Elbaite Tourmaline and their value. Any idea?

[JewelryLover]

JL,
Indicolite is the name for a blue tourmaline, not green. With a sapphire, you might be able to get away with prongs but tourmalines are softer and less durable, chipping easily. The risk of damaging a prong set tourmaline pear tip is very high, especially in bigger sizes.

I'm fully aware of that, my Tourmaline has better glow even if the Indicolite are blue. It's not as good as Chrome, but located somewhere inbetween that and Indicolite. I think it might be because of its texture, it's not as Chrome and not as Indicolite as it looks different (I'm not talking inclusions).

If you keep attention to this picture (easiest to see in this one) it's almost a tiny bit tinted mint Blue in the deepest part of the tourmaline (still it's not a regular Blue-Green tourmaline). I have also attached another picture of a rough Elbaite Green Tourmaline just to show how the color are located (the rough crystal is not mine), the red triangle is only indicating how the pear are cut and how the bluish are located. The price of the raw crystal is $3000, carats are not mentioned but the size is 6.4 x 3.4 x 1.6 cm (centimeter). http://newtest.minclassics.com/worldwidemix808.php?cur=ausd

 

[minousbijoux]

As Chrono mentioned, The Guide is the accepted industry standard for stone and pearl pricing. it is published quarterly. The pricing range is aggregated from sales reported by vendors - aggregated so as to protect anonymity and business practices. It would be great to hear from a vendor more about how the data is gathered, but I digress... There are many tourmaline types represented in it. If I haven't recycled my latest copy, I will look up price differentials between cuprian and regular tourmalines. IIRC, there is not any demonstrated premium of cuprians over non-copper bearing tourms unless the cuprians are of excellent quality.

HTH.

 

[JewelryLover]

As Chrono mentioned, The Guide is the accepted industry standard for stone and pearl pricing. it is published quarterly. The pricing range is aggregated from sales reported by vendors - aggregated so as to protect anonymity and business practices. It would be great to hear from a vendor more about how the data is gathered, but I digress... There are many tourmaline types represented in it. If I haven't recycled my latest copy, I will look up price differentials between cuprian and regular tourmalines. IIRC, there is not any demonstrated premium of cuprians over non-copper bearing tourms unless the cuprians are of excellent quality.

HTH.

Do you know where it's possible to get my hands on "The Guide"?

 

[chrono]

Unless you can tell apart the nuances of colour, the fineness of a particular gem and understand the GIA colour grading system, the guide will do you little good.

It is normal for a green tourmaline to show areas of blue, so I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make about your cuprian. Have you ever seen a true glowing Paraiba in person? Once you've seen it, you'll understand what makes it stand apart from a regular cuprian and why it commands such high pricing.

 

[LD]

Thank you Chrono and Minou!

JL - Elbaite's have pleochroism and that's why you're seeing blue and green. That's pretty normal. Chrome tourmalines also display this and as they're an Elbaite so I guess it isn't surprising! BTW I've just seen them described as "brittle" - that's a bit of an alarming word but it does reinforce that tourmalines need care.

 

[JewelryLover]

Unless you can tell apart the nuances of colour, the fineness of a particular gem and understand the GIA colour grading system, the guide will do you little good.

It is normal for a green tourmaline to show areas of blue, so I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make about your cuprian. Have you ever seen a true glowing Paraiba in person? Once you've seen it, you'll understand what makes it stand apart from a regular cuprian and why it commands such high pricing.

Yes I have seen a Paraiba in real. The tourmaline I got has the same type of "structure", that it looks almost like a "dry" gemstone, I dont know any other way to explain it. I'm not comparing color or glow to a Paraiba as that is like comparing red to blue.

 

[JewelryLover]

Thank you Chrono and Minou!

JL - Elbaite's have pleochroism and that's why you're seeing blue and green. That's pretty normal. Chrome tourmalines also display this and as they're an Elbaite so I guess it isn't surprising! BTW I've just seen them described as "brittle" - that's a bit of an alarming word but it does reinforce that tourmalines need care.

Yeah, I think it's looking quite "fragile", as I wrote in the post over this; it's looking very "dry".

 

[chrono]

I am sorry I don't understand what you mean. It should have the same structure because both are tourmalines and the growth structure should be the same.

 

[cm366]

LD - I wonder if you and Chris have divergent experiences because you're dealing in divergent markets? It sounds like your experiences are mostly in "trade" settings where his are more eBay and online. FWIW, there are certainly plenty of eBay and other online vendors who tout their stones as Cuprian and ask higher prices on that basis (for example, Googling swala cuprian tourmaline pulls up a page at swala gems where they discuss "African Cuprian" tourmaline as "Paraiba" or "Paraiba-like" despite their stones' appearance, or http://gemwiseblogspotcom.blogspot.com.au/2006/09/mozambique-cuprian-tourmaline-part-ii.html where Richard Wise describes the prices he was asked to pay for very ordinary looking tourmaline purely on the basis of its chromophore). Those prices may not be honored by the astute purchaser, and posters here generally get told "buy what you like and what looks good, don't buy a name", but they're definitely being asked.

JewelryLover - Sorry to distract from your lovely tourmaline! I personally wouldn't value it any higher on the basis of its chromophore, whatever that may be, as it doesn't fall into the range of 'neon' colours I associate with premium priced tourmaline. Still, it's a lovely stone and I hope you turn it into an amazing ring so I can drool over it

Edited to add: ATG gems also glowingly describes their purple tourmalines as "certed as Cuprian", and John Dyer includes it as a descriptor on several of his stones.

 

[JewelryLover]

I am sorry I don't understand what you mean. It should have the same structure because both are tourmalines and the growth structure should be the same.

I personally think that Elabite and Paraiba tourmalines got another look than other regular tourmalines. Paraiba and elbaites are looking "dryer", or more "fragile". I think it might be because of the Copper content.

 

[JewelryLover]

LD - I wonder if you and Chris have divergent experiences because you're dealing in divergent markets? It sounds like your experiences are mostly in "trade" settings where his are more eBay and online. FWIW, there are certainly plenty of eBay and other online vendors who tout their stones as Cuprian and ask higher prices on that basis (for example, Googling swala cuprian tourmaline pulls up a page at swala gems where they discuss "African Cuprian" tourmaline as "Paraiba" or "Paraiba-like" despite their stones' appearance, or http://gemwiseblogspotcom.blogspot.com.au/2006/09/mozambique-cuprian-tourmaline-part-ii.html where Richard Wise describes the prices he was asked to pay for very ordinary looking tourmaline purely on the basis of its chromophore). Those prices may not be honored by the astute purchaser, and posters here generally get told "buy what you like and what looks good, don't buy a name", but they're definitely being asked.

JewelryLover - Sorry to distract from your lovely tourmaline! I personally wouldn't value it any higher on the basis of its chromophore, whatever that may be, as it doesn't fall into the range of 'neon' colours I associate with premium priced tourmaline. Still, it's a lovely stone and I hope you turn it into an amazing ring so I can drool over it

No problem at all, and thank you!
Even AGL vs. GIA cant agree about certain things, not even grading stats. So, each individual got their own way to see things and their own opinion.

 

[chrono]

I think the lab used by ATG for their cuprians is GIT which did not participate in the Paraiba / Curpian lab roundtable discussions with the other big name labs.

 

[LD]

I am sorry I don't understand what you mean. It should have the same structure because both are tourmalines and the growth structure should be the same.

I personally think that Elabite and Paraiba tourmalines got another look than other regular tourmalines. Paraiba and elbaites are looking "dryer", or more "fragile". I think it might be because of the Copper content.

I'm really confused by this. A tourmaline is a tourmaline is a tourmaline. The copper doesn't make it more or less fragile.

I also don't understand what "dryer" means?????

 

[JewelryLover]

I am sorry I don't understand what you mean. It should have the same structure because both are tourmalines and the growth structure should be the same.

I personally think that Elabite and Paraiba tourmalines got another look than other regular tourmalines. Paraiba and elbaites are looking "dryer", or more "fragile". I think it might be because of the Copper content.

I'm really confused by this. A tourmaline is a tourmaline is a tourmaline. The copper doesn't make it more or less fragile.

I also don't understand what "dryer" means?????

Then I dont know how to explain it .. .. they just look kinda more "fragile" ..

 

[cm366]

Yep, think so, although they reference GIA standards for clarity in the introductory paragraphs and further muddy the issue by referencing pricing standards form the Guide. They also describe this stone as "Paraiba" under the AGTA's definition, which might be technically correct but does suggest they're sliding around from source to source to maximize the marketing potential for their products.

 

[chrono]

No stone can be ID-Ed definitively by looks alone. I, too, don't understand or see this "dry" or "fragile" appearance nor ever heard of such a thing.

 

[JewelryLover]

No stone can be ID-Ed definitively by looks alone. I, too, don't understand or see this "dry" or "fragile" appearance nor ever heard of such a thing.

We are not talking about certification or ID'ed by looks. If you look at the pictures above your post you will see the "fragile" look I'm talking about. While other tourmalines are looking more like glass-like.

 

[chrono]

CM,
This is exactly what I meant earlier by vendors taking advantage of the Paraiba / cuprian marketing hype to sell a regular looking tourmaline for more than a regular looking tourmaline. Sadly, there are people who believe this hype and will pay more for such a stone, further perpetuating this sales practice.

JL,
It looks like a regular tourmaline to me.

 

[JewelryLover]

CM,
This is exactly what I meant earlier by vendors taking advantage of the Paraiba / cuprian marketing hype to sell a regular looking tourmaline for more than a regular looking tourmaline. Sadly, there are people who believe this hype and will pay more for such a stone, further perpetuating this sales practice.

JL,
It looks like a regular tourmaline to me.

Not the type of regular tourmalines I have seen ..

 

[LD]

LD - I wonder if you and Chris have divergent experiences because you're dealing in divergent markets? It sounds like your experiences are mostly in "trade" settings where his are more eBay and online. FWIW, there are certainly plenty of eBay and other online vendors who tout their stones as Cuprian and ask higher prices on that basis (for example, Googling swala cuprian tourmaline pulls up a page at swala gems where they discuss "African Cuprian" tourmaline as "Paraiba" or "Paraiba-like" despite their stones' appearance, or http://gemwiseblogspotcom.blogspot.com.au/2006/09/mozambique-cuprian-tourmaline-part-ii.html where Richard Wise describes the prices he was asked to pay for very ordinary looking tourmaline purely on the basis of its chromophore). Those prices may not be honored by the astute purchaser, and posters here generally get told "buy what you like and what looks good, don't buy a name", but they're definitely being asked.

JewelryLover - Sorry to distract from your lovely tourmaline! I personally wouldn't value it any higher on the basis of its chromophore, whatever that may be, as it doesn't fall into the range of 'neon' colours I associate with premium priced tourmaline. Still, it's a lovely stone and I hope you turn it into an amazing ring so I can drool over it

Edited to add: ATG gems also glowingly describes their purple tourmalines as "certed as Cuprian", and John Dyer includes it as a descriptor on several of his stones.

CM - I'm not in the trade!

The presence of copper means a stone will be a Cuprian. Otherwise it's an Elbaite (the most common), Buergerite, Dravite, Liddicoatite etc. So sellers are right to distinguish between the two. Does this mean a price difference? No. Not unless the Cuprian has overall a better colour/clarity etc.

The example below illustrates well why I do not agree that just having copper means it will command a higher price than another tourmaline. The stone on the right is a Cuprian, the stone on the left is an Indicolite. I know which I would rather have!

In the second photo there's the same Cuprian and a similar quality Indicolite. I would pass on both and certainly wouldn't pay more for the Cuprian.

 

[LD]

By "dry" do you mean the presence of inclusions? I can't think what else you mean. Your stone certainly doesn't look dry to me but I can understand the descriptor if a stone is heavily included.

 

[LD]

CM,
This is exactly what I meant earlier by vendors taking advantage of the Paraiba / cuprian marketing hype to sell a regular looking tourmaline for more than a regular looking tourmaline. Sadly, there are people who believe this hype and will pay more for such a stone, further perpetuating this sales practice.

JL,
It looks like a regular tourmaline to me.

Ditto.

 

[JewelryLover]

By "dry" do you mean the presence of inclusions? I can't think what else you mean. Your stone certainly doesn't look dry to me but I can understand the descriptor if a stone is heavily included.

If it makes it easier to understand we can just call it "copper inclusions", like copper needles.

 

[cm366]

Chrono,

Sure, I get that, and I think we're agreeing with each other - I'm just trying to point out that it's not an uncommon practice confined to a handful of shady dealers, but rather a relatively widespread behaviour among dealers we'd describe as reputable and have recommended in the past. At some point, if a premium is asked and paid for Cuprian tourmaline of unremarkable appearance, isn't it like "Burma" ruby or "Namibian" spessartite, which generally command price premiums even though they aren't necessarily better than fine examples from other sources?

LD - I'm sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that you were a trade member, only that you've had the chance to physically handle more tourmalines than many posters as well as interacting with their dealers. You're not the typical buyer scouting for "Paraiba" based on eBay images and Sotheby's catalogues, and we all profit from your knowledge and experience.

I understand that you wouldn't pay a premium for a Cuprian unless it clearly outperformed the alternative, and that you wouldn't buy an inferior stone regardless. I'm trying to point out that a remarkable number of dealers will still try to charge you a premium based on the stone being Cuprian the same way they would for a premium origin, and that at some point that generally accepted practice becomes a pricing reality for those not lucky enough to have purchased fine examples years ago when the original stones were available. I'm not advocating that people seek out stones of inferior appearance regardless of their chemical composition, origin, the phase of the moon under which they were mined or any other amusing trivia, but I do recognize that there are folks out there who will, and that their buying power substantially alters the market.

 

[LD]

CM - apologies - I totally agree with you!

 

[cm366]

No apologies required - one day I'll learn to say what I mean up front instead of bumbling around

 

[ChrisA222]

I guess the point that I was trying to make, and really the only point...was that value is what someone would pay. Regardless of "The Guide" which the general buying public doesnt have knowlege about, or even access to perhaps, people will value what they want. What they will pay for it, is what it is worth.

We are not dealing with Diamonds here---or gold bars, where structured, controlled pricing exists in all markets in all qualities.

Maybe CM has a point. Being of moderate means, I do not collect multi-thousand dollar gemstones. In Cuprians, Im probably looking at the lower to middle end of the market. So perhaps in the upper markets which you(LD) may be more familiar, there is no disparity between Cuprian and Non-Cuprians. But, from where Im coming from, there certainly is. But like he pointed out, there are reasons why stones are denoted as Cuprian, even if by our standards of appearance there is no benefit.

I will give you another example. I had recently purchased a Blue Spinel. It has nice color, but certainly not the best. I wanted to sell it, because I have a better example of Blue Spinel, I don't need two, and so on. I sent the stone to a gemologist aquaintance of mine, and she suggested that, prior to selling the stone, I send it out to a lab and see if it contains cobalt. Why? Because it increases the value of the stone. But, the stone doesn't have outstanding color. But, she and I both know, if I list the stone with papers confirming presence of Cobalt, it is worth more. Maybe not to you, but to me, and to those who may want to buy the stone, it is. It sets the stone apart from all the common Fe-colored Spinels. Of course, I did take her advice and the stone is colored by Fe...so, there you go. But it was worth taking a chance and paying the fee. Just like it would have been if I had sent my bluegreen Tourmaline and had it checked for Copper, just like a lot of other collectors or vendors do, as it adds something unique and "valueable" to their gemstone.

I have no idea what "dry" means...but wanted to add something about that pear shaped stone. JL I think you were saying something about the color looking stronger at the point and at the base of the gem, more blue? That could be a product of the Pear-Shaped Cut of the stone. Pear cuts concentrate their color sometimes at the point and at the base of the stone, and the middle is sometimes less saturated. That could be partof what you are seeing, aside from the Pleochroism in Tourmaline.

 

[JewelryLover]

I guess the point that I was trying to make, and really the only point...was that value is what someone would pay. Regardless of "The Guide" which the general buying public doesnt have knowlege about, or even access to perhaps, people will value what they want. What they will pay for it, is what it is worth.

We are not dealing with Diamonds here---or gold bars, where structured, controlled pricing exists in all markets in all qualities.

Maybe CM has a point. Being of moderate means, I do not collect multi-thousand dollar gemstones. In Cuprians, Im probably looking at the lower to middle end of the market. So perhaps in the upper markets which you(LD) may be more familiar, there is no disparity between Cuprian and Non-Cuprians. But, from where Im coming from, there certainly is. But like he pointed out, there are reasons why stones are denoted as Cuprian, even if by our standards of appearance there is no benefit.

I will give you another example. I had recently purchased a Blue Spinel. It has nice color, but certainly not the best. I wanted to sell it, because I have a better example of Blue Spinel, I don't need two, and so on. I sent the stone to a gemologist aquaintance of mine, and she suggested that, prior to selling the stone, I send it out to a lab and see if it contains cobalt. Why? Because it increases the value of the stone. But, the stone doesn't have outstanding color. But, she and I both know, if I list the stone with papers confirming presence of Cobalt, it is worth more. Maybe not to you, but to me, and to those who may want to buy the stone, it is. It sets the stone apart from all the common Fe-colored Spinels. Of course, I did take her advice and the stone is colored by Fe...so, there you go. But it was worth taking a chance and paying the fee. Just like it would have been if I had sent my bluegreen Tourmaline and had it checked for Copper, just like a lot of other collectors or vendors do, as it adds something unique and "valueable" to their gemstone.

I have no idea what "dry" means...but wanted to add something about that pear shaped stone. JL I think you were saying something about the color looking stronger at the point and at the base of the gem, more blue? That could be a product of the Pear-Shaped Cut of the stone. Pear cuts concentrate their color sometimes at the point and at the base of the stone, and the middle is sometimes less saturated. That could be partof what you are seeing, aside from the Pleochroism in Tourmaline.

Yes, that might be. It isn't actually lighter in the middle, it's just more "bluish" than green (as the rest of it). But as you also say, it might be because of the pleochroism or dichroism, I dont know the difference very well.

 

[JewelryLover]

Just another question, I'll post it in this topic instead of opening a new one.

Can anyone of you see a difference between a Aquamarine and a Paraiba Tourmaline without testing it? If yes, please let me know how.

 

[LD]

Just another question, I'll post it in this topic instead of opening a new one.

Can anyone of you see a difference between a Aquamarine and a Paraiba Tourmaline without testing it? If yes, please let me know how.

These are completely different gemstones. One is from the beryl family and the other is from the tourmaline family. An Aquamarine will never achieve the glow of a Paraiba Tourmaline and very rarely match the colour so IF you are experienced at looking at stones then, with these two stones, you're pretty much guaranteed to be able to see the difference. HOWEVER, I'm not sure how much you know about gemstones but it's absolutely impossible to tell much about gemstones just by looking - you need a lot of experience for this and know what to look for. A loupe is an essential item but even then you need to be able to "read" what you're seeing. This takes years of practice. There are threads on this if you search. Also some gemstones can look similar to others. In order to determine between the two you need gemological instruments that can test for RI, SG and, in some cases, very expensive large equipment that only the top labs possess! Not all labs are equal.

I have a feeling you're trying to learn (a good thing) but you need to understand it's like learning Latin. There's no quick way.