How much faith do you put into GIT memos?

[RockHugger]

I received my ruby today. It has a git memo saying no heat.

Like any stone I receive I did my string of tests on it. I looked at it under magnification and I notice blue flashes on about 1/4 of the stone (where there are some feather inclusions). I do dark field mag, and there are striations and what look like negative crystals that are reflecting blue.

Now from experience, blue flash means glass. I can't get close enough to see bubbles because my scope broke in the move, so I am stuck at 40x.

I politely contacted the vendor with my finding and he insists GIT is never wrong.

Now...I have never seen this, but can rutile flash blue? I understand a crystal inclusion can ecause of a different RI, but something just looks off to me. I am going to upload pics in a min from my other computer.

Gemmologists...thoughts?

 

[T L]

RH,
I'm not a gemologist, but GIT memos can be forged, as well as any other lab report or memo. It's something to consider.

 

[RockHugger]

TL, I thought of that. I am requesting a refund from the seller. I just want to get opinions of others here before I start accusing someone of forging a lab memo. I take treatments and lying about treatments seriously.

my scope desaturates the color of the stone as I zoom in. The ruby is very red. I actually like it because it makes inclusions much more visable. The flashes are blue and purple, but photographed more purple. Stone is submerged in RI fluid, and using darkfield illumination. None of these 'lighted inclusions' are visable without darkfield, except the feathers of course.

 

[Lovinggems]

Hi RH

Were you able to get a confirmation from GIT?

 

[chrono]

I also get concerned where blue flash is concerned, especially if it happens to also be at the same location as the inclusions. RH, I'm sorry about the potentially treated ruby.

 

[RockHugger]

No email back yet from GIT.

 

[T L]

No email back yet from GIT.

Even if you were to verify it from GIT, I've heard that sellers can cut stones to match the physical dimensions of the description on a real verifiable memo, and then reproduce that memo.

 

[LD]

Mmmmmm I'm not sure looking at your photos. Like you, blue flash screams filling to me. However, because the other inclusions are looking purple I'm not 100% convinced. Also, if there were bubbles, you should be able to see them with a good loupe and I don't see any in your photos (and at that magnification, you should be able to). What's the clarity like without the scope? Can you see the blue flash with just a loupe? In the bottom photo there appears to be a tiger stripe inclusion which would indicate a natural ruby (at least that might be helpful!).

If you do return the stone, I'm not sure I would accuse the seller of forging the GIT memo - it might just be safer to return and say nothing other than you feel it may be treated and it was not what you were looking for. I realise this may not be exactly speaking the truth but unless you get this confirmed by a gemmologist, I'd be very wary of accusing somebody if you know what I mean.

Sorry probably none of that helps and I do hope you get some resolution.

Edit: Sorry just looked again at the bottom photo. Not sure if I'm seeing things but it looks like an inclusion to the right of the picture that has blue flash????

 

[RockHugger]

The inclusions are not visible with the naked eye. They are also not visible under a loupe without darkfield illumination. Light from above or below they arnt there....but from the side they light right up.

Only inclusions visible under a loupe and normal light are the 2 small feathers.

Yes the feathers have blue flash also with DF illumination. That's what's in the 2 nd photo.

 

[LD]

RH - are the bits I've highlighted below inclusions or feathers? They don't look like feathers??? Those are the bits that are making me wonder. The bit below and to the left is either a feather or a tigers stripe.

It's such a shame we can't upload videos as it would be a great tool for this sort of thing wouldn't it?

 

[RockHugger]

Those are small fractures. I know, video would be awesome. My scope takes video, and I could move the penlight and show what it does at different light angles.

Eta: I forgot to add, the 1st photo is like a fingerprint inclusion. It's one plane, not throughout the depth of the stone. Above and below it is inclusion free.

 

[LD]

RH are you getting blue flash from those fractures?

Also, is there any chance that the feathers you're seeing are flux feathers? Can you get in closer to the feather?

 

[RockHugger]

The feathers in the 2 nd pic are showing a blue flash. I can't get closer to the feather because my scope broke while we were moving, and it won't go past 40x.

The fingerprint in the 1st pic might be flux healed. That fingerprint just doesn't look right to me.

 

[LD]

I've got a great photo of a flux feather in a ruby - would that help to compare?

 

[RockHugger]

I would love to see it.

 

[LD]

Here you go .......... hope it helps!

 

[Lovinggems]

Is it harder to forge one with a photo attached?

RH sorry your ruby didn't work out for you, I think that vendor has a 15% restocking fee, unless misrepresented, I remember now that was the other reason why I didn't return my sapphire, but I found a use for it, a 3 stone pendant.

 

[RockHugger]

Yeah, that's a flux fingerprint. That's what I am thinking the top picture is, but not as close.

I'm pretty sure selling a heated ruby as unheated is under misrepresented. If I wasn't 90 percent sure it's filled I would keep it. It is a very nice ruby. But not worth close what I paid if it's filled.