Older GIA Report = Bad?

[MichaelLC]

Thanks for all the great advicde so far. Based on advice given here, I'm narrowing it down!

Shopping around, I've noticed some of the rocks have older GIA reports; one from 2004 that doesn't seem to have the crown or pavillion numbers on them.

Is that a concern? Should a few years out of a couple million (billion?)

bother me?

Thanks!

EDIT: recived a .8 on the HCA using table & depth numbers.

 

[JulieN]

ask for a Sarin.

 

[niceice]

Date: 7/26/2006 7:54:01 PM
Author:MichaelLC
Shopping around, I''ve noticed some of the rocks have older GIA reports; one from 2004 that doesn''t seem to have the crown or pavillion numbers on them. Is that a concern? Should a few years out of a couple million (billion?)

bother me?

Well, a diamond is not a loaf of bread and therefore it is unlikely to spoil... Not much has (actually) changed in terms of the GIA lab report with exception that the new report includes the crown and pavilion measurements and as Julie has indicated, you can (and should) get that information from a Sarin report. Ask the seller to provide you with a Sarin or OGI computerized proportions analysis of the diamond and you''ll have more or less the same information provided on the new GIA lab report. It is not uncommon for a diamond to have paper that is a year or two old, but at the same time, it is a good idea to have an independent gemologist evaluate the diamond to ensure that the current state of the diamond is the same as stated on the 2004 lab report - refer to the list of independent appraisers available via the Resources / Appraisers link available at the top of this page.

 

[Regular Guy]

Unfortunately, although maybe not much has changed with the new GIA paper, if knowing crown & pavilion angles, and implementing the HCA score is "where it''s at," everything''s changed.

Date: 7/27/2006 1:34:06 AM
Author: niceice
Ask the seller to provide you with a Sarin or OGI computerized proportions analysis of the diamond and you''ll have more or less the same information provided on the new GIA lab report.

Nice Ice has this to get for you...and so will a hand full of others. Also, maybe your store and you have an insight about this particular stone, and are willing to use some extraordinary measures to send the diamond away to get this data...but you''re just shopping, right? You could also pick a stone that does have this data. Are you or your jewler highly enough motivated to spend a lot of time getting info on a stone not yet owned by you?

It is not uncommon for a diamond to have paper that is a year or two old, but at the same time, it is a good idea to have an independent gemologist evaluate the diamond to ensure that the current state of the diamond is the same as stated on the 2004 lab report - refer to the list of independent appraisers available via the Resources / Appraisers link available at the top of this page.

Unfortunately, most of these appraisers don''t have this equipment, either. Some few do, and as Nice Ice reports, the Resources link will tell you which ones you can go to, that might help you with this. Also, reading here, many of those same appraisers populate these forums. One could only speculate about whether now more, or less, appraisers will be interested in adding these machines to their inventory, now that GIA has come to value that data. Although they could easily say...well...it''s on the cert, so now more than ever, I shouldn''t bother to get it. Then again, the color and clarity grade are on the cert too, so maybe they should just close up shop.

Finally, where you say: " received a .8 on the HCA using table & depth numbers...." I think you''re just picking up the defaults already imputed in the HCA tool. Without knowing these, which is the point, your depth and table data cannot be used with the HCA, which is the point of that tool.