Ist it possible to identify a stone with nonprofessional equipments?

[ppass]

Hi,

i have received my stone from my online merchant. I attached the certificate and the real diamond image from the store.

I have also tried to magnify the diamond with my usb microscope.
back side

I am a little bit disappointed, the quality of my images is bad, though i can see a lot of small points (pinpoints or feather?) in the diamond, that i can not see on the shops real diamond image.
Why is it so?

 

[ppass]

It is more difficult to analyse the front side (table) of the stone for me.
I can not find there any signs, that match with the gia map.

image 1
image2
image3

 

[Diamond Explorer]

It looks like the diamond photos don''t match the GIA certificate, but before jumping to conclusions you should try cleaning the diamond. Diamonds can accumulate bits of dirt and grim, and I cannot tell whether most of the "inclusions" we see are actually bits of lint and dust on the surface. Rubbing the diamond down with a microfiber (glasses cloth) might help too. I hope that is the solution. Curious what others make of this. Good Luck!

 

[stone-cold11]

It is against forum regulations to post linking to image outside of forum. So your link will be taken down soon. Can you attached the images directly on the thread?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Do not panic.

Most of what you are seeing is probably dirt. If you have not properly cleaned the diamond, and only handled it with tweezers afterwards, this is what you will always see under high magnification.

I would suggest trying to measure the diameter and the depth first, and compare it to the grading-report. If these match (depending on the accuracy of your measurement), it is highly likely that this is the correct stone.

Live long,

 

[ppass]

Date: 7/9/2009 5:30:34 AM
Author: Stone-cold11
It is against forum regulations to post linking to image outside of forum. So your link will be taken down soon. Can you attached the images directly on the thread?

I would gladly upload my images to this forum, but as i saw, there is a 100000 byte limitation for image size.
My files are unfortunately bigger, and i could decrease the size only with considerable additional quality lost. Do you have a solution for that?

 

[ppass]

Date: 7/9/2009 6:44:35 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

I would suggest trying to measure the diameter and the depth first, and compare it to the grading-report. If these match (depending on the accuracy of your measurement), it is highly likely that this is the correct stone.

Thx, i will make a try probably with a slide gauge and/or look for an appraiser in germany.

 

[stone-cold11]

If the images are too big, try emailing to the admin and ask them to upload it for you.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Where in Germany are you?

Appraisers are hard to find in Europe. If you wish, and Antwerp is not too far for you, I can check it for you.

Live long,

 

[strmrdr]

Its the right stone to match the report.
image 3 shows the cloud and a feather identified on the report.
The others show the feathers.
There is a lot of dust on the stone.
The vendors picture has a shallow dof and lighting that hides the inclusions.

 

[strmrdr]

feather and cloud on the diamond

 

[strmrdr]

feather and cloud on the report

 

[strmrdr]

This is what I would expect to see from an oily fingerprint

You can tell its on the surface.

 

[Todd Gray]

Date: 7/9/2009 9:51:11 AM
Author: strmrdr
Its the right stone to match the report.
Image 3 shows the cloud and a feather identified on the report.
The others show the feathers.
There is a lot of dust on the stone.
The vendors picture has a shallow dof and lighting that hides the inclusions.

I concur

Most of what you are seeing through the microscope is surface oil from fingerprints, etc. and perhaps even a little wax from the parcel paper that likely held the diamond. When we photograph a diamond to put the images up online, we steam clean it several times during the process of photographing it to remove this type of surface oil, instead we end up with some water spots here and there but they are far less distracting than the oil and wax!

The trip from Germany over to Antwerp would be worth it just to be able to meet Paul! Cool offer. (Yea, I know... I already know him)

 

[Diamond Explorer]

Nice! Glad to see the likely culprit is dust and fingerprints. Yeah I agree with Paul, the best way to quickly verify the diamond is by checking the diameters and depth with an accurate millimeter gauge. Once you get the diamond clean, then you check the inclusions against the plot.

 

[cheradrian]

Date: 7/9/2009 1:17:35 PM
Author: Diamond Explorer
Nice! Glad to see the likely culprit is dust and fingerprints.

Agreed, good to see it's the diamond as advertised.

btw, which USB microscope do you have? The pictures look like they turned out pretty good.

 

[ppass]

Unfortunately i can''t get the stone absolutely clean, but i think i have it.

 

[ppass]

cloud

 

[ppass]

back side

 

[ppass]

1

 

[ppass]

2

 

[ppass]

3?

 

[ppass]

4

 

[ppass]

maybe 6?

 

[ppass]

6?

 

[Diamond Explorer]

Awesome! It is very clear that your diamond matches the GIA certificate. Nice camera work too.

 

[ppass]

large cloud

 

[ppass]

Date: 7/9/2009 11:50:18 PM
Author: cheradrian

Date: 7/9/2009 1:17:35 PM

Author: Diamond Explorer

Nice! Glad to see the likely culprit is dust and fingerprints.

Agreed, good to see it''s the diamond as advertised.


btw, which USB microscope do you have? The pictures look like they turned out pretty good.

nothing special, like this one
1.3 MPixel

not exactly, but similar, branded with other name.
My camera has only 4 leds.
But i wouldn''t suggest it unconditionally for this purpose. Because of the shallow dof it was not easy at all to get the pics. I''m sure, i have spent more time with the stone, than the person appraised it.

But i may be too stupid to use it.

 

[ppass]

Thank you, for your hints!