AGS less strict on colour?

[Texas Leaguer]

THIS. Not everyone prefers yellow.



So would it be a map or an average score?

Not a map. Probably some type of rating, most likely along their normal ex, vg, g, f, p
system. It would be nice to see a score, but I would not expect that. And even though their excellent score will likely be broad, like the cut grade it will be meaningful, and a big improvement for the consumer.

 

[yssie]

Assuming AGS were able to match GIA for colour would they do it?

Or,

Would they lose the vendors who rely on them to go soft on colour?

You seem to be looking for ill-intent that just isn’t there. No vendor is “relying on AGS to grade soft”. If they were then why would they choose a lab with a 60% GIA match rate, according to your own evaluation?
AGS is trying to maintain parity with GIA. And they’re doing better than anyone else but they’re not doing superbly. There are lots of reasons for that, but an agenda of helping unscrupulous vendors hawk inferior goods isn’t one of them. In fact, given the way colour grading is done, based on qualitative human evaluation, it’s not surprising - it’s the grading system that needs to change. Like I said, there are no skeletons in this closet. For real.
There are a ton of older threads on this same topic, you might find some of them interesting. Definitely not the first time the colour grading system has been chewed up here on PS.

Edited about six times* To answer the initial question posed by the thread title - I, as a consumer (a longtime consumer with zero trade experience) do believe that AGS grades soft on colour compared to GIA often enough that I don’t mentally equate an AGS colour grade with a GIA colour grade. So that means that if I want the GIA colour grade I need to go get the GIA colour grade. I do NOT believe this is deliberate on AGS’ part and I also don’t believe it’s “fixable” without changing the whole colour grading system.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Assuming AGS were able to match GIA for colour would they do it?

Or,

Would they lose the vendors who rely on them to go soft on colour?

In our operation we deal in both GIA and AGS graded diamonds. I understand some of your questions naturally derive from the assumption that AGS is soft on color, but I do not believe that assumption to be valid. Vendors do not "rely on them to go soft" on anything. They rely on them to do competent, consistent grading and to provide much more rigorous cut analysis than GIA.

Color grading is still ultimately a human grading call, based upon determination of very small ranges. It is therefore inherent that borderline calls can vary +_ one grade by the best graders in the best labs.

Anectdotal evidence is frequently brought forward as "evidence" of color grading bias, but I have seen enough over the years to understand that it is a reflection of the nature of color grading, more than any bias. Even an individual dealer's inventory is way too small a sample size to proclaim rumored bias to be factual, particularly since such diamonds do not comprise a random sampling.

If GIA did not have the (well deserved) worldwide reputation it has, and if the market did not have great faith in them, people might look at the two lab results differing by a grade and conclude that it is a borderline case, such as the example to start this thread of the stone that AGS graded VS1 and GIA graded VVS2. But they would not generalize that result to the overall grading accuracy of either lab.

 

[max1111]

You seem to be looking for ill-intent that just isn’t there. No vendor is “relying on AGS to grade soft”. If they were then why would they choose a lab with a 60% GIA match rate, according to your own evaluation?

It's just human nature. It exists in literally every sphere of life where companies serve two masters. The diamond industry might be the one exception but it would be an extreme anomaly if that was the case.

In this case I imagine it's lab shopping. Whichever lab gives the most profitable result is the one they run with. If you have a borderline colour ideal cut stone you send it to AGS with the expectation it'll grade a colour higher with 0% chance it'll grade lower. I mean why would you not do that?

AGS is trying to maintain parity with GIA. And they’re doing better than anyone else but they’re not doing superbly. There are lots of reasons for that, but an agenda of helping unscrupulous vendors hawk inferior goods isn’t one of them.

That's being extreme. It's more like media reviews of advertisers products. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. Unless you've got another way to explain the 40% variation in one direction only.

There are a ton of older threads on this same topic, you might find some of them interesting. Definitely not the first time the colour grading system has been chewed up here on PS.

Yep been reading through them. None really have any explanation for the HPD results.

 

[yssie]

In this case I imagine it's lab shopping. Whichever lab gives the most profitable result is the one they run with. If you have a borderline colour ideal cut stone you send it to AGS with the expectation it'll grade a colour higher with 0% chance it'll grade lower. I mean why would you not do that?

That’s what used to be rampant with EGL.

But vendors who submit to AGS tend to be a niche group, and they’re targetting AGS for the cut grade (and AGS’ cut grading reputation) specifically. Vendors aren’t lab shopping between AGS and GIA for the most favourable colour/clarity.

How do I state that with such confidence - well, when was the last time you ran into an AGS Gold report The vast majority of AGS reports out there are the DQD, and the vast majority of those with the light performance CG.

 

[max1111]

In our operation we deal in both GIA and AGS graded diamonds. I understand some of your questions naturally derive from the assumption that AGS is soft on color, but I do not believe that assumption to be valid. Vendors do not "rely on them to go soft" on anything. They rely on them to do competent, consistent grading and to provide much more rigorous cut analysis than GIA.

Color grading is still ultimately a human grading call, based upon determination of very small ranges. It is therefore inherent that borderline calls can vary +_ one grade by the best graders in the best labs.

Anectdotal evidence is frequently brought forward as "evidence" of color grading bias, but I have seen enough over the years to understand that it is a reflection of the nature of color grading, more than any bias. Even an individual dealer's inventory is way too small a sample size to proclaim rumored bias to be factual, particularly since such diamonds do not comprise a random sampling.

Hi Bryan, how many stones do you have with dual certs?

I appreciate the +_ one grade variation but when it only goes in one direction I think we need a better theory to explain it. 66 stones is a significant sample size given there are only about 600 AGS stones total on the PS search engine.

There should have been a few graded lower unless CBI sifted the ones that graded lower..

 

[Rockdiamond]

GIA’s not going to do that. GIA’s not even going to entertain the idea

Although GIA won't work together with cutters in the way AGSL will, there's still a way to get your brand on a GIA report
We had been "branding" diamonds about 9 years ago.
GIA uploaded our logo and laser engraved it on the diamond- meaning it also appeared on the reports.
Not really comparable to AGSL branding but better then nothing...

 

[Texas Leaguer]

@max1111 ,
Over the years, I have been involved in submitting thousands of diamonds for laboratory grading to GIA and to AGSL.

There are obvious reasons why vendors do not send diamonds to multiple labs. It adds cost, internal resources in handling, and time to market. It can also add to customer confusion when there are differences. But we are always willing to do so for customers who request it. So I have that experience to judge from as well.

 

[Karl_K]

I also don’t believe it’s “fixable” without changing the whole colour grading system.

I agree with you there.
The grading system itself is a huge part of the problem.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I agree with you there.
The grading system itself is a huge part of the problem.

Alas, we are stuck in the times we are born into. If only we lived in an age of universally agreed upon diamond analysis!

 

[yssie]

Alas, we are stuck in the times we are born into. If only we lived in an age of universally agreed upon diamond analysis!

I just have to say that the diamond industry is generations ahead of the pearls industry. Going down the pearls rabbit hole has made me really appreciate just how much of your sh*t y'all diamond people have together now, in 2022. The fact that there is even a ubiquitously-accepted colour grading system to armchair diagnose...

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Just wanted to share the gradings given on a few super ideal stones I've been offered. Obviously it's a very small sample size but has given me pause for thought.


1.24ct, Round brilliant Ideal cut diamond.
GIA- I in colour VS1 in clarity
AGS- H in colour VS1 in clarity
Gcal- H in colour VS1 in clarity


1.07ct, Round brilliant Ideal cut diamond.
GIA- G in colour VVS2 in clarity
AGS- F in colour VS1 in clarity
Gcal- G in colour VS1 in clarity


1.19ct Round brilliant Ideal cut diamond
GIA- E in colour VS2 in clarity
AGS- E in colour VS2 in clarity
Gcal- E in colour VS2 in clarity

Just saw this thread. I am very curious what jeweler is currently selling triple graded stones? That would inevitably add to the cost.

My personal choice is that I buy superideal cuts that are generally only graded by AGS. When I buy, I have Whiteflash line up a few stones and I choose the higher to mid color stones in the line up (and I'd do that with GIA stones if I were looking at those!). I have found my WF sales associates to be 100% honest in that regard. Because I have bought multiple superideal cut diamonds, I feel that I have been safe in getting stones that would be graded the same in AGS and GIA. WF has had the best selection of stones for years as well as a generous upgrade policy that I have used multiple times. They also have almost always had the best pricing on superideal cuts. So for me, I still think that's the best option.

 

[yssie]

Just saw this thread. I am very curious what jeweler is currently selling triple graded stones? That would inevitably add to the cost.

My personal choice is that I buy superideal cuts that are generally only graded by AGS. When I buy, I have Whiteflash line up a few stones and I choose the higher to mid color stones in the line up (and I'd do that with GIA stones if I were looking at those!). I have found my WF sales associates to be 100% honest in that regard. Because I have bought multiple superideal cut diamonds, I feel that I have been safe in getting stones that would be graded the same in AGS and GIA. WF has had the best selection of stones for years as well as a generous upgrade policy that I have used multiple times. They also have almost always had the best pricing on superideal cuts. So for me, I still think that's the best option.

Agree with all of this (and disclosure: I am also a longtime WF customer).

In addition to the question of where those initial three triple-graded stones are from - I would also like to know the dates each of the reports was issued, and each stone’s fluorescence grade from each lab.

 

[oncrutchesrightnow]

Not a map. Probably some type of rating, most likely along their normal ex, vg, g, f, p
system. It would be nice to see a score, but I would not expect that. And even though their excellent score will likely be broad, like the cut grade it will be meaningful, and a big improvement for the consumer.

Thanks… I was thinking about clouds.

 

[max1111]

Agree with all of this (and disclosure: I am also a longtime WF customer).

In addition to the question of where those initial three triple-graded stones are from - I would also like to know the dates each of the reports was issued, and each stone’s fluorescence grade from each lab.

They are from a EU based retailer. I've asker her to reach out to their supplier regarding AGS/GIA colour differences so hopefully we'll have an answer from the horses mouth..

 

[max1111]

@max1111 ,
Over the years, I have been involved in submitting thousands of diamonds for laboratory grading to GIA and to AGSL.

There are obvious reasons why vendors do not send diamonds to multiple labs. It adds cost, internal resources in handling, and time to market. It can also add to customer confusion when there are differences. But we are always willing to do so for customers who request it. So I have that experience to judge from as well.

Thanks, I think what we really need to see is dual graded stones otherwise we're back on shaky ground.

I'm willing to accept there may be an external factor skewing CBI stones but no one has put a theory forward that would explain this or any other data that points to the contrary. These are the only stones that come out of the door with both certs and it points to soft(er) colour grading.

 

[MissGotRocks]

When you buy an AGS or GIA diamond from a vendor, you can also request that it be sent to the other lab - at your expense of course. I am assuming you would be buying at their listed price and that there would be no money refunded if it came back a lower grade or no money charged to you if it came back at a higher grade. Just make sure you are buying said diamond from a vendor with a great return policy - and check the time frame of that policy. I am pretty sure that HPD sold diamonds based on one cert or the other and the price was not negotiable.
The ins and outs have been well explained and while well regarded diamond vendors try to be as transparent as possible, they can’t cover every nuance. If you buy a GIA 3x diamond and it turns out to be less than stellar cut wise (which many of them are) you probably overpaid for that diamond as well. Personally, I am far more interested in ideal cut over a +/- 1 color grade in a diamond. Cut trumps color for me every time and you will also pay for that level of diamond cutting.
My best advice is to find a vendor you trust to work with and take it from there. I honestly believe that well regarded and documented vendors are not trying to be as slippery as you make them seem. Go to some of the booths in the diamond district in NYC - you will see the difference in approach and attitude!

 

[yssie]

When you buy an AGS or GIA diamond from a vendor, you can also request that it be sent to the other lab - at your expense of course. I am assuming you would be buying at their listed price and that there would be no money refunded if it came back a lower grade or no money charged to you if it came back at a higher grade. Just make sure you are buying said diamond from a vendor with a great return policy - and check the time frame of that policy. I am pretty sure that HPD sold diamonds based on one cert or the other and the price was not negotiable.
The ins and outs have been well explained and while well regarded diamond vendors try to be as transparent as possible, they can’t cover every nuance. If you buy a GIA 3x diamond and it turns out to be less than stellar cut wise (which many of them are) you probably overpaid for that diamond as well. Personally, I am far more interested in ideal cut over a +/- 1 color grade in a diamond. Cut trumps color for me every time and you will also pay for that level of diamond cutting.
My best advice is to find a vendor you trust to work with and take it from there. I honestly believe that well regarded and documented vendors are not trying to be as slippery as you make them seem. Go to some of the booths in the diamond district in NYC - you will see the difference in approach and attitude!

^ +100

 

[max1111]

I am pretty sure that HPD sold diamonds based on one cert or the other and the price was not negotiable.

I believe they based it on GIA at least for colour given it is the industry standard.

The ins and outs have been well explained and while well regarded diamond vendors try to be as transparent as possible, they can’t cover every nuance. If you buy a GIA 3x diamond and it turns out to be less than stellar cut wise (which many of them are) you probably overpaid for that diamond as well. Personally, I am far more interested in ideal cut over a +/- 1 color grade in a diamond. Cut trumps color for me every time and you will also pay for that level of diamond cutting.

Here's the thing though it's a bit more than a small nuance. The cost of a GIA cert is negligible once you get to the carat mark.

 

[MissGotRocks]

I believe they based it on GIA at least for colour given it is the industry standard.



Here's the thing though it's a bit more than a small nuance. The cost of a GIA cert is negligible once you get to the carat mark.

I think at least one of the vendors has explained their reasoning for not doing it and I honestly don’t know of another that dual certs either. I am sure the cost of doing so would be added to the purchase price and it seems pretty clear that none of them are going to send for two certs. The good news is that you can ask for it to be done even if it is at your expense. GIA used to list their prices on their website.

 

[DejaWiz]

GIA used to list their prices on their website.

They still do

Fee Schedules

A list of fees by service in 7 currencies.

www.gia.edu

 

[max1111]

I think at least one of the vendors has explained their reasoning for not doing it and I honestly don’t know of another that dual certs either. I am sure the cost of doing so would be added to the purchase price and it seems pretty clear that none of them are going to send for two certs. The good news is that you can ask for it to be done even if it is at your expense. GIA used to list their prices on their website.

Yeah to be honest I've spent hours comparing stones and the more I look the more it's confirmed that I need to buy a grade higher if I go with AGS. I'm at peace with it now

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I believe they based it on GIA at least for colour given it is the industry standard.



Here's the thing though it's a bit more than a small nuance. The cost of a GIA cert is negligible once you get to the carat mark.

It's the report cost plus insured shipping both ways. So depending on the value of the diamond, it could be a few hundred dollars. You don't need to buy a grade higher with AGS as long as you go with a stone that is in the mid to high range of the color grade, as I think I said earlier.

 

[oldminer]

Assuming AGS were able to match GIA for colour would they do it?

Or,

Would they lose the vendors who rely on them to go soft on colour?

Unfortunately, GIA nor AGSL cannot duplicate their own results 100%. Trying to get any different lab to equal GIA results is not possible under the current color grading methodology, machine, human, or both. Color grading to be truly repeatable and reliable would have to be a scientific exercise re-invented, taking into account both the inherent body color of the diamond material as well as the face-up appearance of the faceted diamond. This would be fairly easy on near colorless diamonds, but you can see how complex this would become as stones get increasingly tinted. Using such a newly created approach, every diamond would be color graded exactly in the same way, but this would be very different from the way nearly colorless and fancy color diamonds are graded for the past 80 years or more. The trade would be completely in an uproar. What a mess it would make of inventories.

Lots of tradition and existing paperwork would make such a large transition totally unpalatable to the customers of grading reports, dealers especially.

While what we have today is not a perfect system, what we have works quite well. I'd love to see a better system created, but any implementation of it would be highly controversial. Maybe the Lab Created community might opt for such a system due to their technological orientation, but the Mined community might be a lot more content with the status quo. I'm happy not to be in a position to make such a decision to rock the boat so hard. I remain truly interested in innovation and progress where it will do some good.

 

[max1111]

Unfortunately, GIA nor AGSL cannot duplicate their own results 100%. Trying to get any different lab to equal GIA results is not possible under the current color grading methodology, machine, human, or both. Color grading to be truly repeatable and reliable would have to be a scientific exercise re-invented, taking into account both the inherent body color of the diamond material as well as the face-up appearance of the faceted diamond. This would be fairly easy on near colorless diamonds, but you can see how complex this would become as stones get increasingly tinted. Using such a newly created approach, every diamond would be color graded exactly in the same way, but this would be very different from the way nearly colorless and fancy color diamonds are graded for the past 80 years or more. The trade would be completely in an uproar. What a mess it would make of inventories.

Lots of tradition and existing paperwork would make such a large transition totally unpalatable to the customers of grading reports, dealers especially.

While what we have today is not a perfect system, what we have works quite well. I'd love to see a better system created, but any implementation of it would be highly controversial. Maybe the Lab Created community might opt for such a system due to their technological orientation, but the Mined community might be a lot more content with the status quo. I'm happy not to be in a position to make such a decision to rock the boat so hard. I remain truly interested in innovation and progress where it will do some good.

Hey David,

That it is not 100% at the same lab doesn't mean it is generally inaccurate though. I suspect it's much, much higher for colour than people think otherwise stones would be getting sent back 7/8 times in a row. Re-checks are so cheap they are profitable even in if accuracy is in the high 90s but I doubt those happen for every stone either. Maybe I'm totally wrong here and stones are getting re-graded many times in a row?


Considering GIA are already using colorimeters on round diamonds which seems to be the vast majority of AGSL stones and the most popular cut in general by far, it sounds like to me we are already at a point where the accuracy of colour, at least at a single lab, will be very high.

Now between labs the variance is clearly part of the reason certain labs are chosen over others.

A little out of context but underscores a point I was trying to make earlier. From @denverappraiser

"The pedigree of the lab is not what makes one stone more or less lovely than another. The lab client was the dealer or the cutter and the reason they bought the report was to help them sell their stone better. The usual reason consumers insist on it to maximize the chances that they will get what they expect with their purchase. These are all fine reasons, but they are not entirely aligned. As I’m sure you know, all SI1’s are not the same.

---

The path of a stone from the mine to you was not chosen randomly and it wasn’t chosen by you. This choice is being made by some clever people who are working on razor thin profit margins that can vary considerably depending on the results. If they think they can make more money with that particular stone by sending it to a different lab and using a different retailer, there’s a pretty good chance that this is what they’ll do."


Now from my perspective all this circumstantial evidence - The entire CBI inventory, every picture comparing GIA vs AGS stones in the same setting I could find, posts here about re-graded stones, the fact it's a $79billion dollar industry etc. There is a point where you have to call a spade a spade.

The simple answer IMO is that the market is quite efficient and the best result is that you just about get what you pay for.

 

[DejaWiz]

max1111, what is your end-game, here?
It clearly seems to be that you have a problem about color grading with all labs that are not GIA.
I think that you are hyper-analyzing the situation, but doing so with a bit of a two-dimensional approach instead of considering all the differing factors involved when color grading a diamond: the shape of the diamond, the differing proportions, differing environments, minor differing lab lighting variances (that can occur even within the same grading lab entity across multiple locations or even different rooms within the same location), the different people grading and the people concurring, the differing calibrations for any measuring equipment used, the different saturation of tint, the differing color of the tint, the differing absorption rates, and possibly the differing overall methodology of grading to avoid potential infringements and lawsuits between labs.

If you want to see examples of tiny variances for the same lab, then head over to a site that has very consistent photography, such as James Allen.
Narrow down the filters as you wish, limit it to a single color grade and single grading lab, then use the side view option:



GIA F grade:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com | Page 2

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond. | Page 2

www.jamesallen.com

GIA G grade:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond.

www.jamesallen.com

GIA H grade:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com | Page 3

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond. | Page 3

www.jamesallen.com

GIA I grade:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond.

www.jamesallen.com

GIA J grade:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com | Page 3

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond. | Page 3

www.jamesallen.com

GIA K grade:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond.

www.jamesallen.com

My point is this: the key to successfully buying a well cut and performing diamond is to be sufficiently informed and utilize any and all resources available in order to ensure that what is being bought is satisfactory to the buyer, because that is always between the buyer and their own wallet to determine if the diamond that they are purchasing with the pedigree that is attached to it is acceptable for the price being paid, regardless of the grading lab gracing the grading report.

One further point is that each lab likely KNOWS quite well that there will be slight variances within their own ranks of expert graders, because they took what seemingly is a tighter 23 grade scale of D through Z applied to an infinite range of tint, then further simplified it into a subgrouped scale of five:
Colorless (D-F)
Near Colorless (G-J)
Faint (K-M)
Very Light (N-R)
Light (S-Z)
Why? Because most humans can't discern between one or two adjacent color grades, especially without some kind of consensually accurate reference point to compare with.



Now what if a diamond falls near the line between F and G, or H and I, or J and K? There is no human or machine that is going to make a consistent call 100% of the time that 100% of people are going to agree with: they have to make the best judgement call that they can within their experience and capabilities, but it's still based on opinion.

Quite simply: if someone doesn't like any aspect of a particular grading lab, then merely avoid buying a diamond that was graded by that lab...there are plenty of diamonds available all over the planet to fit every individual budget, goal, and desire. That's the beauty of so many labs out there: it creates competition and gives folks a lot of choices. Granted, that only truly works if someone is familiar with which labs are deemed trustworthy (e.g.- GIA or AGS) and which are purposefully unscrupulous (e.g.- GSI, GRA, or EGL).

More simply: go and lay hands and eyes on two diamonds side by side of the same color grade with extremely similar proportions and angles of approximately the same spread, one with GIA 3X and the other with AGS 000. Please tell us what you *truly* see.

 

[max1111]

max1111, what is your end-game, here?

The end game is that I buy a stone sight unseen and when it arrives it is what I was expecting. Nothing more, nothing less but definitely not 2 colour grades lower which can easily happen when balancing the 4C's and cross shopping labs. I've adjusted my expectations but I could have saved some time had I paid heed to earlier advice on this very board on the subject.

As a consumer we want to ignore it and believe there is a free lunch with AGS stones. I just don't think that exists anymore. We always give something up.

I think that you are hyper-analyzing the situation, but doing so with a bit of a two-dimensional approach instead of considering all the differing factors involved when color grading a diamond:the shape of the diamond, the differing proportions, differing environments, minor differing lab lighting variances (that can occur even within the same grading lab entity across multiple locations or even different rooms within the same location), the different people grading and the people concurring, the differing calibrations for any measuring equipment used, the different saturation of tint, the differing color of the tint, and possibly the differing overall methodology of grading to avoid potential infringements and lawsuits between labs,

Sure. It could be all of those different factors working together in a mega coincidence.

Or -

It could just be a commercial entity doing what it must to serve it's customers in a niche that priorities cut over everything else including colour.

I know which one I think is more likely.

If colour grading was anywhere near as loosey goosey as you're implying then most stones above 1ct would justify high multiples of regrades. If that isn't happening then we have our answer. If it is then I'll eat my words.

My point is this: the key to successfully buying a well cut and performing diamond is to be sufficiently informed and utilize any and all resources available in order to ensure that what is being bought is satisfactory to the buyer, because that is always between the buyer and their own wallet to determine if the diamond that they are purchasing with the pedigree that is attached to it is acceptable for the price being paid, regardless of the grading lab gracing the grading report.

Exactly and part of that is understanding the idiosyncrasies of how and why Diamonds are graded the way they are. That's what hopefully keeps the informed buyer out of problem stones of which there are many. Painting labs as anything else except commercial ventures is not really doing the consumer any favours. Sometimes our values align, sometimes they don't.

One further point is that each lab likely KNOWS quite well that there will be slight variances within their own ranks of expert graders, because they took what seemingly is a tighter 23 grade scale of D through Z into a subgrouped scale of five:
Colorless (D-F)
Near Colorless (G-J)
Faint (K-M)
Very Light (N-R)
Light (S-Z).
Why? Because most humans can't discern between one or two adjacent color grades, especially without some kind of consensually accurate reference point to compare with.

I don't really get this. I've only ever heard consumers and jewellers refer to diamonds by their exact letter grade. Most people of the internet generation will have at least done a google search or asked a friend. They don't go to a jeweller and ask for a Faint diamond.

Now what if a diamond falls near the line between F and G, or H and I, or J and K? There is no human or machine that is going to make a consistent call 100% of the time that 100% of people are going to agree with.

I would bet AGS grades all of these stones up.

 

[yssie]

I too am wondering what the purpose of this thread is.

I would bet AGS grades all of these stones up.

Many tradepeople and many consumers who have participated in this thread have already agreed with this supposition.

And more:
1. They’ve explained why they feel that way, and
2. They’ve provided insight into the colour grading process - positives and flaws - and its place in the diamond industry, and
3. They’ve explained the “likely” and “unlikely” of your arguments regarding lab shopping, and
4. They’ve made practical recommendations for consumers who are concerned to evaluate and select stones with more confidence.

It does seem that your end goal here is to get us all to both agree with your presumptions re. lab shopping for colour and vilify non-GIA labs. Neither of which we’re willing to do, and we’ve all made efforts to state why. Aside from the fact that we’ll never all agree on anything - when does that ever happen outside the classroom… The thing is, our refusal to agree with you isn’t coming from a place of us being greedy, or being ignorant fools looking for free lunches, or having single-minded priorities with blinkers on toward everything else. We’re all making our own informed evaluations and transacting informed purchases. And now you’re better armed to make your own more-informed evaluation too.

 

[max1111]

I too am wondering what the purpose of this thread is. There is nothing in the last two pages that is revolutionary or eye-opening in any capacity.


Both many tradepeople and many consumers who have participated in this thread have already agreed with this supposition.

And more:
1. They’ve explained why they feel that way, and
2. They’ve provided insight into the colour grading process and its place in the diamond industry, and
3. They’ve explained the “likely” and “unlikely” of your arguments regarding lab shopping, and
4. They’ve made practical recommendations for consumers who are concerned to evaluate and select stones with more confidence.

It does seem that your end goal here is to get us all to both agree with your presumptions re. lab shopping for colour, and vilify non-GIA labs - neither of which we are willing to do, and we’ve all explained why. The thing is, our refusal to agree with you isn’t coming from a place of us being idiots or having blinkers on - we are all making our own informed evaluations and transacting informed purchases. You don’t have to agree with us, but we don’t have to agree with you either.

I'm not trying to vilify anyone. GIA will have it's set of incentives which may or may not align with the consumer. That is the nature of capitalism and it doesn't change just because we're talking about diamonds.

There doesn't seem to be much consensus at all. I mean we don't even really know if GIA is using machines for colour grading yet. Seriously.

Anyway, why would you not want to know about this stuff?

This place isn't just about selling diamonds is it?

 

[Karl_K]

If colour grading was anywhere near as loosey goosey as you're implying then most stones above 1ct would justify high multiples of regrades. If that isn't happening then we have our answer. If it is then I'll eat my words.

You are vastly under estimating how hard it is getting GIA to change a grade on a recheck or regrade even when you think they are very far off.