the halo, like, for example, french cuts. That could become expensive but that look bad always been my favorite, and they were always e/w

 

[chrono]

The inclusion will be noticeable to the wearer but whether it bothers her or not is a personal tolerance. Because the tone is on the darker side, it will not be as sparkly. Bezeling it may further darken the tone and lessen the sparkle.

 

[ccuheartnurse]

Haha Michael, someone might fall in to my ring, you never know just how close someone can get to it. Nahhh..kidding of course. Lucky the people I surround myself with only look at the big picture & not the details (in regards to jewelry).

Neil, I'm so with you on the cluster ring look. The older I get, the more I appreciate them. Maybe not so much the 1980's look (as I remember it all too well), but more the 1950's glamour, cocktail type rings. There are so many beautifully intricate ones on Pinterest. I also like the coloured baguettes or french cuts & I agree, that might be too expensive. While I do prefer an E-W setting for a Marquise, I think this is going to be too wide for my size 6 finger once I add a halo & maybe some detailed Art Deco or Art Nouveau type of tab prongs. Michael's right though, it won't spin. LOL I'm definitely leaning toward the glamour look. Now I have to figure out a way to balance out the look for what I can afford.

Chrono..** sigh ** I know the stone will get darker in a bezel. My love of bezels are 2 fold..1 I like the look but 2, more importantly, I feel more secure wearing something on my right hand. The last stone I lost was a fabulous H&A little .21 F, VS stone. While not the end of the world, I was very sad to see it missing. And just 2 weeks ago, I somehow got my eternity band caught in the door handle at Cheesecake Factory (be careful if you pull the handle there!) & it bent my round platinum 3/4 ring in to an oval. I'm not being stubborn about bezels, I'm right handed & a clutz.

I haven't gotten my pic from Brad yet, and when I do, I'll post it.

Thanks.. Judy

 

[ccuheartnurse]

I got a picture from Brad who admits he's not good at taking pics. LOL What a super nice guy he is to accommodate my request. He also made mention that the stone is lighter than the picture shows. It's still dark I know a bezel is out of the question. He also said I could have it recut to about 1.75 ct if I wanted a flawless gem. I don't actually want to cut any weight. LOL I really like the shape for this stone, but I'm wondering if it will be too dark for me. I know they tend to darken indoors & the last thing I want is a greenish black gem. Would a recut lighten the gem? There is no guarantee but maybe this is an option I should look at. The price is very reasonable that I would consider it.

Also, I do plan on keeping this gem, would an AGL brief be a reasonable thing to do?

Not sure yet about the setting, but something similar to this one I found on Pinterest adding a fine halo. I would certainly protect the ends with v prong or something decorative. And keep the gallery as minimal as possible.

Judy