IGI versus GIA for lab created diamonds

[Sopranojla]

Hello,

I came to Pricescope (not google) for an education on lab created diamonds. Under the “Education” tab, I found just what I was looking for, but when I clicked on the link it was invalid.

My local jeweler sells only IGI lab created diamonds. I know when it comes to natural diamonds, my personal preference is GIA. I just don’t know how this thought compares with a lab created diamonds. Should I be looking for a GIA? What is the difference between the two? If memory serves me correctly, natural diamond color grading was different. For example, a IGI H color might appear more like a GIA I or J. Is this the case with lab created diamonds as well?

Also, in my searching, I have noted that the l x w ratios on lab created radiants (I have a natural radiant and am not 100% that is the shape I’m buying yet as I have a few questions about shapes, too) are not in the suggested range of 1.00-1.35 depending on square or elongated. I know this is all preference, almost all of the IGI stones I looked at on my jewelers (and a few others) website fell outside of those parameters at 1.45 to 1.58. Is that a new norm?

In looking at various different sites, my jewelers pricing seems somewhat on the low side—which is not a bad thing, but are IGI stones generally less that the GIA?

Any links to articles you may have that would help me in learning about choosing a LCD would be appreciated! I knew a little bit about them before and am interested in purchasing one, but before I do, I want to know everything so I can make an informed decision on what and where to buy.

Thank you so much!

 

[Inked]

Let me preface this with: I'm not an expert and I am sure someone knows why labs seem mostly to use IGI. I have however bought 12 lab diamonds. They're all IGI. It just seems preferred for lab (maybe it's cheaper than GIA?). With natural diamonds I know GIA is the way to go and its 'known' that IGI can be lax in grading, giving better stats, so you get an earth mined diamond thats IGI F but GIA would have made it a G.

That said, i personally purchased an IGI lab G VS2, and I wanted warmth, and i would have preferred H or I, so I took the IGI G thinking it was 'really' probably an H.

I had it recut and requested it go to GIA because... it's GIA and i feel like *most* of us just respect GIA more. Well, it came back GIA F VS1! so IGI had been MORE strict with the parameters, because GIA gave it better 'stats' than IGI had given it

 

[0515vision]

I can't go into super depth at the moment, but here's my little knowledge about the whole IGI-GIA LGD history. Initially, GIA passed on grading LGD. This allowed for IGI to take the lead. Before then, they had a reputation of being "soft."

However, LGD took over the market, and IGI was able to build their reputation for being a solid certification. You are not the first person to come back with a "softer" GIA grading than IGI. IGI is now considered reputable in the LGD sphere. I'm pretty sure that GIA still dominates the mined market.

I don't believe they "only" do LGD since they were doing mined stones before the advent of jewelry grade LGD.

Each lab has their own pitfalls. GIA rounds angles and other people can explain more about that. I think everyone loved AGS, but that era has passed. There have been some GCAL 8x which PSers have said shouldn't have been graded as such.

All to say - no, IGI does mined diamonds, too, and IGI has a solid reputation in the LGD space. There's a talk from the head of IGI floating on the internet somewhere, and I think it was posted on PS a little while ago. Sure informative (although, I assume a little biased since he was talking about his own company).

I'm sure we'll learn a ton more from other PSers!

 

[Sopranojla]

I can't go into super depth at the moment, but here's my little knowledge about the whole IGI-GIA LGD history. Initially, GIA passed on grading LGD. This allowed for IGI to take the lead. Before then, they had a reputation of being "soft."

However, LGD took over the market, and IGI was able to build their reputation for being a solid certification. You are not the first person to come back with a "softer" GIA grading than IGI. IGI is now considered reputable in the LGD sphere. I'm pretty sure that GIA still dominates the mined market.

I don't believe they "only" do LGD since they were doing mined stones before the advent of jewelry grade LGD.

Each lab has their own pitfalls. GIA rounds angles and other people can explain more about that. I think everyone loved AGS, but that era has passed. There have been some GCAL 8x which PSers have said shouldn't have been graded as such.

All to say - no, IGI does mined diamonds, too, and IGI has a solid reputation in the LGD space. There's a talk from the head of IGI floating on the internet somewhere, and I think it was posted on PS a little while ago. Sure informative (although, I assume a little biased since he was talking about his own company).

I'm sure we'll learn a ton more from other PSers!

Excellent information that I did not know! Very helpful, thank you!

 

[Sopranojla]

Let me preface this with: I'm not an expert and I am sure someone knows why labs seem mostly to use IGI. I have however bought 12 lab diamonds. They're all IGI. It just seems preferred for lab (maybe it's cheaper than GIA?). With natural diamonds I know GIA is the way to go and its 'known' that IGI can be lax in grading, giving better stats, so you get an earth mined diamond thats IGI F but GIA would have made it a G.

That said, i personally purchased an IGI lab G VS2, and I wanted warmth, and i would have preferred H or I, so I took the IGI G thinking it was 'really' probably an H.

I had it recut and requested it go to GIA because... it's GIA and i feel like *most* of us just respect GIA more. Well, it came back GIA F VS1! so IGI had been MORE strict with the parameters, because GIA gave it better 'stats' than IGI had given it

Oh wow! Interesting information! Thank you for replying! This is very helpful!!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Interesting discussion!

I had it recut

Just curious, but what was it cut like when you bought it and what did you have it cut to?

Point of interest...GIA reports cost a lot more than IGI reports. So there's that.
On stones costing many thousands, where even a slight grading difference really affects value, it's worth it.
On stones costing ...say $3k of less, the GIA report becomes a costly addition.

 

[Inked]

Interesting discussion!


Just curious, but what was it cut like when you bought it and what did you have it cut to?

Point of interest...GIA reports cost a lot more than IGI reports. So there's that.
On stones costing many thousands, where even a slight grading difference really affects value, it's worth it.
On stones costing ...say $3k of less, the GIA report becomes a costly addition.

it was a MRB recut to Transitional. The recut could explain the VS2 to VS1 but i was surprised about the color