Before the invention of precise faceting machines when cutting was done by eye...

[Avondale]

When I use a rough grit sandpaper on anything no matter how clear...glass even...it becomes clouded. But after using finer and finer sandpaper and then eventually polishing it becomes clear again. What your saying is not logical.

I have never facepalmed this hard at anything I've read on this forum board before.

 

[JRVAULTS]

If its ruby or spinel its synthetic and I dont think its either.

 

[JRVAULTS]

non blurry version of close up.

 

[JRVAULTS]

Found that in a GIA training video.

 

[JRVAULTS]

It is cut and polished and it is barely translucent, so no. It is closer to a rock than a gem -- you can polish all you want and that won't make it transparent. If the grain is fine enough, you could maybe make it shinier. Best of luck with it! Over and out.

I agree with you and fully understand you point, however to me it looks like someone sanded a rough into this shape and then used a file on it. I do not think it has been cut and polished.

 

[JRVAULTS]

I have never facepalmed this hard at anything I've read on this forum board before.

I agree with you and fully understand your point, however....


Lol i forgot to mention the lady in NY said she got it 46 years ago from a THAI lady she used to work for...i had no idea Thailand was so close in proximity to Myanmar (Burma). My face hit my palm too after i looked up Unheated/Untreated Burma Ruby over 10 carats...(currently between 20-25carats).
If you scroll up a bit what i wrote that shocked you so much about the stone might not sound so far fetched.

 

[JRVAULTS]

There is a site geared towards professionals in the Trade including lapidaries. Although I am not allowed to link the site, you can find it quite easily by googling "gemology" and "forums" or "online."

I agree with you and fully understand your point, however if i had not posted this in the wrong forum i wouldn't have learned such a valuable lesson. Shout out to Kenny and everyone else that helped me with that and also to lovedogs for trying to crush my dreams gently. Ty all for your time.

 

[JRVAULTS]

It is cut and polished and it is barely translucent, so no. It is closer to a rock than a gem -- you can polish all you want and that won't make it transparent. If the grain is fine enough, you could maybe make it shinier. Best of luck with it! Over and out.

 

[JRVAULTS]

That's with sandpaper man...I imagine if I use a buffing wheel it gets better

 

[JRVAULTS]

 

[JRVAULTS]

You really can't imagine that could turn into that cut? Both stones from same person too.

 

[JRVAULTS]

Quiet in here! Crickets...

 

[Starstruck8]

You really can't imagine that could turn into that cut?

No, I can't.

But you raise an interesting question. Objects with transparent bodies but rough or weathered surfaces can be polished transparent. Objects with translucent or highly fractured or included bodies can't be polished transparent. But how exactly does one spot the difference when looking at an unpolished lump?

It seems obvious to my eye that the rough in your example is at least passably transparent:


It seems equally obvious that your stone is not transparent.

But exactly why? Well, the ruby rough has patches of relatively saturated red. These read as backlit by transmitted light. There are also less saturated patches. These read as surface reflections. You don't see this variation in your stone, which appears to have a pretty uniform surface-based colour.

Here is a demo with a brown quartz crystal pebble (transparent body, but with a rough, water-worn surface) and a rose quartz sphere (polished but translucent and fractured). You could polish the pebble to make it transparent, but no extra polishing could make the sphere more transparent, because it's translucent and fractured right through.

Front-ish light.

Notice how the pebble looks dark at the lit end, lighter at the less lit end. This is what suggests transparency. The uniform brightness of the sphere suggests translucency.

Backlit in front of a white computer screen:

Again, notice how the brightness varies across the pebble, but is pretty even in the sphere (apart from inclusions and fractures).

Lit from below by a flashlight, viewed from the side (two pics combined):

This is especially telling. The (translucent, included) sphere is bright all over, because the whole body scatters light. The (transparent) pebble is bright mostly at the top, where the transmitted light hits the rough surface.

Which of these does your stone most resemble? The pretty uniform colour seen in all your pictures indicates that it's at best translucent, not transparent.

 

[JRVAULTS]

No, I can't.

But you raise an interesting question. Objects with transparent bodies but rough or weathered surfaces can be polished transparent. Objects with translucent or highly fractured or included bodies can't be polished transparent. But how exactly does one spot the difference when looking at an unpolished lump?

It seems obvious to my eye that the rough in your example is at least passably transparent:


It seems equally obvious that your stone is not transparent.

But exactly why? Well, the ruby rough has patches of relatively saturated red. These read as backlit by transmitted light. There are also less saturated patches. These read as surface reflections. You don't see this variation in your stone, which appears to have a pretty uniform surface-based colour.

Here is a demo with a brown quartz crystal pebble (transparent body, but with a rough, water-worn surface) and a rose quartz sphere (polished but translucent and fractured). You could polish the pebble to make it transparent, but no extra polishing could make the sphere more transparent, because it's translucent and fractured right through.

Front-ish light.

Notice how the pebble looks dark at the lit end, lighter at the less lit end. This is what suggests transparency. The uniform brightness of the sphere suggests translucency.

Backlit in front of a white computer screen:

Again, notice how the brightness varies across the pebble, but is pretty even in the sphere (apart from inclusions and fractures).

Lit from below by a flashlight, viewed from the side (two pics combined):

This is especially telling. The (translucent, included) sphere is bright all over, because the whole body scatters light. The (transparent) pebble is bright mostly at the top, where the transmitted light hits the rough surface.

Which of these does your stone most resemble? The pretty uniform colour seen in all your pictures indicates that it's at best translucent, not transparent.

First I want to thank you for the information. I read all of it and what your saying makes perfect sense however this is a Ruby...not a glass sphere and not a pebble. I understand what your talking is about is whether or not it can be polished and you maybe correct....I found this and it seems maybe the light refraction inside the Ruby as apposed to other stones maybe different. I'm honestly not that smart as you might have already guessed and since others have pointed it out. I'm not arguing...sometimes the way I write responses read differently than the way I intend to say them.

 

[LilAlex]

I read all of it and what your saying makes perfect sense however this is a Ruby...not a glass sphere and not a pebble.

I applaud @Starstruck8's heroic effort above and I already said "over and out" but you are (really?) wondering why you are not getting responses when you ask the same thing over and over? You almost had me at "sandpaper" but even then I resisted. Maybe passing it through the GI tract of an endangered mammal? I hear it works for some elite coffee beans.

We all recognize that ruby is not the same as glass if that is the point you are making. It is also not the same as an airplane but the principle of transparency is the same.

I think it's time to stop asking and do something. Get all your sandpaper, toothpaste, furniture polish -- whatever you decide -- and fix it. Come back when this transformation is complete:



Please show us your success story. Cutting is remarkably cheap so that should not stand in the way. Best of luck!

 

[JRVAULTS]

I applaud @Starstruck8's heroic effort above and I already said "over and out" but you are (really?) wondering why you are not getting responses when you ask the same thing over and over? You almost had me at "sandpaper" but even then I resisted. Maybe passing it through the GI tract of an endangered mammal? I hear it works for some elite coffee beans.

We all recognize that ruby is not the same as glass if that is the point you are making. It is also not the same as an airplane but the principle of transparency is the same.

I think it's time to stop asking and do something. Get all your sandpaper, toothpaste, furniture polish -- whatever you decide -- and fix it. Come back when this transformation is complete:



Please show us your success story. Cutting is remarkably cheap so that should not stand in the way. Best of luck!

Upon closer look with the loupe the sandpaper had zero effect on the stone. I am not a smart guy but I know when it's time to tell someone to go pound sand because they are super rude. I understand it will probably mean being removed from forum but that's life and if I'm being honest life hasn't dealt me the greatest hand anyways. Have a blessed day friend.

 

[lovedogs]

Upon closer look with the loupe the sandpaper had zero effect on the stone. I am not a smart guy but I know when it's time to tell someone to go pound sand because they are super rude. I understand it will probably mean being removed from forum but that's life and if I'm being honest life hasn't dealt me the greatest hand anyways. Have a blessed day friend.

Of course sandpaper didn't have an effect. You're essentially asking whether you can polish an opaque object enough to make it transparent. The answer is no. Folks have told you over and over again, yet for some reason you are convinced you can magically make the opaque stone transparent. You can try all you'd like, but I'm sorry to say it simply won't work. If someone could have polished that stone into a transparent high qyaliry ruby, they would have done it.

 

[JRVAULTS]

Of course sandpaper didn't have an effect. You're essentially asking whether you can polish an opaque object enough to make it transparent. The answer is no. Folks have told you over and over again, yet for some reason you are convinced you can magically make the opaque stone transparent. You can try all you'd like, but I'm sorry to say it simply won't work. If someone could have polished that stone into a transparent high qyaliry ruby, they would have done it.

When would they have done it? I acquired about 15 stones that were in a ladies drawer for 46 years in NY. She had acquired them from a Thai woman she worked for. Included 11 faceted Citrine, Emeralds from 1-20 carats, 1 matrix opal and this RED stone. Now when you hear this story does it séem like she might have been holding onto a $35 dollar plastic bead this whole time? Maybe...but no matter how many times I ask the same dumb question because I'm having a hard time believing it's nothing does not give that dude or anyone the right to be rude.

 

[Avondale]

When would they have done it?

When they first mined it.

 

[Gloria27]

Yooo!! what a thread

First, that is a low quality ruby (not worth much) that can't be polished, they've already tried, you have the result in your hands.

The sandpaper doesn't work because even low quality Ruby is still 9 (out of 10) on the Mohs scale of hardness, only moissanite (which is also called silicon carbide is a 9.5 on Mohs scale) and diamond (which is pure carbon is 10 on Mohs scale) can scratch it.


fun fact: silicon carbide sandpaper exists and so does diamond sandpaper
types of sandpaper:

Sandpaper - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

High quality ruby:

Low quality ruby:

 

[lovedogs]

When would they have done it? I acquired about 15 stones that were in a ladies drawer for 46 years in NY. She had acquired them from a Thai woman she worked for. Included 11 faceted Citrine, Emeralds from 1-20 carats, 1 matrix opal and this RED stone. Now when you hear this story does it séem like she might have been holding onto a $35 dollar plastic bead this whole time? Maybe...but no matter how many times I ask the same dumb question because I'm having a hard time believing it's nothing does not give that dude or anyone the right to be rude.

Yes. I have a ton of random stones in my collection, some of which are worth $30 or less

 

[LilAlex]

were in a ladies drawer for 46 years in NY...Now when you hear this story does it séem like she might have been holding onto a $35 dollar plastic bead this whole time?

I was off pounding sand as instructed but am taking a break. I missed this reasoning. They must be valuable because they were kept in a drawer for 46 years? My kids are gonna be in for a treat then. Pretty sure I still have a T-shirt that old.

I have silver coins in my safe deposit box that are worth $10 -- and that's where the good stuff lives!

I liquidated several households over the past decade on behalf of dear relatives. I encountered drawers full of stuff that was 46 years old (give or take). I found a few things with eBay "vintage" values in the $20 - 100 range that we saved and distributed. But most of the stuff that older people save (and I am now speaking for My People) is what they can't quite bring themselves to throw away. It is not necessarily what they cherish.

 

[PrecisionGem]

You can rub those stones all you want, but you are not going to turn a slightly translucent stone into a transparent one. Rubies have been faceted for a lot longer than 46 years. If these could have been faceted, they would have back when they were found. Sorry, but you didn't strike it rich with these.

 

[LCS]

Just sharing here about my ruby cabochon found in my profile picture. The surface has been polished smooth and shiny - which is pretty. Even if cut in a faceted design it would look the same - meaning that you cannot see through it. The natural world produces so many things that are beautiful. I think it is wonderful that the exact same mineral or stone can have so many different forms.