Very Strong Fluorescence

[zz00ter]

I bought a 1.1c diamond with very strong fluorescence
I specifically wanted a glow in the dark diamond

I am disappointed - I was hoping it would be brighter
This image is with the diamond about 12 inches from the blacklight
When the diamond is about 36 inches from the light the glow is very faint.

This is the blacklight that I am using

 

[WillyDiamond]

I like it.
But you have to like it.
Can you return it?

 

[zz00ter]

It is not as cool as I expected
but for the price of $6,300 it is a keeper
Ritani has a good upgrade policy so maybe we upgrade later

I wonder if others can share pictures of their diamonds glowing in the dark

 

[yssie]

1. GIA grades fluor under short- & long-wave UV (250nm & 365nm). Most cheapy "blacklights" will have a range of emissions - if you want glow get thee to a tanning salon! Or, alternatively, some fluorescent tubes. I don't see the frequency rating on the bulb you bought? (Though, to be honest, I wouldn't really trust it anyway).

2. Did you have someone trusted verify that the GIA grade of VSB is as espected? I've got a handful of stones with absolutely bizarre GIA fluor grades so I've learnt not to take the grade on the report at face value...

3. Gotta ask... are you confident your expectations are realistic? 'Cause that thing is glowing pretty darn brightly in that pic

A quick Google search brought this up: http://www.gia.edu/gems-gemology/Summer-2013-luo-fluorescence


ETA: FWIW here's a pic of two of my stones - the smaller one has SBF according to the GIA, the larger one has no report but an appraiser I trust called it "medium-ish". Stones ~12" from my blacklight same as you took your pic.

 

[Heidibrooke]

I bought a 1.1c diamond with very strong fluorescence
I specifically wanted a glow in the dark diamond

I am disappointed - I was hoping it would be brighter
This image is with the diamond about 12 inches from the blacklight
When the diamond is about 36 inches from the light the glow is very faint.

This is the blacklight that I am using

That's an awesome pic! I love fluorescence too!

 

[Heidibrooke]

This is not the diamond I ended up choosing but I loved its fluorescence. It was very strong blue, GIA graded. The third pic is the diamond I chose. It's only faint blue.

 

[leoshraeder]

Cool pictures

 

[IE_Princess]

Mine has medium fluor (not GIA graded, appraised by David Atlas). The difference between the raw image and the JPG is significant (same shot, camera shoots two images, first JPG, second RAW, although both are labeled here as JPG probably because of uploading them to the site). Taken with a macro lens in a dark room using a tripod.

 

[yssie]

Wow, IE_Princess that is a startling difference!
Which is the compressed one?

 

[IE_Princess]

Wow, IE_Princess that is a startling difference!
Which is the compressed one?

The second image is the raw, uncompressed image. Here is another set, first is JPG, second is RAW.

 

[yssie]

This is very interesting - thank you for posting! My Canon P&S allows RAW but I usually take the easy route and let it store JPEGs to save on space and speed things up, but I'm going to have to reconsider - especially for non-action shots. I don't recall ever seeing such a marked difference but now I'm wondering how many I might have missed!

 

[kenny]

If your camera can do it, shooting in RAW mode is better.
RAW files can capture a much wider range from dark to bright, and much more detail/resolution/sharpness.
This is because RAW files are not compressed, which is why the RAW files are huge.

When manipulating the pic on the computer in programs like Photoshop or iPhoto I experience a HUGE difference between RAW and jpeg.
With jpeg there is very little detail in the shadows available for recovering, same problem with the highlights.

In the above examples the ones originally taken in jpeg have washed-out highlights; the RAW ones have better detail in the highlights.

Yes, PS won't accept RAW files so you have to convert them to jpeg or PNG (which is better than jpeg).
When RAW is converted to jpeg much of the wonderful detail in the highlights and shadows is retained compared to pics originally shot in jpeg.

Some subjects, often diamonds, have a huge dynamic range from very dark to very bright.
With subjects with a more narrow dynamic range you won't notice as much improvement using RAW mode.

Even if your camera does not have the RAW mode it probably lets you choose low, medium and high-quality jpeg modes.
Pick the highest one.