synthetic diamonds vs natural diamonds????

[jasita]

Ok, so I was watching 60 minutes tonight and what caught my interest was a story about two companies in Florida. One is called Genesis in Sara Soda. The other is called Appollo (location unknown).
Genesis has created a man made diamond with all the same ingrediena nautral diamond has in it the carbon and everything. It takes 3 days to create in a Russian designed chamber. These diamonds are coloured in a yellow shade due to the impact the carbon has on the mixture of other ingredients. the laser test came back positive that this was a real diamond, however there are a couple of computer machines out now, Debeers uses them and they detect this is a synthetic diamon by the age it took to generate. They sell for between $3,000 and $4500 US but are worth apparently $16,000 US equal to that of a diamond with all the right "C''s".
Then theres that other company developing a clear diamond, for both industrial uses as a conduet and for jewelry. Must say they looked really nice.
Someone mentioned on the show that a real diamond is like giving a woman something that took forever make and lasts forever just like their love....ain''t that sweet.
But if you remove the emotional factor diamonds offer, could these new synthetics be a possible replacement for the real mccoy????
You could probably get more of the story from the 6o minutes webpage on the internet for tonights show
Wed. May 12
What are you all feeling about the new synthetics apart from including the emotional meaning of a diamond.
Jasita

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Please do a search and go read the 2000 posts on this beat up PR for synthetics.

I wonder if worked? Any one heard if Apollo have found the Venture Capitol they needed for computer chip research? Seems they still have trouble making the white stones (read as grey brown stones) colorless in the HPHT treatments they never bothereed to tell anyone about.

And as for Gemesis, you can buy HPHT treated natural colored diamonds for less than their synthetics, so why get all worked up and bothered by synthetics that have been around for 50 years?

 

[Judi W]

I saw the 60 Minutes piece on "Man-made" diamonds tonight as well. I think it's a repeat from some time ago, and it's true that there are numerous and lengthly past Pricescope threads on the subject. As for me.....I'll take the REAL THING any day, any time, any size!!

 

[Veronika]

Yup....I have bought synthetics before! Never again...they just don't cut it I can always tell that they are not real! Diamonds are truly in their own category!!!!

 

[elmo]

----------------
On 5/12/2004 10:00:58 PM jasita wrote:

Ok, so I was watching 60 minutes tonight and what caught my interest was a story about two companies in Florida. One is called Genesis in Sara Soda. The other is called Appollo (location unknown).
----------------

When you do the searches Garry suggests, enter them as 'gemesis' (with an m) and 'apollo'.

 

[jasita]

so what did you think of the show?

 

[Yupi]

I have not seen the show but read the following cover story last September.



http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/

 

[chialea]

----------------
On 5/12/2004 11:11:04 PM Veronika wrote:

Yup....I have bought synthetics before! Never again...they just don't cut it I can always tell that they are not real! Diamonds are truly in their own category!!!!----------------

But these are in fact diamonds. Real diamonds. Chemically composed the same way as the ones out of the ground. Look exactly the same. Durable exactly the same. Why would you want something that required so much misery to bring you joy if you have a chemically and mechanically idential alternative?

 

[purduephotog]

Nah, thats nowhere near as interesting as this:

http://cdac.ciw.edu/

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/99/20/12523

I contacted Apollo some time back for diamonds of type IIb configuration. They never responded; I've had better luck with researchers.

Large optical grade diamonds would be nice for certain laser applications...

 

[CaptAubrey]

apollo is still a ways from releasing their stones. the large majority of them are brown to brownish and need hpht treatment to become colorless. the jury is still out on whether they can make them cheaply enough to turn a profit. synthetic diamonds will find a niche in the market, but at prices well below that of naturals. gemesis stones are selling well, but are priced at a fraction of natural fancy yellows and oranges of equivalent color.




one thing to keep in mind: gemesis and apollo project to make about 15-20,000 carats per year at their current capacity. this is against 130 million carats per year being currently mined.

 

[10X]

I saw 60 minutes last night and I have to say that while I find the scientific aspect of synthetics to be quite intersting, I am far more intrigued by gems that take millions of years to form and travel hundreds of miles to the earths surface in a rare and spectacular event. For me, a flawless carbon copy (no pun intended) that pops out of a machine is just not as cool as something that takes eons to form and contains its own unique characteristics.

 

[purduephotog]

I think you are underestimating and trivializing what it takes to make a synthetic stone. Of course my background is Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, so I have an almost thirst for this sort of thing.

First the equipment, while 'cheap' now, wasn't always. That metal was mined and traveled thru the earth and was probably removed by machines that can 'scoop' a swimming pool in one dip. 180000 lbs of dirt per dip. Some of the largest and most impressive, awe inspiring pieces of equipment to roam the surface of the earth have sunk their teeth to find ore.

It was then forged and baked and then polished, using millions of watts of energy, to beat down the surfuce of the metal until it looks and behaves like glass (electropolishing). I won't get into the hundred years of technology that has gone into vacuum work, microwave work, or metal work here either.

Then several thousand graduate students (cheap labour of the non-mining sort) slaved over endless equations of state, probing at the very nature of how things line up- how itsy bitsy atoms would react to each other when we've never even seen them directly.

Finally, when it all comes together, you have a system that is in effect a 10 story tall 'pin' balanced on it's tip.

And then and only then can you remove a representation of a replicated carbon pattern the holds the key to future computing, future composite materials, future energy transmission, and possibly all of space itself.

I for one would pay dearly to hold that final epochal demonstration of technology and marvel at everything it represents- the past, the present, and the future (to borrow from DeBeers in an ironic twist).

When you say 'pop it out of the machine' I think you are refering to nano-tech replication. We aren't there yet, but MEMs (silicon based) is certainly getting there.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 5/13/2004 10:33:01 AM chialea wrote:

But these are in fact diamonds. Real diamonds. Chemically composed the same way...
----------------

No they are not... diamond hype includes the history of the stones, and the fame of famous diamonds (all natural) and, most importantly, the struggle of each individual get to the point of owning diamonds! As soon as some kind of diamonds may become cheap or widely available, all this fame becomes a curio - as in: "oh, these used to be that valuable?"

I am not sure if telling naturals from manufactured goods is a matter of aetetic, moral or just market control. Until present, market control seems to have some success, but will it work for diamonds ?

Cheap syntetics can break a gem. Did it happen? Sure. Ever saw one of those wonderful Faberge pieces made of diamonds and natural blue topaz? I seriously doubt that blue topaz will ever get that kind of lavish attention now that's been bought and sold by the ton. No market control worked there at all.

Amethyst is a lost cause - no one bothers to clearly identify top naturals from synthetic, since they're cheap anyway.

Pearls weathered the storm a bit better. It is unlikely that an entire clan will ever become famous because of the pearls they own more than for inventing a new industry (HW and the post)... However, prices are still up and the fame is there. Until China, market control meant that only the best cultured pearls see the market so that the perception of the product and the price do not get tarnished. Despite the growth in production, this still works.


Now, I would imagine you are just as enthusiastic about synthesized sapphire, ruby, spinel emerald, aquamarine... Some of the lab versions truly are close to nature. These are beautiful regardless of where they came, and better material should mean better jewelry. Right ?

One might hope that jewelers could take advantage of the beauty of synthetic gems to create value by workmanship - but somehow this good idea got lost. Cheap stones get the short side of that stick too: the best made pieces still contain naturals or naught, and the best cuts are done in cheap natural stones not inexpensive but stunning synthetics.

One could imagine that, once some industry learns how to make gem material, they could also create new gems: crystals unknown in nature but with gem-like properties and value. This also sounds good by logic alone ...,but nay. Remember the attempt by GE to market created diamonds at higher prices than naturals ? I do. Too bad they chose to compete with diamonds of all gems...

(Here’s - LINK - a funny account of GE’s marketing of their diamonds, btw…)

 

[Nicrez]

Just a brief aside...Why would you want to own a diamond if you could easily replicate it with a machine and human ingenuity? It's like trying to buy a Louis Voitton bag in the sea of all the fake ones. Same reason you bought it before. Status, luxury and liking.

A diamond is NOT just a fancy bag, though. It is a symbol, and thanks to DeBeers we have learned to truly equate it to love and committment. It has a history that is older than almost anything around us, and we treasure that history, that strength and beauty by spending so much on it every day. Millions of fiances are being created and they are (in the large majority) buying rings to propose with diamonds in them. More so than ever. Right hand hands as well, earrings, pendants, necklaces, even shoes!

Why? Because we have become a consumer nation that uses symbols and items to represent ourselves. Designers are quoted in rap songs, people wear T-Shirts emblazoned with labels, and pay highly for such labels. It's the mark of wealth, success, and fashion.

A diamond is part of that, but greater. We have made it an important symbol of commitment, marraige and love. Why would you dilute that with a synthetic? If I got a synthetic, would that lessen his love for me? Perhaps, it meant that we needed to have a certain thing to impress others, or that my fiance wouldn't make that important financial sacrifice so many men make to impress, woo and gift to their intendeds.

As I see it, if you didn't agree with spending so much on such a thing, I personally would not buy ANY diamond, and just get gemstones, or other types of jewelry. But to actually dilute and feign a luxury to give the image that I have "more" diamonds, or "bigger" diamonds, etc, to me that would just be as bad as a wearing a "Rollex", carrying a "Guchi" purse, in my "Goach" sneakers, in my "Ralf Lawren" T-shirt and "Calvin Kline" jeans. I would rather a REAL tatseful something else (no namebrand or luxury), than an imitation of the real thing.

This may not be a popular attitude, but frankly, I would rather have less and something of better quality than to make myself look like I have more or live beyond my means to impress anyone else.

A synthetic stone has no draw for me to wear or pass off as the real thing, (especially as an e-ring!!!) Although I LOVE collecting them to study and analyze or as! Others may think it real, and if I can't have the real thing, I sure don't want a fake! I'll know the difference, and to me, it's not needed to make myself feel better, it would just make me feel fake, or self-conscious that it's a fake.... Give me the REAL thing any day!

A synthetic is just that. It is NOT real. Real means made by the elements, by nature. Made by man is just that. It is synthetic. It did not take millions of years to form. Do I care, yes. Then what is the whole point of the mystery, romance and beauty of anything if we can recreate it in labs? Why even have children if we can grow them in testubes. Perhaps a bit far, but I believe in leaving a bit of nature still left open for appreciation....

Just my usual $.04...

 

[CaptAubrey]

----------------
On 5/14/2004 7:28:14 AM purduephotog wrote:











Finally, when it all comes together, you have a system that is in effect a 10 story tall 'pin' balanced on it's tip.

----------------

umm, maybe in the 1950s. nowadays, diamond synthesis equipment is a lot smaller and more sophisticated. gemesis stones come out of russian-designed presses that are about the size of a stand-up freezer. the cvd reactor that apollo uses is about the same size. whatever expertise your're drawing on here is about 20 years out of date.

 

[zeytoun]

There are differences in synthetic versus natural diamonds some people might find bothersome. Since they start the synthetic diamond growth with a seed plate, the grain structure is slightly different from natural diamonds, so synthetics often have strange graining often in octagonal shapes, and unusual flourescence,like weird green crosses.

And then, theres the trade off between having a yellow diamond (caused by nitrogen absorption) or unnatural looking flux inclusions.

 

[lclaxton]

I live in Oklahoma and desperately want a man made white diamond engagement ring for my girlfriend. The only ones I have found are the yellow ones you spoke about, CZ's or have a blueish tint. Any ideas for me? Thank you in advance for your help.

 

[oldminer]

lclaxton: I think a few colorless synthetic diamonds are now being sold by Chatham Created Gems through their netowrk of dealers. Maybe someone here knows who to ask. You could also look up Chatham. They must be on the Internet these days.


xxxxxxxxxx




On a more general note, we often grade large quantities of mass produced jewelry for various chain stores. The diamonds are H/I color and I1-I2 clarity types. Just imagine if, for similar or less money, these rather poor diamonds could be replaced with more sparkly diamonds of similar or better color and VS clarity that were synthetic. Most of the budget conscious clients of these chains would probably love the better looks. They don't buy diamonds for investment, but only as a gift. If they could save money or get a prettier product, they would accept synthetic diamonds with open arms. A few would rather have only natural diamonds, but I predict the masses will readily accept synthetic diamonds once they see the possibilities.




We have graded some diamonds for Gemesis and they are beautiful. The downside its they are not rare. Does it matter? Yes to some and no to others.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 10/27/2004 5:26:19 PM crankydave wrote:

As of last week (Chatam) have been unable to provide their resellers with colored goods over 3/8 of a carat.

----------------

Yeah... and there is an announcement (by Takara, who distributes Chatam diamonds) that the cutting of yellows is folding down. They say, this is happening in favor of future production of pink and blues - but I wonder

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 10/27/2004 6:44:50 PM crankydave wrote:

Yeah... Perhaps this is what Tom was thinking.

----------------

Sure (LINK) and this is just the beginning, they wish:

So much for the $5/ct cost for whites mentioned here and there...