Would you buy this spinel?

[chrono]

I''m looking at a VERY well priced pink spinel:
2.99 ct Burmese spinel
Medium dark purple pink colour
9 mm
Looks to be well cut and brilliant

BUT it has an inclusion on one corner of the stone. I''m thinking this can be hidden by a prong. However, I''m not used to inclusions in my gemstones. I KNOW it can be hidden but I''m sort of in the mind clean camp too. I know lots of people do this with their diamonds but diamonds are super duper expensive and this is a pretty cheap stone. So, should I get it or not?

 

[Harriet]

It might be my screen, but I'm seeing a sizable inclusion.

 

[chrono]

Harriet,
Yes, it is quite a good sized inclusion and this picture was taken at its worst angle to highlight the inclusion. So, are you saying you would pass up on this spinel?

 

[Lorelei]

You know Chrono, if you could get a better pic as I too am seeing a large inclusion at about 5 o'' clock, I would consider buying it as I really like the pretty rose pink colour ( as it looks on my monitor anyway).

 

[Harriet]

Date: 9/14/2007 9:59:33 AM
Author: Chrono
Harriet,
Yes, it is quite a good sized inclusion and this picture was taken at its worst angle to highlight the inclusion. So, are you saying you would pass up on this spinel?

Not necessarily. Only if I can see the inclusion without a loupe.

 

[chrono]

Well, lets describe the inclusion this way: can be seen with the naked eye but only at certain angles and it can also be partially hidden by a prong. The inclusion is an internal fracture that comes no more than 1/3 into the stone at its maximum.

So, Harriet and Lorelei (and anyone else who's reading this) - would you still consider buying this stone?

 

[Harriet]

I''d pass.

 

[Clio]

I''d probably pass, too. I''d want to see it in person, though, just to make sure. The super-magnified pictures can highlight something that really isn''t such a big deal.

 

[Green with Envy]

I would pass, too. a better one will come along- and if you buy this one- you will probably still want the next one without any inclusions as well.

 

[Richard M.]

Date: 9/14/2007 9:41:24 AM
Author:Chrono
BUT it has an inclusion on one corner of the stone. I''m thinking this can be hidden by a prong. However, I''m not used to inclusions in my gemstones.

Have you actually seen the stone or are you judging from a greatly magnified image? Is the stone described as eye clean? Often, inclusions that seem very obvious in blown-up images are trivial or not even visible to the naked eye. I''m not saying that applies to this particular stone, but it''s something to consider.

Colored gems are not diamonds, and aren''t judged by the same clarity standards. GIA has set 3 clarity "tiers" for colored stones. Type I stones (aquamarine, for instance) can be expected to be at least eye clean; Type II gems typically grow in nature with some minor inclusions that may be eye-visible in cut gems; Type III gems usually grow in nature with many inclusions (think emerald) and inclusions are eye-visible.

Pink spinel is a GIA Type II gem, and even stones with "Minor inclusions somewhat easy to see with the unaided eye" are classified as "Fine" in clarity under the most commonly used grading system.

I''m not trying to influence your decision in any way: that''s personal. But judging color by diamond "rules" is just wrong, and can deprive consumers of much pleasure (and many great bargains!)


Richard M.

 

[chrono]

Date: 9/14/2007 10:36:25 AM
Author: Green with Envy
I would pass, too. a better one will come along- and if you buy this one- you will probably still want the next one without any inclusions as well.

You know me too well.

 

[chrono]

Date: 9/14/2007 10:36:57 AM
Author: Richard M.

Date: 9/14/2007 9:41:24 AM
Author:Chrono
BUT it has an inclusion on one corner of the stone. I''m thinking this can be hidden by a prong. However, I''m not used to inclusions in my gemstones.

Have you actually seen the stone or are you judging from a greatly magnified image?
Nope, haven''t seen it in person. I''m basing my judgement on a magnified picture and in emails with the vendor. This stone is so cheap that it''s not worth the hassle of shipping back and forth. That''s how good a deal it is. This stone is going for less than $200!

Is the stone described as eye clean? Often, inclusions that seem very obvious in blown-up images are trivial or not even visible to the naked eye. I''m not saying that applies to this particular stone, but it''s something to consider.
This stone is described as slightly included by the vendor. His description of slightly included is the inclusion is visible with some effort. The inclusion has a minor effect on its appearance and no durablity concerns.
Colored gems are not diamonds, and aren''t judged by the same clarity standards. GIA has set 3 clarity ''tiers'' for colored stones. Type I stones (aquamarine, for instance) can be expected to be at least eye clean; Type II gems typically grow in nature with some minor inclusions that may be eye-visible in cut gems; Type III gems usually grow in nature with many inclusions (think emerald) and inclusions are eye-visible.

Pink spinel is a GIA Type II gem, and even stones with ''Minor inclusions somewhat easy to see with the unaided eye'' are classified as ''Fine'' in clarity under the most commonly used grading system.

I''m not trying to influence your decision in any way: that''s personal. But judging color by diamond ''rules'' is just wrong, and can deprive consumers of much pleasure (and many great bargains!)


Richard M.

Richard,
I appreciate your input. I enjoy learning more about gemstones from the true experts. I know this stone is a great bargain but I''m having trouble with my mind in accepting the inclusion.

 

[simplysplendid]

Hi Chrono, I don''t mind the inclusion, just not a big fan of the colour.. I won''t know what to do with this spinel ..

 

[colormyworld]

Like simplysplendid I am not to crazy about the color. This is just my opinion for what it is worth. I would rather save my money for a really saturated color with a a nice hue. But that is just me.

 

[chrono]

Thanks all! Thanks for putting some sense back into my brain. I''m going to pass on it because I just can''t get over the inclusion. The colour is also nice but a brighter one would be MUCH better.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/14/2007 3:47:30 PM
Author: Chrono
Thanks all! Thanks for putting some sense back into my brain. I''m going to pass on it because I just can''t get over the inclusion. The colour is also nice but a brighter one would be MUCH better.

lol reading down this thread knew ya was going too pass on it!
I would have also.
If an inclusion is visible to me it has too be kewl looking and that one isnt.