headlight
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2003
- Messages
- 3,304
Hello, PSers!
So here's another "conversation" I'd love to have with you... regarding GIA 3X.
I think it has been well-documented here the issues with regard to 3X parameters/allowances.
I purchased a 3X thinking that it must be a well-made diamond... "AFTER ALL", GIA is known globally for it's consistent, solid, and well-respected grading of color and clarity. So, it would seem to follow suit that if this highly respected, standard-setting independent gemological laboratory assigns a cut grade of not only Excellent, but TRIPLE Excellent, you've got yourself a fine stone there!
Am I the only one who feels misled, perhaps even "duped"? I feel it is totally irresponsible.
I think it is totally legit that over time revisions may have to be made. Of course, this opens a Pandora's box! If they tighten the parameters for a cut grade of Excellent, a lot of stones (including mine!) would go down a rung. I know that AGS made a revision resulting in previously graded 0s becoming 1s. I'm sure those people weren't happy, but it is my understanding that an AGS1 is still finer than a good majority of GIA EX (doesn't help the people who went from 0 to 1, but hopefully you get my point). Doing a revision of the cut grades and re-grading of previously graded stones could be a total disaster for GIA (and perhaps that is why one hasn't been done??). I am sure I am not the only one who would have a serious complaint if I found out that the value of my stone (be that what it is at this point) was further degraded (with that said, I think the 3X grade of my stone isn't worth the paper it is written on as clearly it is a false sense of what my stone is). Clearly I'm already pretty disillusioned over that fact that what I thought was "excellent" and considered amongst "the best" from the lab that is the most "highly respected", blah blah blah. (I say this in the context that most people know GIA, that AGS just isn't as well known by the masses clearly due to its exclusivity.)
It's funny because as I read this back to myself, I feel like I'm talking about someone who purchased a stone graded by EGL-Israel, thinking it was on-par with a GIA report! Many of you will know what I am talking about. Sadly, for me, I previously HAD one of those EGL-Israel diamonds and thought THIS TIME I was "getting it right" by making sure my stone was GIA-graded. Talk about feeling doubly-duped
Another thing is that I've read in a few places something to the effect that there is a "relationship" of sorts between GIA and the cutters that are fashioning the stones that are so often rejected here on PS. If this is true, that implies (to me, at least) that GIA is not impartial, as they so highly tout themselves to be. It is like there is a vested interest, of sorts, between this "flawed" cutting and the "granting" of a cut grade of Ex. If so, that definitely negates the term "independent" in independent laboratory.
What are your thoughts? Think of this as us going to lunch and having a conversation (except you are buying your own lunch lol!). I feel badly that I am having these thoughts about GIA, but after learning what I have here as well as other places online, I am really at a loss as to how to reconcile this in my mind.
Really interested in your perspectives, as well as getting more accurate info with regard to anything I have stated that may be incorrect.
So here's another "conversation" I'd love to have with you... regarding GIA 3X.
I think it has been well-documented here the issues with regard to 3X parameters/allowances.
I purchased a 3X thinking that it must be a well-made diamond... "AFTER ALL", GIA is known globally for it's consistent, solid, and well-respected grading of color and clarity. So, it would seem to follow suit that if this highly respected, standard-setting independent gemological laboratory assigns a cut grade of not only Excellent, but TRIPLE Excellent, you've got yourself a fine stone there!
Am I the only one who feels misled, perhaps even "duped"? I feel it is totally irresponsible.
I think it is totally legit that over time revisions may have to be made. Of course, this opens a Pandora's box! If they tighten the parameters for a cut grade of Excellent, a lot of stones (including mine!) would go down a rung. I know that AGS made a revision resulting in previously graded 0s becoming 1s. I'm sure those people weren't happy, but it is my understanding that an AGS1 is still finer than a good majority of GIA EX (doesn't help the people who went from 0 to 1, but hopefully you get my point). Doing a revision of the cut grades and re-grading of previously graded stones could be a total disaster for GIA (and perhaps that is why one hasn't been done??). I am sure I am not the only one who would have a serious complaint if I found out that the value of my stone (be that what it is at this point) was further degraded (with that said, I think the 3X grade of my stone isn't worth the paper it is written on as clearly it is a false sense of what my stone is). Clearly I'm already pretty disillusioned over that fact that what I thought was "excellent" and considered amongst "the best" from the lab that is the most "highly respected", blah blah blah. (I say this in the context that most people know GIA, that AGS just isn't as well known by the masses clearly due to its exclusivity.)
It's funny because as I read this back to myself, I feel like I'm talking about someone who purchased a stone graded by EGL-Israel, thinking it was on-par with a GIA report! Many of you will know what I am talking about. Sadly, for me, I previously HAD one of those EGL-Israel diamonds and thought THIS TIME I was "getting it right" by making sure my stone was GIA-graded. Talk about feeling doubly-duped
Another thing is that I've read in a few places something to the effect that there is a "relationship" of sorts between GIA and the cutters that are fashioning the stones that are so often rejected here on PS. If this is true, that implies (to me, at least) that GIA is not impartial, as they so highly tout themselves to be. It is like there is a vested interest, of sorts, between this "flawed" cutting and the "granting" of a cut grade of Ex. If so, that definitely negates the term "independent" in independent laboratory.
What are your thoughts? Think of this as us going to lunch and having a conversation (except you are buying your own lunch lol!). I feel badly that I am having these thoughts about GIA, but after learning what I have here as well as other places online, I am really at a loss as to how to reconcile this in my mind.
Really interested in your perspectives, as well as getting more accurate info with regard to anything I have stated that may be incorrect.