Can this be real???

[Pandora II]

Thought's anyone??

It doesn't show double refraction so that will rule out tourmaline and chrome diopside (am I correct here?), so that basically leaves YAG, green glass or tsavorite...

Any other options?

Hallmark is 2005 - so it's not as if it's some piece from the 1970's that no-one knows what it is. Too good to be true I am thinking.


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/9ct-Gold-Green-Tsavorite-Claw-Set-Ring-Hallmarked-2005_W0QQitemZ220212886716QQihZ012QQcategoryZ67728QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

[Ninama]

It might have a high reserve... is that the super green color that''s desirable for tsavs? It''s an impressive ring!

The seller has 100% positive feed back - you can probably ask any questions you may have?

 

[Pandora II]

There is no reserve...

 

[Ninama]

*

*

Ask questions!

 

[Pandora II]

I've asked loads.

I don't believe in bargains that are too good to be true. I have had some, but only where the seller had no idea what they had...

I've had a couple of pieces where the stones turned out not to be as represented, and one very big fight to get my pennies back, so I'm wary.

Hence why I'm also talking about it here. If I was sure it was really what they say I'd be keeping very quiet indeed!

ETA: I'd be surprised to see stones of that size and quality set in 9ct in 2005. If it was 18ct I'd be thinking more favourably, but even in the UK they don't set good stones in 9ct these days. These are decent sized rocks and look VERY clean.

I've just heard back from the seller, who is very nice, but says she has no info other than that she was sold it as tsav. She's tested it with a diamond tester and it came back as a natural stone??? I've not used one of these except on diamonds so does this actually mean anything.

Part of me is tempted to buy it just to know, the other half tells me it will be more hassle than it's worth!

 

[DiamondExpert]

My cynical guess is that it''s glass (leaded?) - look carefully at the facet edges in the two large photos - they appear a bit rounded to my eye...

...but good luck if you give it a shot - stay under 50 quid and play it safe.

 

[strmrdr]

I doubt it, first clue is they are too closely matched in color and tone.
They would have also had better yield as ovals.

 

[RevolutionGems]

I have to agree. Too clean, too perfect. No one in their right mind would set Tsavs of that size and quality in a 9ct ring. Like setting a diamond in sterling. Why would you belittle the stones like that? My guess is that there is something rotten in Denmark, (or the UK...)

 

[Pandora II]

I''m not going to bother..

I just think they look wrong - and you''re almost certainly right on the facet edges, I''d been squinting at them as well.

Some of the shots look similarish, but some of the others just don''t have the tsavorite sparkle, or the dark, dark green to bright neon green that mine shows all at the same time (is there a term for this???) - even if they are ec''s...

 

[jszweda]

Date: 3/20/2008 3:30:05 PM
Author: Pandora II
I''m not going to bother..

I just think they look wrong - and you''re almost certainly right on the facet edges, I''d been squinting at them as well.

Some of the shots look similarish, but some of the others just don''t have the tsavorite sparkle, or the dark, dark green to bright neon green that mine shows all at the same time (is there a term for this???) - even if they are ec''s...

I agree with you and what everyone else has said on this more or less. The chrome diopsides and the tourmalines are doubly refractive, and they do appear to be too perfect.

There is one other small detail too that I don''t know if anyone ever thought of, and this could be due to the picture itself. Actually, 2 things.

Every tsavorite that I recall seeing has some yellow in it due to the calcium in the matrix. I don''t see those flashes there. Now some of the darker colors, I could see how that might be harder to determine in a photograph. Secondly, it does lack a certain refractivity.

You want my guess? Synthetic died green quartz. I could be wrong, but I get that impression.

 

[Harriet]

Date: 3/27/2008 2:00:17 PM
Author: jszweda
Every tsavorite that I recall seeing has some yellow in it due to the calcium in the matrix.

Compared to what you've said, I'm making but a minor point. There are tsavorites without yellow. Mine, with its beautiful blue secondary, is taking umbrage.

 

[Pandora II]

I have yet to see any yellow at all in mine - it''s very definitely a blueish green.

I''m not sure what you mean by ''refractivity''?

 

[Missrocks]

Date: 3/20/2008 1:32:25 AM
Author: DiamondExpert
My cynical guess is that it's glass (leaded?) - look carefully at the facet edges in the two large photos - they appear a bit rounded to my eye...

...but good luck if you give it a shot - stay under 50 quid and play it safe.

My first guess was glass too. I saw the rounded faceted junctions. But sometimes I have also seen this in stones that were polished hastilly. Could also take a chance and guess natural glass- moldavite. Although I have yet to see it quite that saturated.


Definetly would not guess dyed green quartz. I have never seen this gemstone transparent, as the dye is generally quench crackled into the stones. And the irradiated green quartz I have seen is generally lighter in tone and lower in saturation.


On another note:
Harriet and Pandora- Your tsavorites are both beautiful! I have seen tsavorites ranging from slightly bluish green to yellowish green and enjoy them all!

 

[Pandora II]

It went for £64

I was quite tempted to either send the vendor a chelsea filter, or buy it just to satisfy my curiosity - if it had been 18k I''d probably have done so just to know...

 

[Harriet]

Thanks, Missrocks.