Please enlight me: treated emeralds

[mcb00]

So the more I read about emeralds, the less I seem to know A case in point: I always thought emeralds always had inclusions, no matter how clear they were. Nowadays with all the treatments, some vendors claim they can make an emerald be "IF" clear.

An example: http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-56ct-EMERALD-H-SI-DIAMOND-SOLID-14K-WHITE-GOLD-HALO-ENGAGEMENT-WEDDING-RING/270858798341?ssPageName=WDVW&rd=1&var=570045077184&category=164343&cmd=ViewItem

I realize Ebay is not the most reputable seller and only a gemologist can verify what the stone really is. I've seen topaz and amethyst that is treated and becomes this clear, but emerald?

Any thoughts? Thanks!

 

[chrono]

Emeralds have been treated with oil and resins for a very long time to smooth out the light reflections caused by air pockets in the surface cracks of the stone. If skilled, you can spot it via loupe by looking at the face of each facet in reflected light, looking for cracks and features in the surface. A lightly treated stone has very few surface reaching inclusions that are very small. A more heavily treated stone will have surface reaching inclusions that cross several facets.

Zambian emeralds are almost always clean and require very little to no treatment. However, the colour is usually not as good as Colombian emeralds. Colombian emeralds are well known as the finest mined but as always, there are good ones and there are poor quality ones. The reason why many Colombian emeralds are included is due to the nature of the chromium impurity that gives the beryl its fabulous colour. The more Cr it has, the better the colour. However, the more Cr it has, the more included it is as well.

Treatment types

Cederwood oil
Stable but not permanent treatment, whereby the oil will eventually dry up or even leak from the stone after several years. This is not noticeable to lightly oiled stones but becomes quite obvious on heavily treated emeralds. Emeralds treated as such should never be used in ultrasonics, steamers or even most jewellery cleaners.

Epoxy
This is used to fill naturally occuring and also unnaturally occuring cracks and fissures. Sometimes, this is used without disclosure.

Gematrat
Permanent and stable treatment. Does not leak or discolour, and is easily viewed under UV light, showing a blue tracer. This treatment method allows the stone to be cleaned via US and steamer.

ExCel
One of the better permanent and stable treatment. It does not leak or discolour and has no blue tracer. Is strong enough to withstand US and steamer cleaning and supposedly recutting as well.

Palm Resin
An oil-like plastic treatment that is not stable or permanent. It tends to leave a milky white residue.

Opticon
Another plastic treatment that is dyed green but over time, dries out into a yellowish colour.

PermaSafe
A permanent and stable treatment. Pretty much the same thing as ExCel.

Joban
A different type of green oil that is not permanent but stable. The green colour of the oil helps improve the colour of the emerald.

Paraffin
Commonly used on African emeralds, paraffin is used in an oil or wax form.

Irradiation
This is a very new treatment done to improve the colour of the emerald. There is debate as to whether the treatment is stable or permanent.

 

[T L]

So the more I read about emeralds, the less I seem to know A case in point: I always thought emeralds always had inclusions, no matter how clear they were. Nowadays with all the treatments, some vendors claim they can make an emerald be "IF" clear.

An example: http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-56ct-EMERALD-H-SI-DIAMOND-SOLID-14K-WHITE-GOLD-HALO-ENGAGEMENT-WEDDING-RING/270858798341?ssPageName=WDVW&rd=1&var=570045077184&category=164343&cmd=ViewItem

I realize Ebay is not the most reputable seller and only a gemologist can verify what the stone really is. I've seen topaz and amethyst that is treated and becomes this clear, but emerald?

Any thoughts? Thanks!

Ebay is not a seller, it is a marketplace for sellers of whom some are highly reputable, and some are crooks, and there's a lot of sellers in between. Always check out feedback on toolhaus.org and try to stick with highly rated sellers with a good return policy and lots of long standing and positive feedback.

High quality emeralds (think Bulgari and Harry Winston) will not have a lot of inclusions visible to the naked eye, and be a medium dark vivid slightly bluish green color. Photography often makes these stones look more included than they are, but they can cost at least $25K/ct.

In the realm of mid tier to lower quality emeralds, you will almost always see inclusions, or if there are not a lot of inclusions, the stones are usually much lighter in tone and contain less chromium and sometimes more vanadium. The chromium in emerald typically causes the inclusions because it weakens the crystal lattice during the growth process. That is why very clean, chromium rich, medium dark emeralds are so incredibly rare and valuable, as they contain more chromium and saturation of that fabulous color.

Always be very careful about where/who you buy high quality emeralds from, and if you see very clean ones, buyer beware.

As Chrono indicated, Zambian emeralds tend to be cleaner than Colombian material, but they contain less Chromium than Colombian material. I heard that vanadium is the main coloring agent of Zambian material.

Chrono gave an excellent write up on the types of fillers and treatment on emeralds, but one should also be cognizant of the amount of treatment as well. AGL defines various amounts of treatment such as none, faint, minor, moderate and strong. I would personally stay away from those that have strong treatment, but value is determined not only by the kind of treatment, but the amount. All things being equal, a stone with minor treatment will be more expensive than a stone with moderate treatment. At the recent Elizabeth Taylor auction, I believe her large emerald ring had faint treatment so even the top of the top material might be treated. It's very common, as the stones are almost always treated prior to cutting, and fine Colombian crystals with no treatment are the rarest of the rare.

There are companies, like Arthur Groom in NYC, that specialize in removing and/or replacing treatment, however, that does not mean there might not be some faint residue found by the lab.

 

[Rosebloom]

Just wanted to thank Chrono and TL for this fantastic information. I've been lurking in this area for almost 2 years and I have learned so much especially from you two. Thank you so, so much for sharing your vast knowledge! Gems are fascinating!

 

[Quantz Studios]

Did anyone else notice that the seller lists treatments as "diffusion, heating"? Likely not even a natural stone, yeah?

 

[chrono]

I noticed that too; heating (and diffusion) will crack the stone into pieces. My guess is that the vendor doesn't understand gemstones and treatment because they are mainly in the setting business. Seeing how clean it is, who knows if it's even a synthetic.

 

[mcb00]

Thanks Chrono and TL for all the valuable information! You're awesome!

Just so those of us who are less knowledgeable understand what exactly you guys/girls mean in terms of color. Is this what Chrono means by "medium dark slightly bluish vivid" color? http://www.bidz.com/product/Bulgari-Made-in-Italy-Majestic-Ring-with-0-75ctw-Super-Clean-G-VVS-Diamonds-and/99398371

That will go for $2000 or less, so I'm not sure it is the quality of emerald you were referring to? Anyone has a pic of what the ideal color of emerald looks like? I understand it is more saturated and medium dark, but is the green tone closer to the Bulgari one above or more like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/390465552734?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1431.l2649

I think some of the sellers just list heating as a default treatment, since it is the most common treatment. They might say that when they don't know how the stone was treated. I did not know myself that heating could not be used on emeralds, so some of them may not know either.

My understanding is that diffusion can be used in natural stones too, but I don't know if it can be used on emeralds.

 

[chrono]

Neither are fine quality emeralds. I can't find it now but TL once posted Elizabeth Taylor's amazing emerald ring, which not only had amazing colour but also that superb velvety glow.

I don't see how emeralds can be diffused because the diffusion process requires high temperature heating which the emerald is unlikely to survive.

 

[T L]

Neither are fine quality emeralds. I can't find it now but TL once posted Elizabeth Taylor's amazing emerald ring, which not only had amazing colour but also that superb velvety glow.

I don't see how emeralds can be diffused because the diffusion process requires high temperature heating which the emerald is unlikely to survive.

This one.

 

[chrono]

That's the one! Thanks TL.

 

[mcb00]

I see. Very glowy! I also see the colour is not dark or medium dark but rather light. The color looks bluish on that pic but in other pics it is more of a yellowish green. I know it depends on the camera, light, etc. The difference is huge though.

Angelina Jolie is a big emerald fan too. These are gorgeous: http://www.annawanna.com/blog/style-of-jolie/

Thanks everyone for the knowledge and tips you shared!

 

[T L]

I see. Very glowy! I also see the colour is not dark or medium dark but rather light. The color looks bluish on that pic but in other pics it is more of a yellowish green. I know it depends on the camera, light, etc. The difference is huge though.

Angelina Jolie is a big emerald fan too. These are gorgeous: http://www.annawanna.com/blog/style-of-jolie/

Thanks everyone for the knowledge and tips you shared!

You have to see a fine emerald in person. The color on Liz's is medium dark, but that bright part you're seeing is some of the reflection of light off the inclusions that give it a velvety glow. It's really hard to explain, but no photo does them justice. Emeralds are notoriously difficult to photograph.

I don't care much for Angelina's huge emerald earrings by Lorraine Schwartz as far as top quality is concerned (but I still love them!!). I think Elizabeth Taylor's emeralds from the recent auction are much finer. Don't get me wrong, I would take Jolie's emeralds in a heart beat, but to me, they're no comparison to Liz's, if I think I'm seeing what I'm seeing in the photos. Maybe the photos are just bad.

Another super fine emerald is the Chalk emerald in the Smithsonian, but the photos out there do not do it justice. Now we're talking some of the finest emeralds in the world here, so Jolie's are superb, but I suspect they're a bit more included than a top top quality stone.

Victoria Beckham has an amazing emerald ring too, medium dark of course, and very velvety, and lightly included for such an enormous gem.

 

[T L]

Okay, here's a decent photo of the Chalk emerald in the Smithsonian. I heard a story about the owner of this ring. She was at a function with Elizabeth I, Queen of England, and she felt her ring [the Chalk emerald] was so beautiful, it made the emeralds the Queen was wearing pale by comparison, so she felt like hiding her ring when she met Her Majesty.

Of course very few can afford this quality, if they can even find it, but I thought I'd post these since I feel it's good to look at top notch specimens so you know what to expect when looking at mid tier or lower quality. I hope no one is offended by my posting these, as they're simply for educational purposes.

 

[mcb00]

I think I'm getting the idea: as much color as possible for a stone that is still clear and glowy; and the color is a green blue to darker green depending on the lightning.

Angelina's earrings look very cloudy on that pic but I've seen other pics where they look more clear. I have to say though that there is something beautiful about a few cloudy inclusions--makes it look natural to me (just personal taste). Just a few though and not near the surface

It's sad that these gems are reserved for the super rich. I need to marry a jeweler

Can I find a decent emerald with good clarity and color in a gold ring for less than $200?

 

[chrono]

Actually, most emerald inclusions are on the surface. The clarity treatments just evens out the pitting and fills those small cracks to lessen its appearance and help make it a little more durable.

What is your definition of a decent emerald? What size are you looking for? What do you deem an acceptable level of treatment for the emerald?

 

[T L]

I think I'm getting the idea: as much color as possible for a stone that is still clear and glowy; and the color is a green blue to darker green depending on the lightning.

Angelina's earrings look very cloudy on that pic but I've seen other pics where they look more clear. I have to say though that there is something beautiful about a few cloudy inclusions--makes it look natural to me (just personal taste). Just a few though and not near the surface

It's sad that these gems are reserved for the super rich. I need to marry a jeweler

Can I find a decent emerald with good clarity and color in a gold ring for less than $200?

That's the other thing about emeralds, some very fine ones show their inclusions much more through a photograph than IRL. I know when I photograph my favorite emerald, I see more inclusions in the photo than I see IRL. Lighting may also have something to do with it. Emeralds to me, look best in artificial light. If she was outdoors when those photos were taken, they might not have looked their best either. I just know that when I first saw them, I was more impressed by their size than the quality. She has a ring though that I believe she wore on that same event, and it photographed much better. Since then, she has been spotted wearing lots of different and beautiful emerald jewelry. The color looks great on her.

If you want a decent emerald for around $200, it will probably be very tiny (sub half carat), maybe even a quarter carat. Emerald pricing has gone up a lot in recent years. The good thing is that at least a small stone will face up larger than most stones the same carat weight. Beryls are not dense stones, and often face up twice the size than a similar carat weight of a sapphire for example. You may have to sacrifice something such as color, clarity or carat weight.

 

[colorluvr]

ExCel
One of the better permanent and stable treatment. It does not leak or discolour and has no blue tracer. Is strong enough to withstand US and steamer cleaning and supposedly recutting as well.

I had a chance to buy an emerald ring a while back, but passed because it was an ExCel treated stone, and I was leery of the procedure because I didn't know anything about it, AND the seller didn't disclose that it was an Excel treated stone until I questioned her about how clean it looked, and then she "remembered" about the treatment. I looked up the treatment and saw both good and bad comments, but I still decided to pass.

What is everyone's opinions on this treatment, in case another crosses my path.

 

[chrono]

I know that fine emeralds photograph very poorly. My little emerald looks opaque in photographs but it really isn't. I have no idea why that is so. I cannot capture the true colour either no matter how hard I try so I've given that up for now. This same emerald has been treated with ExCel has has held up well. On the other hand, it's still not set and worn yet because I've been to busy trying to set some older stones.

Colorluvr,
It's the seller I'm more concerned about if she conveniently "forgot" the emerald was treated and with what. I'm curious to read what's the cons for ExCel.

 

[colorluvr]

I know that fine emeralds photograph very poorly. My little emerald looks opaque in photographs but it really isn't. I have no idea why that is so. I cannot capture the true colour either no matter how hard I try so I've given that up for now. This same emerald has been treated with ExCel has has held up well. On the other hand, it's still not set and worn yet because I've been to busy trying to set some older stones.

Colorluvr,
It's the seller I'm more concerned about if she conveniently "forgot" the emerald was treated and with what. I'm curious to read what's the cons for ExCel.

It was a while ago, so I don't remember what I read that made me say "bad", so perhaps I should not have stated it that way. Most of what I found online at the time was from the company that does the process, so if I remember correctly, I didn't feel like I had enough information to make an informed decision (and of course the fact that she didn't disclose it initially - Her excuse was that she'd had the stone "forever" and forgot.)

I do remember reading that the treatment wasn't always disclosed, so I'm sure that was part of what made me uneasy.

After reading more on the subject, I must say that the ExCel treatment doesn't make me as leery as it did at the time, which is why I asked what others on here thought about it.

 

[chrono]

You made me go hunting around and instead I scared myself pantless. I am swearing off Perma and Gematrat but to be fair, perhaps this is only true for emeralds that have high levels of clarity enhancement and not the minor levels.
http://www.jckonline.com/article/290298-Emerald_Crack_Up.php

 

[mcb00]

Hmmm...I guess by decent I mean not opaque; relatively clear; with enough saturation to give it that characteristic emerald color (not pale or lame). I would hope for something 10mm long; 12-14mm would be better, even I sacrificed some clarity.

Just to give me an idea, from 1 to 10, what would this emerald rank in quality: http://www.ebay.com/itm/390465552734?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1431.l2648

What would be a fair price for this quality?

Thanks!

 

[T L]

Hmmm...I guess by decent I mean not opaque; relatively clear; with enough saturation to give it that characteristic emerald color (not pale or lame). I would hope for something 10mm long; 12-14mm would be better, even I sacrificed some clarity.

Just to give me an idea, from 1 to 10, what would this emerald rank in quality: http://www.ebay.com/itm/390465552734?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1431.l2648

What would be a fair price for this quality?

Thanks!

I would rank it as a 4. It's too light in tone to have decent saturation and glow. It's also pretty included. I think people feel all emeralds are supposed to be super included and that's not the case. A good one shouldn't have eye distracting inclusions and that stone does, although it is more accepted in emeralds than other colored stones. Lighter toned emeralds are typically more free of inclusions, so if I'm going to get a lighter one, I would want less eye distracting inclusions.

BTW, the vendor calls it a "no heat" emerald, but emeralds are not heated, sapphires and rubies are, so I think he's confused about the type of treatment an emerald can take, or he's being deceptive.

For a one carat stone, I wouldn't pay more than $150 for that. The setting is really eating the stone too, don't like it.

 

[T L]

Here's a dealer that I can't vouch for and I don't know if he/she is reputable, but they seem to have decent smaller emeralds for reasonable prices, like this one. He claims to use GIA.


While this is light in tone, the inclusions are not distracting at all.

http://www.embassyemeralds.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=5&products_id=344

 

[chrono]

The colour is light enough for me to classify it as green beryl rather than emerald. And no heat? Does the seller even know or understand emerald treatment? They are not heated but clarity enhanced. It is also rather included for a light coloured emerald and these types should typically be cleaner. All in all, the asking price seems fair for the quality.

 

[mcb00]

That ring sold for 250. It was 14k gold, but still...

What about this emerald? The pic makes it hard to see how clear it is. Since it looks somewhere between transparent and opaque-it is hard to tell. Are these even gem quality?

http://www.modnique.com/product/Yellow-Gold-Jewelry-Blowout/8056/Ladies-Emerald-Ring-Designed-In-14K-Two-Tone-Gold/01376255/color/Two%20tone/size/seeac/gseeac/04tJ0op1l1CHGYa

I noticed Angara has this quality chart option where they let you see the same piece of jewelry with a "good,better, and heirloom" gem quality. What do you think of that? Is it really useful? http://www.angara.com/p/round-emerald-three-stone-ring-sr0226eg.html

 

[chrono]

It does look pretty bad in the picture; included almost to the point of being opaque which it likely is because of the I1 clarity description. There is also no mention of what the stone has been treated with and the level of treatment.

Angara's method is interesting although I think there is a limitation to what it shows. They show a stock setting so you don't really know exactly what you are getting but have some idea of what it might look like. Their "good" abd "better" is actually quite sorry looking but the description seems more apt. I don't understand why an opaque stone falls into the "good" category. Again, there is no mention of treatment, type of treatment or level of treatment.

 

[T L]

That ring sold for 250. It was 14k gold, but still...

What about this emerald? The pic makes it hard to see how clear it is. Since it looks somewhere between transparent and opaque-it is hard to tell. Are these even gem quality?

http://www.modnique.com/product/Yellow-Gold-Jewelry-Blowout/8056/Ladies-Emerald-Ring-Designed-In-14K-Two-Tone-Gold/01376255/color/Two%20tone/size/seeac/gseeac/04tJ0op1l1CHGYa

I noticed Angara has this quality chart option where they let you see the same piece of jewelry with a "good,better, and heirloom" gem quality. What do you think of that? Is it really useful? http://www.angara.com/p/round-emerald-three-stone-ring-sr0226eg.html

The Angara chart is bogus, and is used to help them make sales. It says nothing about treatment, tone, and saturation, nor hue.

The emerald you showed in the angara link is not gem quality at all. It's just an opaque green stone. It's like putting an industrial grade diamond in a ring, and calling it a "gem." I laugh at the fact that call that grade "good." I would call their qualities

very poor
poor
fair
good

ETA: I didn't see an emerald in your first link.

 

[mcb00]

Wow TL, that is harsh lol. The heirloom ones do like they would be pretty rare for natural emeralds. Of course it depends on the treatments too, but if it was all treatment they would be able to make all emeralds look like that

The link didn't work because the event was over. Here's a similar one: https://checkout.bidz.com/product/Dazzling-Brand-New-Ring-With-1-90ctw-Precious-Stones-Genuine-Clean-Diamonds/99602258

Is this gem grade?

 

[T L]

Wow TL, that is harsh lol. The heirloom ones do like they would be pretty rare for natural emeralds. Of course it depends on the treatments too, but if it was all treatment they would be able to make all emeralds look like that

The link didn't work because the event was over. Here's a similar one: https://checkout.bidz.com/product/Dazzling-Brand-New-Ring-With-1-90ctw-Precious-Stones-Genuine-Clean-Diamonds/99602258

Is this gem grade?

Pale emeralds tend to be cleaner, and I suspect that's their "heirloom" quality. I would not go as far to call that stone the same quality as top boutiques (Bulgari, VC&A, Harry Winston, Graff I presume??). I apologize if I sound harsh, but this vendor appears to be doing little to educate the buyer, and more to deceive. Calling that opaque piece of green rock "good" quality is ridiculous. Many vendors make up their own quality levels, and some are a bit more honest about them than others. My preference is to have a third party neutral report on the quality of an expensive piece.

Also be cautious of vendors that use stock photos to sell gems. You should see the exact gem you're getting.

The emerald in the new link you provided is poor quality to my eyes.

If you have a budget, we can perhaps find you something acceptable. There are some honest vendors of emeralds out there, and I would rather deal with them.

 

[mcb00]

Great advise TL, thanks!! Where would you shop for nice gemstones on a budget?