GIA Reports - Comments Section

[maddie]

Looking at a dimaond with the following comments on the GIA report. What do they mean and is this a bad thing?
- Pinpoints not shown
- Internal graining is not shown

 

[verticalhorizon]

Also, why do GIA reports have inclusion plots, but GIA Dossiers do not?

 

[zeytoun]

There are very specific plotting guidelines for GIA reports.

Certain features are supposed to be plotted on the graph always (like crystals, for example. Usually, features mentioned by a comment are of less impact to the grades, and if a feature that is never plotted is the grade setter, the comment will say so.

Regarding pinpoints:

Up to 3 are plotted on the report chart. For example, if there are 6 ppts and nothing else, 3 will be plotted, and the comment "additional ppts are not shown" will be added.

If there are already 3 internal inclusions plotted, and 2 or more ppts not plotted, a comment "pinpoint are not shown" will be added.

So I would guess that the diamond from this GIA report is VS1 or lower and already has 3 internal inclusions on the chart.

Regarding internal graining:

Since internal graining is not a concrete feature, but depends on the viewing angle, lighting conditions, etc, it is never plotted on the final chart (it will be charted in private GIA charts in case your stone ever comes back in for grading again).

For internal graining to be "callable" (considered a clarity characteristic, and not just clear graining visible in most stones under a microscope) it has to be louped at 10x. Louped only through the Pavillion, it is considered a VVS1 characteristic. Louped through the table, it is usually considered VVS2, although, sometimes internal graining that is more noticeable can be given a lower grade. For example, once we had a stone that had VS1 crystals, but internal grain lines that were obvious even to the naked eye face up, and the stone got an I-1 grade.

If internal graining is the grade setter, the comment is "clarity grade based on internal graining that is not shown".

Regarding dossiers:

I'm not sure. I believe all dossiers are done at the Carlsbad lab. They're cost less then a full report, don't they? They are quicker and simpler to do.

I don't know if that fully answers your question, if not, let me know.

 

[WinkHPD]

Such wonderful information! Thank you. I knew that one of the reasons they were not plotted (according to my instructor) was that plotting all of them could sometimes make a very nice stone look like a dissaster area. I was never taught the guidelines and I thank you for sharing it with us. Every day I am blessed to learn something about my trade, this was a great thing to learn.

Wink

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Hey! Zey! Thanks for the info!

Nice having you around...

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 5/24/2004 9:09:47 PM zeytoun wrote:

"Up to 3 are plotted on the report chart. For example, if there are 6 ppts and nothing else, 3 will be plotted, and the comment 'additional ppts are not shown' will be added. ."

Would at most 3 internal characteristics make a VVS grade and more degrade the stone regardless of how big or small they are ? Just trying to understand why 3 is magic number here...



" Regarding internal graining [...] (it will be charted in private GIA charts in case your stone ever comes back in for grading again)."

What is this all about? If a stone is submitted for grading a second time, the grades would be taken from an archive rather than established from scratch ?

----------------

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Hey Zey, that was fantastic.

 

[zeytoun]

The number 3 is just an arbitrarily chosen number, it has nothing to do with determining the grade. It's just so you don't have to plot excessively, it could have just as easily been 2 or 4.

And, yes, if a stone comes back, and a previous report number is given, it is graded in comparison to the previous report. Sometimes that might hurt you (i.e. it is a very old report and they gave you an SI-2, and now they probably would have given you an SI-1 if it weren't for the old report), and sometimes it might help you. Mostly it's (1) to see if there has been any changes/damage to the stone (2) verify that it is indeed the same stone as before (3) make sure the grades are relatively consistent, because odds are 2 different people may grade the stone differently.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

This is interesting Zey.

Do 3 people grade every stone?

 

[verticalhorizon]

Perhaps, GIA only plots inclusions that are the basis of the grade. Other inclusions that aren't necessarily important are left off so as not to make the plot too scarey!

It seems odd that GIA would have two different reports, one includes an inclusion plot and the other doesn't.

For that matter, GCAL doesn't inlude a plot diagram either. What's up with that. You'd think that was a pretty important aspect.

 

[Brian Knox]

Hi Zey,

"...Sometimes that might hurt you (i.e. it is a very old report and they gave you an SI-2, and now they probably would have given you an SI-1 if it weren't for the old report),..."

Does this mean that there is "admitted" softening of the SI clarity grades ?

 

[zeytoun]

The grade is automatically graded twice. If the double checker is experienced, and he agrees with all the grades, he can finalize the report. If he is experienced and disagrees on one grade, he can get opinions from one of the quality assurance checkers on that specific point. Sometimes an experience double checker will opt to have it graded a third time, if there are a lot of things he disagrees with, or wants to be extra sure. If the double checker is not as experienced, it automatically goes to a triple checker to be graded a third time.

So stones are sometimes graded twice, sometimes three times.

 

[zeytoun]

Re: softening

I'm not really sure. I've heard it said before, and it seems possible. I don't know if it is true or not, and if it is, whether because of deliberate decision, or just an unintentional "drift" because of a different group of graders than previous years.

 

[niceice]

----------------
On 5/25/2004 5:17:57 PM verticalhorizon wrote:

Perhaps, GIA only plots inclusions that are the basis of the grade. Other inclusions that aren't necessarily important are left off so as not to make the plot too scarey!

It seems odd that GIA would have two different reports, one includes an inclusion plot and the other doesn't. ----------------

We discussed this matter specifically with one of the lab directors at GIA NYC last week because we felt that they had missed a feather which we felt was one of the "primary grade maker's" because it had not been indicated on the lab report. He indicated that the feather had not been indicated on the plotting diagram because they did not feel that it was substantial, we argued that the feather should be indicated on the plotting diagram and subsequently re-submitted the diamond for grading with the request that the feather be indicated on the lab report which it eventually was. We got the impression that the GIA was not indicating all of the inclusions within the diamonds graded due to pressure placed upon them by the cutters because of a desire for nicer looking paper, we said "it is unfortunate that an institution like the GIA feels it necessary to lower their grading standards due to the pressure placed upon them by their clients" and as you might imagine, the statement seemed to hang there for a bit and the conversation akwardly moved forward. No doubt that the labs are feeling the financial pressure placed upon them by diamond cutters who like the results offered by softer laboratories that offer more lenient consumer friendly "paper" but it is unfortunate that they seem weak enough to succomb to such pressure when in fact they should be setting the standards by which all other laboratories try to serve their clients by... Another case in point for buying your diamond from a dealer who actually personally inspects the diamonds that they sell, who knows what you're going to get when you're "buying off paper" these days!

 

[verticalhorizon]

So even then, with a report that includes the plot, you have to take it with a grain of salt and see what your ind. appraiser says.

Is it better for insurance purposes to have an (accurate) inclusion plot? Or with the pressure from cutters, the plot loses a bit of its cred?

Of course, this can change.