How does HRD stack up (clarity grading)?

[yssie]

Stone in q is a 2.5 HRD SI2. Lab report from 2007.



I've heard and read that HRD grades colour with similar strictness (harshness?) as GIA/AGS..?

 

[Upgradable]

My stone is I SI2, and it is completely eye clean. I''d say color is on par with other labs, but clarity seems to be higher.

 

[yssie]

By higher do you mean you might consider your stone a GIA/AGS SI1 or an I1?

 

[Upgradable]

SI1

 

[Stephan]

I think that a G with 41 pavilion might look darker than a Brian Gavin Signature H.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/23/2010 10:08:08 PM
Author:yssie
Stone in q is a 2.5 HRD SI2. Lab report from 2007.



I've heard and read that HRD grades colour with similar strictness (harshness?) as GIA/AGS..?

HRD are better known outside the US, they are a highly reputable lab, one of the experts should be able to explain further.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

All is relative, and one cannot always use generalisations to predict one specific case.

HRD is a very reliable and professional lab, and in general terms, one could say that:
- their colour-grading is good, and somewhat stricter than GIA in the G through J-range,
- their clarity-grading is good, but somewhat more lenient than GIA in the LC-VVS1-division (LC is HRD''s top-clarity-grade).

However, one cannot use this as a predictor for one stone. In your case, the clarity is SI2. This might be a high SI2 (close to SI1) or a low SI2. Since HRD has no SI3-grade, the next grade down is I1. There is always a chance that one specific stone (maybe yours) might be graded I1 by another trustworthy lab.

Live long,

 

[Rockdiamond]

This is a great example of how this forum allows a broad exchange of information.
Although I have worked in Antwerp, I have far more experience in the New York market. In general HRD reports are rare in the US.

I have heard other pros speak highly of HRD here on PS, which tempers my comments.

However, I have seen some fairly inaccurate grading on the limited number of HRD reports I''ve seen.
IN one recent case HRD called a diamond I/SI2 that was subsequently graded K/I1 by GIA. I also graded the diamond K/I1

Therefore my advise to American buyers in particular is to steer clear of HRD, unless they are working with a trusted vendor who will look at the stone personally for them

 

[yssie]

Thanks Stephan, Lorelei, Paul, David.



It definitely is on a stone-by-stone basis, and of course in that size choosing an SI2 is a gamble regardless of reporting entity. The stone is from a reputable vendor. I'm not in the market, though - just good info to know

ETA: Stephan - nice sleuthing, but wrong result

 

[Dreamer_D]

Yssie are you up to something?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Putting David''s reply in perspective, I wanted to add the following.

For years, I saw NY-based wholesalers buy HRD-graded stones in Antwerp, and I did not understand why the HRD-report was rare in the American retail-market. Then, I learned that these wholesalers specialized in buying specific stones ranging mostly from H through J, where they thought that GIA would give it a better colour and never used the HRD-report.

Live long,

 

[yssie]

Date: 2/24/2010 4:16:50 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
Yssie are you up to something?

Possibly?



Well, only if a lot of things happen "just so". Never hurts to contingency plan though, right?

 

[bgray]

I had a stone that had an HRD and a GIA grading report. They were both the same