Thoughts on blue sapphire

[MichaelB]

Hi all, just wanted to get some thoughts on this sapphire (for an ER). Thanks.

http://jefferydavies.com/inventory/product/409-mj015-sapphire-4-13ct

 

[LoversKites]

I don't see any glaring issues. Ask him how it holds colour in different lighting.

 

[ephsea]

The culet looks off center to me.

 

[LoversKites]

The culet looks off center to me.

It does, but so many larger stones have symmetry issues and if it doesn't negatively affect anything face up, its not a big deal. Jmo, of course.

 

[Acinom]

It looks promising from the photo's and video.
Perhaps you could ask him to snap some additional photo's in natural daylight for you.

 

[minousbijoux]

It is a very pretty stone, but I would ask Jeff for clarification on one aspect. Since it is listed as Heat Only, you need to ask how they have determined that it has not had more invasive treatments as well. If it were to have further treatments than just heat, the value would be considerably lower. I suggest this because I notice that according to the AIGS report, the only box checked for equipment used is the one for microscope. In many cases, LIBS or other sophisticated equipment is required to provide clarity on the issue of treatment.

 

[MichaelB]

Thanks for the feedback. I have requested more photos and info from Jeff. What do yall think about paying upwards of 9k for a heated stone (assume heat only)?

 

[T L]

Thanks for the feedback. I have requested more photos and info from Jeff. What do yall think about paying upwards of 9k for a heated stone (assume heat only)?

Was it LIBS tested by AIGS? Can they confirm heat without diffusion?

 

[eastjavaman]

Assuming minimal treatment with gorgeous color, eye clean, that thing looks almost loupe clean, absolutely no problem. The cert adds "cornflower blue" title which adds prestige of course.

 

[T L]

Assuming minimal treatment with gorgeous color, eye clean, that thing looks almost loupe clean, absolutely no problem. The cert adds "cornflower blue" title which adds prestige of course.

I don't pay attention to metaphors on lab reports.

 

[LoversKites]

It is a very pretty stone, but I would ask Jeff for clarification on one aspect. Since it is listed as Heat Only, you need to ask how they have determined that it has not had more invasive treatments as well. If it were to have further treatments than just heat, the value would be considerably lower. I suggest this because I notice that according to the AIGS report, the only box checked for equipment used is the one for microscope. In many cases, LIBS or other sophisticated equipment is required to provide clarity on the issue of treatment.

I always forget about additional potential treatment when a trusted report says 'heat'... Will try keep that in mind.

 

[Marlow]

Thanks for the feedback. I have requested more photos and info from Jeff. What do yall think about paying upwards of 9k for a heated stone (assume heat only)?

Was it LIBS tested by AIGS? Can they confirm heat without diffusion?

I think this report is not very good. Instead of a color describtion ( cornflower) nobody needs they should add WHY they think the stone ( large and valuable) is heat only after using only a microscope.

The stone is VVS - so maybe only a tiny negative crystal or mineral inclusion**.

If the inclusion shows no evidence for high heat how do they know the stone was heated with a lower temperature and is maybe unheated????

With this report I wouldn't buy such a large and expensive gem...


** lower heat for example will produce a disk like "crack" around a zircon - high heat ( you need for diffusion) will melt the zircon crystal.
But a melted zircon is NO EVIDENCE for diffusion - only for high heat. So you need additional tests this lab offers ( look at the report).

And selling a 4+ ct sapphire a vendor should be able to pay for additional tests.

 

[T L]

It is a very pretty stone, but I would ask Jeff for clarification on one aspect. Since it is listed as Heat Only, you need to ask how they have determined that it has not had more invasive treatments as well. If it were to have further treatments than just heat, the value would be considerably lower. I suggest this because I notice that according to the AIGS report, the only box checked for equipment used is the one for microscope. In many cases, LIBS or other sophisticated equipment is required to provide clarity on the issue of treatment.

I always forget about additional potential treatment when a trusted report says 'heat'... Will try keep that in mind.

So many diffused rubies and sapphires are sold with reports saying "heat," to unknowing customers, you particularly have to be careful with corundum.

I have an issue with AIGS and their reports for corundum after they skirted a question to whether my heated sapphire was tested for diffusion, so I have no confidence in them with corundum.

 

[minousbijoux]

It is a very pretty stone, but I would ask Jeff for clarification on one aspect. Since it is listed as Heat Only, you need to ask how they have determined that it has not had more invasive treatments as well. If it were to have further treatments than just heat, the value would be considerably lower. I suggest this because I notice that according to the AIGS report, the only box checked for equipment used is the one for microscope. In many cases, LIBS or other sophisticated equipment is required to provide clarity on the issue of treatment.

I always forget about additional potential treatment when a trusted report says 'heat'... Will try keep that in mind.

So many diffused rubies and sapphires are sold with reports saying "heat," to unknowing customers, you particularly have to be careful with corundum.

I have an issue with AIGS and their reports for corundum after they skirted a question to whether my heated sapphire was tested for diffusion, so I have no confidence in them with corundum.

Yes, but wasn't that several years ago before they had the proper equipment to test?

I brought the treatment issue up because there is a huge gap in assumption consumers make (and labs seem to propagate) about treatment - that is, if a report says "Heat" the consumer assumes no further treatment which is almost always not ascertainable unless there has been additional testing. So the better way to go is to assume diffusion/invasive treatment unless a lab proves otherwise.