Aquamarine Facts

[jumpa1]

We were able to get a digital camera, here are the pictures. We took them from 2 different angles. I hope you can give me some information on where you think it might be from as well. It turns out that it may not be from Idaho.

reuploaded
http://www.alexusfreehost.com/jumpa1/Aquamarine1.bmp
http://www.alexusfreehost.com/jumpa1/Aquamarine2.bmp

 

[valeria101]

Don't take this wrong... this is innocent and sincere Q: who told you this is aqua?

One of a kind is hard to believe

I am not very warry of saying that I have never seen anything like it: this piece was cracked form something much larger of the same type. The original crystal should have been of incredible size and quality to produce such a chunk.

If this is beryl, not too many will be able to put a value on it. It will depend on a longer chat on what for and where it could be sold.

Getting a professional opinion and full identification is unavoidable.

 

[jumpa1]

A gemologist. Was he incorrect?

 

[valeria101]

I hope not. He held the piece, all I see is a puzzling picture. Nothig in the pic, except the incredible size, disproves or proves his claim.

It would be very nice to get a gemologist perform the required tests and issue an identification report to this stone. You need a broker, not a stand in a gem show.

 

[jumpa1]

Angelfire wouldn't let me keep the pictures there, so I had to put them on another site which would only accept bmp pictures. but here they are again

http://www.alexusfreehost.com/jumpa1/Aquamarine1.bmp
http://www.alexusfreehost.com/jumpa1/Aquamarine2.bmp

We already contacted an independent appraiser that can do the identification, so we will be taking it down there next week.

 

[CaptAubrey]

----------------
On 4/12/2004 2:19:20 AM valeria101 wrote:





I hope not. He held the piece, all I see is a puzzling picture. Nothing in the pic, except the incredible size, disproves or proves his claim.

----------------

well, yes there are things in the picture that make me doubt that this is aquamarine:

-the fractures are endlessly and totally concoidal (rounded/arced). you can see concoidal fractures in beryl but to such an extent as with this piece is unusual

-with the fractures i see what look like flow lines in the material itself. these are common in glass but do not exist in natural aquamarine.

-the color is much too saturated. aquamarine rough is normally much paler than that.

it's possible this is for real, but at first glance, i have my doubts. if it were me, i would think this was a chunk of blue glass until the proper tests indicated otherwise.

 

[Richard M.]

I also have strong doubts about this stone. It looks exactly like chunks of window glass I've seen.

If it's natural aquamarine it would rank as a museum-quality specimen.

The following argue against it being natural beryl: perfect conchoidal fracture (typical of glass), unusually deep color saturation, nearly perfect color distribution, absence of obvious natural flaws/inclusions, and absence of any natural crystal faces.

Sight-identifying any stone, especially from an on-line image, is a dangerous proposition of course. Here are a few simple things you should do before spending much time and money authenticating it.

1. Glass is a very poor conductor of heat. If you have available a known crystalline gem like a quartz crystal, touch the tip of your tongue to it, then to the "aqua." (Make sure both are clean and avoid sharp edges). Glass will be noticeably warmer than the crystal, all things being equal.

2. With a hand lens of at least 10 power magnification, carefully inspect the inside looking for "swirly" areas and perfectly round gas bubbles that are randomly distributed. Both are very strong indications of glass.

If your stone passes those tests then it may be worth further checking. Naturally I'd like for you to have a real treasure but this one seems "too good to be true".

Richard M.
Gemcutter/Jeweler

 

[jumpa1]

I tried the temperature "test" and it is the same, maybe a little colder, and looked with a magnifying glass couldn't see any bubbles or swirling at all. The pictures were from the sides, if you look through the top and bottom its like a window very easy to see if there are bubbles and there arent any not even one. Is there any other ways to test it before we take it to the appraiser?

 

[Richard M.]

----------------
On 4/13/2004 8:53:06 AM jumpa1 wrote:

Is there any other ways to test it before we take it to the appraiser?
----------------

The only other simple test I can think of is hardness if you don't mind the possibility of putting a small scratch on your stone. The Mohs hardness of glass is usually between 5 and 6.5. Beryl is 7.5 to 8. A hardened steel file, Mohs 6-7, will scratch most glass and won't scratch beryl. This isn't a very precise test because steels vary in hardness and interpreting results can require some experience. Using professional hardness points would yield more accurate results but a steel file may give an indication. Good luck!

Richard M.
Gemcutter - Jeweler

 

[CaptAubrey]

----------------
On 4/13/2004 8:53:06 AM jumpa1 wrote:





I tried the temperature 'test' and it is the same, maybe a little colder, and looked with a magnifying glass couldn't see any bubbles or swirling at all. The pictures were from the sides, if you look through the top and bottom its like a window very easy to see if there are bubbles and there arent any not even one. Is there any other ways to test it before we take it to the appraiser?

----------------

You really need stronger magnification than a magnifying glass to see gas bubbles and flow lines, which can be tough to identify if you have no experience. The fact that this sample is completely clean, as you say, is a strong indication to me that it's glass. A natural beryl crystal that large would have some inclusions visible to the naked eye.

 

[Richard M.]

While we're waiting for test results, is anyone interested in bidding on a world-class 1,545-carat aquamarine? Lambert Holding Co. of Bangkok is offering it for $50,000 - a mere $32.33 per carat. There's a smaller stone available, only 300 carats, at approx. $35/ct.

These are among 5 stones a Russian dealer gave Lambert to sell in mid-2002, according to a report in Colored Stone Magazine. Three stones, between 300 and 500 carats each, were purchased by Japanese dealers.

The aquas were faceted in Russia and are thought to be originally from the pre-Communist Russian Crown Jewels. The stones are thought to be from some other source than Brazil. Russia has produced many fine, large aquamarines but the source is not definitely known.

The article says the largest known cut aquamarine is a 2,594-carat stone cut by JoAnn McLean of Pala International in 1979 and sold to a private buyer. No value was given for it.

Richard M.
Gemcutter - Jeweler

 

[Sagebrush]

It is rarely a good idea to talk about THE mine that produces the BEST of any gem variety. I have seen aquamarine from Africa the so-called "Santa Marie Africana" as well as gems from Mozambique that rival the best so-called "Santa Maria" from Brazil. In fact, the best Aquarmarine I have seen from Brazil comes from the area around the "Coronel Muerta" mine. This is a deep aquamarine meaning about 60% tone. There is an excellent photograph of a top gem trillian cut aquamarine in Richard Wise's book: Secrets Of the Gem Trade, The Connoisseur's Guide To Precious Gemstones. Also, you can read about a trip to Posso Grande an aquamarine mine near Nova Era. This mine produces a pure blue aquamarine that does not require heat treatment.

Much of the darker material also has a distinct gray mask. Darker and grayer or lighter and purer blue. This is often the tradeoff.

 

[gemnut]

If the man in the picture is who I think it is (it sure looks like him!) I may be wearing a 27 ct chunk of that stone right now!
Did it have more information in that article?

 

[nicky newark]

Take a look at the Aqua at http:// www.paraibainternational.com

 

[kaylagee]

bump