More alexandrite questions, with pictures

[girlyglam]

Hi All,

I previously posted about making an alexandrite ring ([URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/making-an-alexandrite-ring.212304/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/making-an-alexandrite-ring.212304/[/URL]), and I then requested handshots of some of the alexandrites I was interested in from David:



Based on this, I am definitely leaning toward the top left and bottom left stones. Does anyone have any thoughts for one over the other?

Thank you!

 

[regina3737]

Top left looks the best to me clarity and color wise.

 

[minousbijoux]

I think it might be a more awkward shape to work with, but the bottom left appears more saturated in color and therefore would be my pick. I would ask him 1) the % color change on each stone and 2) if he recommends one over the other. I have not worked with him, but others who have would say his opinion is helpful.

 

[Marlow]

I don't like - maybe top left - both on the right side are really ugly - why not a CCG for the same money???

Sorry - only my personal opinion

 

[pregcurious]

In terms of color, the left ones are better.

I would put it in something like this to give it more presence, and make the shape look more regular (assuming it is symmetrical).

Since you're going for a birthstone ring, have you considered pearl or moonstone? The are both more affordable. The caveat is that they are softer than alexandrite.

 

[ilovegemstones]

Because your hand is on an angle in the photo I think everyone is talking about the same stone as being the best - the elongated oval that is the most saturated. Do you love the stone and the colour change? I could see it set East/West with diamonds on either side. Half moon diamonds or triangles would be nice. Would love to see pics of the colour change! I had to return an alexandrite from there because it looked too washed out against my skin. Excited for you!

 

[LD]

The most important thing with an Alex is the colour change. So whilst my favourite is bottom left and looks like it has good possibilities for a colour change (whereas the two on the right don't), I would want to see them in their incandescent colourway before deciding if it was a stone to purchase.

The value of an Alex is in colour change, size/clarity and then cut in that order.

 

[GregS]

Top left would be my pick, bottom right has a more pleasing color, or maybe just less extinction, but looks to have a glaring inclusion(s) and I am not a fan of elongated ovals.

 

[LD]

BTW top left has a huge window. That will impact on colour change as the centre will always look washed out (hence my preference to bottom left)!

 

[GregS]

In that case I'd say none of them. There were a few decent looking rounds last time I looked .

 

[girlyglam]

Thank you so much for all of your insights! At this point, I'm leaning towards the bottom left. I'm just wondering if I should be worried about the cut or inclusions. David did say the inclusions won't pose a durability problem, so that's good anyway. I did send David a follow up email to ask about the color change between the two stones on the left, and he said the bottom left has the stronger color change. Do you think I should email again to ask for hand pictures in incandescent and mixed lighting? I don't want to annoy him...

 

[LD]

Thank you so much for all of your insights! At this point, I'm leaning towards the bottom left. I'm just wondering if I should be worried about the cut or inclusions. David did say the inclusions won't pose a durability problem, so that's good anyway. I did send David a follow up email to ask about the color change between the two stones on the left, and he said the bottom left has the stronger color change. Do you think I should email again to ask for hand pictures in incandescent and mixed lighting? I don't want to annoy him...

Is there not an online photo of the change? Sometimes he includes videos as well. You could always ask him to hold it for you and would he take a video? BTW the colour change in mixed lighting is definitely not important because (a) if you're in mixed lighting it's usually only for a short period of time (ie light fading outside as night falls) and (b) no Alex is judged by the reaction to mixed lighting. I think people get hung up on this and honestly, the most important is daylight and incandescent.

The inclusions are nothing to worry about (it's reasonably normal to find some inclusions in Alex). If David says there's no problem with them then take him at his word. He knows his stuff!

I really do like the elongated oval and it gives you an opportunity to add some lovely side stones and have a much bigger face up look than you would otherwise.

 

[girlyglam]

Thank you LD. From what I've read on the forums, you are the alex expert, so I greatly appreciate you chiming in on this!

And I'm sorry - I totally misunderstood you. He does have photos of the change online, and based on those photos, I do prefer the color change on the elongated oval. Do you think it's worth it to ask him for photo/video in Incandescent light? Basically, here are his website photos for the elongated oval:



And here are his website photos for the other one (top right):



The cut and clarity seem nicer to me on the second stone, which is why I still haven't made a definitive decision. But I know my primary concern should be color change. And it is...I just want to be sure I'm not ignoring glaring cut or clarity issues when choosing a stone. Of course, I'm obviously not going after the most high quality alexandrites to begin with, but even with a baby starter stone, I'm hoping to get the best I possibly can.

Also, thank you for the information about mixed lighting! I was, as you said, a bit hung up on that, and I'm glad it's not something I should be worried about!

 

[LD]

Well, the second one has a huge window AND if you look at the incandescent lighting photo, you'll see you can still see some green in it? That means it's a weak colour changer and it's struggling to change. Personally I wouldn't buy this or recommend it to anybody BUT I'm fussy with Alex!

The inclusions in the elongated oval are a bit obvious and I hadn't noticed them in the photo you first posted. Having said that, you can't see them in that photo and you don't often have your gemstones right next to your eyeball! It does have a better colour change but it's not a phenomenal colour change - it's an average colour change. I suspect that's reflected in the price though.

I would still ask for a video of the elongated oval because it'd be good to see how much the inclusions show. Sometimes, with this type of inclusion, the light catches them and they sparkle. This will either annoy you or you'll love it!!!!


EDIT: Just looking at the photos again of the elongated oval, If you set this with 4 claws, they will actually be placed over the inclusions so will be slightly less visible.

 

[minousbijoux]

I agree with LD - when considering the cutting on the first one, you cannot overlook that large window which takes up a good portion of the stone and would definitely result in a diminished color response.

As for the second, it has better cutting, better saturation, better color change, but inclusions. Personally, if I were in your shoes, I would go for the second, despite the inclusions (unless they do something dramatic by completely changing the appearance of the stone at certain angles or when light hits them just right - which can be remedied by asking David). This is because one buys an alex primarily due to the color change phenomenon and the pretty colorways. If you were buying it for the sparkle and dispersion (like a diamond), and it had those inclusions, it would likely be a different matter, but for an alex, I would take the leap.