Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

GIA Inconclusive country of origin

D

diamondliz

Rough_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Messages
23
GIA just issued an "inconclusive" country of origin on a sapphire. How completely lame is that! Guess we will have to start using another lab for this. The customer is just left hanging now and still has to pay for this cert.
 
The land surface (not under water or ice) of the earth is approximately 45.31 million square miles. The face up area of a large 10mm x 14mm sapphire is 140 sq mm, or less than a fourth of a square inch. Inclusions specific to different regions based on the presence, or concentration of different elements, or types of inclusions give gemologists clues as to origin, but then only if the region has been documented and there are such inclusions in the stone in question. the cleaner and more pure a stone the less a gemologist has to go on. I don't think it is lame at all, rather a commendable honesty. Face it, if GIA cant tell you then no one else will be able to. If you show me a pebble from a driveway in my hometown I couldn't tell you whose drive it came from, let alone where the pebble originated. Better still, if I cut a 1 inch cube of Velveeta® from somewhere in the block, how would you determine from where in the block it came? I would be happy to trade you your anonymous sapphire for my cube of cheese.
 
Yeah... I basically agree with VL. If country of origin is an important factor for the consumer, they need to determine that at the sale of the stone by buying from a lapidary who knows, and not rely on after-the-fact determinations.
 
diamondliz|1353951828|3315727 said:
GIA just issued an "inconclusive" country of origin on a sapphire. How completely lame is that! Guess we will have to start using another lab for this. The customer is just left hanging now and still has to pay for this cert.
Click to expand...

Agree with other posters. With respect to the bolded part of your remarks, are you in the Trade?
 
I thought GIA had more expertise on diamonds but AGL had the leading expertise on sapphires and other non-diamond colored gems . . . No?
 
Yes, that's right, but GIA is highly regarded as well. For colored stones, AGL would be my first choice, GIA second.
 
GIA is an excellent lab but AGL has an edge over them. I've seen AGL able to determine origin where GIA was unable to but note that it is likely AGL might not be able to as well. It isn't an easy task as sometimes there is no tell tale inclusions or is insufficiently conclusive. Please be aware that in most cases, origin adds little to no premium unless it is of very fine quality and significant size.
 
diamondliz,

GIA owes you money. In the event that origin can not be determined a standard identification report should be issued. Please see this link on the GIA website. See the ** at the bottom of the first page. They should refund you the difference in cost of the reports.
GIA pulled this crap on me a couple years back and I called them out on it. I got a refund! When you call them GIA will probably deny that they owe you anything until you show them the link below. That's what happened to me.
If origin is a big concern for you then don't waste your time with GIA. For colored stones go to AGL.

http://www.gia.edu/lab-reports-services/fees_payment/lab_fees/IdentFeeSchedule_USD_Oct2012[1].pdf

~Justin
 
Justin:

Thank you - I did not know that! It just goes to show it pays to read the fine print.
 
It sounds fair to be refunded the difference if GIA is unable to determine origin.
 
minousbijoux|1354070008|3317000 said:
Justin:

Thank you - I did not know that! It just goes to show it pays to read the fine print.
Click to expand...

No problem! Happy to help.
~Justin
 
Chrono|1354028053|3316418 said:
GIA is an excellent lab but AGL has an edge over them. I've seen AGL able to determine origin where GIA was unable to but note that it is likely AGL might not be able to as well. It isn't an easy task as sometimes there is no tell tale inclusions or is insufficiently conclusive. Please be aware that in most cases, origin adds little to no premium unless it is of very fine quality and significant size.
Click to expand...

A more accurate way to put this would be "willing to state (or guess) origin" rather than "able to determine origin". Though the GIA labs are very well equipped with some of the best research gemologists in the world, they tend to be conservative on matters which are not scientifically demonstrable. Indeed they resisted getting into the origin identification game for a long time until they gave into market pressure. There are other differences which are relevant here. For example, GIA is a not-for-profit organization while AGL is a business which must always seek a competitive advantage. Note the form of the language used in an AGL report in the comments section:

"Based on available gemological information, it is the opinion of the Laboratory that the origin of this material would be classified as <origin>."
 
I talked to GIA about the report after posting this. They did refund the difference in report price. I did not even have to ask them to do it, although I had left a few voicemails expressing my disappointment before I got a call back. They told me if they are not sure they will just not call it. I guess I can respect that but I will pobably try AGL next time. The stone in question had been a replacement from a jeweler that broke the original sapphire in the repair process. Ring is approx. from the 1920's. More than likely a Burma stone for original but we will never know. The customer got back a nice looking sapphire but we now know it is diffused! Not such a great deal for the customer. Not sure what to do about it at this point. Replacement was 8-10 years ago.
 
Am I understanding that the sapphire is only now sent to GIA for verification 10 years after replacement by the jeweller? :eek: I am very sorry if that is the case because I doubt anything can be done after this many years. There is no harm in the customer approaching the jeweller about this but without the original damaged stone (and proof of non diffusion), I don't know what else the jeweller can do.
 
Would GIA have been able to determine the treatment back in 2002?
 
I would think so.
 
The jeweler who replaced the stone got it from a gem dealer at the Las Vegas Jewelry show. He was assured it was not heat treated (don't know what he paid). He had another gemologist look at it who also believed it was not heat treated. Diffusion would have been pretty new back then. It is possible the gem dealer did not even know it was diffused.
I did get the ring and cert back from GIA today. Instead of "inconclusive" on the origin section they put "not requested".
 
I guess it comes down to semantics, as you did request it - they just couldn't ascertain it!
 
minousbijoux|1354167125|3318041 said:
I guess it comes down to semantics, as you did request it - they just couldn't ascertain it!
Click to expand...
It's the standart mention on GIA certs. When you don't ask for origin they also add the same thing.
 
Chrono|1354123436|3317461 said:
I would think so.
Click to expand...

Thanks Chrono. I really didn't know, but now I do.
 
Can I just make sure I'm reading this thread correctly?

- A jeweller was asked to work on a 1920s setting 10 years ago and in the process broke the sapphire that it contained.
- He obtained a replacement sapphire from a gem dealer in Las Vegas who assured him it wasn't heated.
- 10 years on, you have sent the stone to GIA to ascertain treatment/origin.
- GIA are unable to ascertain origin but it's been confirmed as diffused?

Not sure why all of the above is happening now but here are my thoughts:

1. There is no evidence of how good the original sapphire was in terms of origin or treatment.
2. With that in mind, the owner of the ring may have got a nicer/worse sapphire - there's no way of knowing.
3. The jeweller and gem dealer were wrong in their representation of the stone at the time.
4. No jeweller or gem dealer can see diffusion so their word at that time is simply their opinion - not concrete evidence.
5. In 2002, labs were familiar with diffusion. If the stone had been sent for testing it would have been confirmed.
6. What can be done now? Nothing. The jeweller would be well within his rights to say that he had acted honestly
7. Also, how does the jeweller know that the stone hasn't been switched out since 2002?

The above is a story of "buyer beware". I'm sure everybody acted honestly but this is why we always advocate "trust but verify" on this forum.
 
LD|1354198366|3318217 said:
Can I just make sure I'm reading this thread correctly?

- A jeweller was asked to work on a 1920s setting 10 years ago and in the process broke the sapphire that it contained.
- He obtained a replacement sapphire from a gem dealer in Las Vegas who assured him it wasn't heated.
- 10 years on, you have sent the stone to GIA to ascertain treatment/origin.
- GIA are unable to ascertain origin but it's been confirmed as diffused?

Not sure why all of the above is happening now but here are my thoughts:

1. There is no evidence of how good the original sapphire was in terms of origin or treatment.
2. With that in mind, the owner of the ring may have got a nicer/worse sapphire - there's no way of knowing.
3. The jeweller and gem dealer were wrong in their representation of the stone at the time.
4. No jeweller or gem dealer can see diffusion so their word at that time is simply their opinion - not concrete evidence.
5. In 2002, labs were familiar with diffusion. If the stone had been sent for testing it would have been confirmed.
6. What can be done now? Nothing. The jeweller would be well within his rights to say that he had acted honestly
7. Also, how does the jeweller know that the stone hasn't been switched out since 2002?

The above is a story of "buyer beware". I'm sure everybody acted honestly but this is why we always advocate "trust but verify" on this forum.
Click to expand...


All very well said. I would add that as the stone is diffused, origin is not going to add anything to it.
 
As usual, LD has stated everything plainly and clearly. I am also in agreement with VL that if the sapphire is diffused, then origin carries zero weight.
 
I agree. Origin is a mute point. The diffusion part I was not expecting. This does show the consumer that they need to have valuable items appraised. This was an inherited piece. If the ring was appraised before nobody knows. The sapphire is very,very clean which is why it was hard to tell anything about origin or heat treatment. It was sent to GIA mounted. Not sure it would have occured to me to take it out and immerse it. In the future I will.
 
diamondliz|1354307903|3319508 said:
I agree. Origin is a mute point. The diffusion part I was not expecting. This does show the consumer that they need to have valuable items appraised. This was an inherited piece. If the ring was appraised before nobody knows. The sapphire is very,very clean which is why it was hard to tell anything about origin or heat treatment. It was sent to GIA mounted. Not sure it would have occured to me to take it out and immerse it. In the future I will.
Click to expand...


I'm confused - how would unsetting and immersing it tell you anything? Immersing it in anything wouldn't ever tell you about diffusion. BE can only be 100% detected by sophisticated lab machines.

I'm not sure that valuable items should be appraised - for surety they should have a lab report because this then has a knock on effect to cost and can then be appraised accurately. Hope that helps.
 
diamondliz|1354902455|3325532 said:
http://www.ruby-sapphire.com/blue_surface_diffusion.htm
Click to expand...

Unless you have done this before, have the equipment and have purchased the necessary chemicals, are extremely knowledgeable about coloured gemstones and are able to compare to other samples where you know treatment hasn't been applied, I wouldn't suggest trying this when simply sending to AGL for $55 would give you the answer. Reading an article and carrying out comprehensive analysis yourself and two different things.

You should read the caveats also where it is very clear that even labs can get it wrong and this is not a science for somebody to dabble in and be assured of the results.
 
Anybody can post links. That article is an old one and one that people read when they want to understand what diffusion is so I really don't see your point in posting it. If you feel you can do as well as a lab then good luck and you'll probably make a good living out of it.

http://www.ajsgem.com/articles/beryllium-diffused-sapphire-testing-and-certification.html

Please do a little more research as to exactly how many labs in the world have LIBS machines. If it was as easy as you think then all labs would be doing it wouldn't they?

I hope you have great fun experimenting with immersion.
 
The stone was sent to GIA so it could be accurately identified and then appraised. Another gemologist besides myself also thought the gem was not heat treated. To appraise it correctly we sent it off. The value would be very different if it were not heat treated. I want to try to identify it myself as much as possible so my suspicions, if incorrect, don't waste the customers money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP

Featured Topics

Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top