Aquamarine vs tourmaline

[alene]

If you had a choice and did not have a strong color preference, which one would you choose? More specifically, for an asscher cut stone that would be set in a ring, is one preferrable to the other? Is aqua going to be substantially more durable? Would one be more sparkly than the other (assuing both have a terrific cut)? Any other factors I should keep in mind? Thanks!

 

[T L]

Lightwise, they'll perform pretty equal. They both have low RI's. As far as color is concerned, there's a much wider array of color in the tourmaline family, and even just for the greenish blues. Just know that the fine greens, blue greens, and blues can be very difficult to come by, and very costly in tourmaline. With tourmaline, you also have to worry about some being overly dark, but some do look like dead ringers for aqua, and the finer ones look awesome, but again, very hard to come by, let alone in an asscher.

 

[alene]

Thanks TL! Here's the tourmaline in question. I think it looks awesome! What do you think? Besides the color, should I be concerned about having a tourmaline set in a ring? It's not going to be worn every day.

 

[T L]

What is the mm size on it?

 

[ruffysdad]

Hi Alene,

Tourms are very durable and would make a great ring stone, even in a solitaire setting, but I''d stiill lean towards some kind of mount that would offer some protection if possible. Nice color on that one Btw.

Pete

 

[cellentani]

Date: 4/26/2010 11:54:51 AM
Author: tourmaline_lover
What is the mm size on it?

It''s an enviable 8.7mm, 3.33ct!


alene, have you contacted the seller on this one? Sometimes they get sold pretty fast.

 

[T L]

Ruffy,
Nice to see you on PS. Remember that 15 carat Afghan rough I got from you? I had it cut. It''s one of my last gallery images.

Thread jack over.

Alene,
It''s a pretty stone. I don''t think you could go wrong with Gene''s or this one. This has more green in it than Gene''s aqua.

 

[oddoneout]

I''m not too sure about the technical details but I really like the cut and colour of the stone you posted.

 

[Michael_E]

Date: 4/26/2010 11:35:16 AM
Author: alene
Besides the color, should I be concerned about having a tourmaline set in a ring? It''s not going to be worn every day.

No, I wouldn''t be concerned about it. I would make sure that the setting either uses double prongs or a wide thick prong which comes fairly close to the corners. The closer to the corners, the more protection the setting can offer, since the prongs would be more likely to get hit before a corner. Colored stones can take quite a bit of abuse as long as they don''t get hit on a corner or along an edge.

As for color, remember that tourmalines are dramatically more dichroic than aquamarines so that they will often show more intense, (or even different), colors in one direction than the other. I think that tourmaline has a lot more to offer than aqua on a cost per carat basis and since their durability is very close, I would think that you may be happier with a tourmaline.

 

[ruffysdad]

Date: 4/26/2010 12:05:44 PM
Author: tourmaline_lover
Ruffy,
Nice to see you on PS. Remember that 15 carat Afghan rough I got from you? I had it cut. It's one of my last gallery images.

Thread jack over.

Alene,
It's a pretty stone. I don't think you could go wrong with Gene's or this one. This has more green in it than Gene's aqua.

Hi TL

! (Smile and a big howdy wave!)

Oh I so remember that one! That was the last load I got from that area until things settle down and they stop shooting at our guys over there. How'd it turn out? I'd love to see the pic.

Hijack over again.

I agree with TL and Michael on that Alene. Tourms are spectacular little juicies. Wish I could buy 'em all!

Pete

 

[Gailey]

Good advice so far Alene. A couple of points to consider. People say that asschers are best suited to lighter coloured material. It makes it easier to see the steps. I have never seen a dark one IRL, so I can''t give my personal opinion on that. You might want to bear that in mind when your looking at photographs of asschers, because they will be quite brightly lit for a photograph.

If you are seriously interested in this stone, check with Gene what the depth of the stone is. Asschers tend to be deep stones. I have a 9.13mm² asscher. It''s depth is 6.0mm. That''s right on the cusp of comfortable for me, or it will be once it is set.

It leads me to ask, do stones with a lower RI result in deeper asschers than those stones with a higher RI or does that not make any difference? Hopefully one of our resident experts will chime in.

 

[ma re]

It''s a really tough choice, cause aquas can look especially nice in step cuts due to their often fantastic transparency levels and icy-looking color. That combo, together with a proper polish on the stone, can make for a real sparkler that very few tourmalines can rival.

But if you''d like a color that''s more rich, if you''re not so crazy about extra sparkly gems, and would prefer something that will grab your attention with optical effects (dichroism is basically something that''s seen as a wider array of different shades of colors seen in a stone), then tourmaline would be the way to go.

You might also think about if and how do you plan on setting it, cause the design might give itself more to one or the other. If less brilliance and more color would suit the design better, tourmaline would be my choice, but if it would benefit from strong brilliance and big flashes of light coming from the long facets in a pastel stone, you might go with an aqua.

 

[ruffysdad]

Date: 4/26/2010 12:28:25 PM
Author: Gailey
Good advice so far Alene. A couple of points to consider. People say that asschers are best suited to lighter coloured material. It makes it easier to see the steps. I have never seen a dark one IRL, so I can''t give my personal opinion on that. You might want to bear that in mind when your looking at photographs of asschers, because they will be quite brightly lit for a photograph.

If you are seriously interested in this stone, check with Gene what the depth of the stone is. Asschers tend to be deep stones. I have a 9.13mm² asscher. It''s depth is 6.0mm. That''s right on the cusp of comfortable for me, or it will be once it is set.

It leads me to ask, do stones with a lower RI result in deeper asschers than those stones with a higher RI or does that not make any difference? Hopefully one of our resident experts will chime in.

In a lot of cases that will be true. Most lower RI stones will have a higher pavillion angle so ideally they''ll be deeper if the correct angles are adhered to. The crown height can vary a bit depending on what you want out of a stone. A snidge lower angle will usually return more light while a snidge higher angle will result in more dispersion. That''s what makes the old mine cut diamonds more firey than the modern SRB.

Pete

 

[alene]

Thanks for all the comments! This is very helpful!
The stone is on its way and should be arriving on Wednesday! I can't wait to see it in person.

A couple of questions. First, why would depth be an issue? It's 6.7 for this stone, is there any reason to be concerned about this?
Also, I was under the impression that neither aquas nor tourmalines are particularly sparkly due to relatively low reflective index, is that incorrect? Finally, should I expect for it to be much darker than the picture? I know I'm going to see it in a couple of days, just wondering.

 

[chrono]

The only reason for the mention of depth in asscher cut stones with low RI is that it usually needs the extra depth to prevent windowing and to lessen the tilt window. However, in doing so, the cutter and customer ends up with a stone that is too deep for a standard setting and as such, will need a custom setting to accommodate the extra depth.

 

[ruffysdad]

Date: 4/26/2010 1:35:18 PM
Author: alene
Thanks for all the comments! This is very helpful!
The stone is on its way and should be arriving on Wednesday! I can''t wait to see it in person.

A couple of questions. First, why would depth be an issue? It''s 6.7 for this stone, is there any reason to be concerned about this?
Also, I was under the impression that neither aquas nor tourmalines are particularly sparkly due to relatively low reflective index, is that incorrect? Finally, should I expect for it to be much darker than the picture? I know I''m going to see it in a couple of days, just wondering.

Depth is only an issue really to the cutter Alene. A matter of how attractive he wants the stone to be. If you cut too shallow then you''ll get a window in the finished stone. If you go too deep then you wind up with a black hole in the stone. It''s the balance line the cutter has to take into account with every piece of rough. How do I get the highest yield from my rough while getting the most brilliance and fire. And even though the RI isn''t as high as some stones, I''ve cut some, what I call, dusty rose tourms that would talk to you from 20 feet away in a dim room.

As far as the color when it gets to you, a lot depends on the lighting when the pic was taken. I try to take pics that reflect what the stone will show in sunlight and because I''m from around Seattle, don''t get much of that. I use two 60 watt GE reveal lights and difused light but some colors still give me a lot of trouble. When that happens I''ll try and pick out the closest, but also one that''s a shows the stone a little worse than it is. It''s the CYA in me. Nobody yells at me if the stone looks better than the pic

Pete

 

[Gailey]

Date: 4/26/2010 1:50:58 PM
Author: Chrono
The only reason for the mention of depth in asscher cut stones with low RI is that it usually needs the extra depth to prevent windowing and to lessen the tilt window. However, in doing so, the cutter and customer ends up with a stone that is too deep for a standard setting and as such, will need a custom setting to accommodate the extra depth.

I think the only reason the depth of the stone may be an issue to you is how high the stone will sit up on your finger. I''m guessing you would need to add on about an extra 1.5-2mm to accomodate a setting. Perhaps Ma-re or someone else will comment on that.

I have a 4.5ct oval garnet set. It''s depth is 6.26mm. I''ll see if I can get an approx measurement of high it sits off my finger and see if I can get a photo to demonstrate what I mean.

Lauren would be the gal to answer these types of questions but she is in the South of France (lucky-pup!). I''m not sure if a custom setting would be needed, Haven''t quite a few asschers gone into LOGRs?

 

[LD]

My aqua modified asscher is very similar in measurements to the stone you''re getting. Yes, it sits high off the finger but not so high that I poke people''s eyes out! If you''re used to wearing low rings, it will seem very high at first.

I have an asscher (cut from what I would consider to be very dark material) and you can''t see the steps and basically I don''t like it. I think the lighter to medium toned gemstones work far better in this cut and from your vendor''s photo I''m sure it''ll be fine even if it''s a tad darker than the photo. The only thing you may find disconcerting is the extinction in the middle section. That may be less noticeable in real life so nothing to worry about unnecessarily. Can''t wait to hear what you think when it arrives - please make sure you post up LOTS of photos!

 

[ma re]

Date: 4/26/2010 1:35:18 PM
Author: alene

Also, I was under the impression that neither aquas nor tourmalines are particularly sparkly due to relatively low reflective index, is that incorrect?

Your impression is correct, neither is particularly sparkly (which is anything but a scientific term

), but that doesen''t mean that they cannot show beautiful, brilliant flashes.

Refractive index has more to do (in terms of human eye''s perception) with how lively the stone will appear. Therefore, tourmalines or aquas will not be as lively as garnets, sapphires or diamonds of comparable color and cutting precision, but they have their advantages. Tourmalines can, unlike say, garnets, show two colors blended within the stone and seen at the same time (dichroism). Aqua can, unlike many spinels (also higher R.I.), show a beautiful color in a lightly toned material, which results in especially brilliant stones, and by brilliant I mean those that can "shoot" white light so strongly when it bounces off the facet, that it can "poke you in the eye".

So refractive index has it''s benefits and advantages for gemstones, but there are many other things by which gems can be considered wonderful.

 

[loriken214]

Date: 4/26/2010 11:35:16 AM
Author: alene
Thanks TL! Here''s the tourmaline in question. I think it looks awesome! What do you think? Besides the color, should I be concerned about having a tourmaline set in a ring? It''s not going to be worn every day.

Hi Alene!

This is a beautiful Asscher! Where did you find it?

Lori

 

[Stone Hunter]

So did you get it? What do you think of it?