GIA Ruby Designation

[cluelesscat]

I recently got this ring which came with a GIA report. The report states untreated Burmese ruby and the color is purplish-red. In reality, I think the ruby is very pretty with excellent clarity and some "glow" under the sun (despite some windowing effect?). However, if I didn't see the report, I might think that this is more a sapphire? I do not actually own any pink sapphires (and this is my first ruby), so I don't know if they are definitely less saturated than this. I don't think I paid too much, so I don't mind that it's not 'vivid' red (the actual stone is quite close to the report image which was what I based my decision on). In general, is there any standard on grading these gemstones? Do you think this is a good quality stone?

 

[Mrsz1ppy]

You are opening quite a can of worms! I understand the the US has a much stricter, ie redder, definition of ruby than the rest of the world. Pink is technically less saturated red, so it becomes a percentage. 51% red=ruby. But there are many more educated people on here who can guide you more.

Personally, I like unheated Burmese rubies and enjoy the variety of secondary colors. The fluorescence knocks me out! I would add your stone to my collection at the right price.

Am following to hear others chime in!

 

[RRfromR]

This is very interesting. I'm an antique girl and there are very little pink sapphires in the antique world, pretty much everything is a ruby. I have two rubies, both unheated and marked as such by GIA, and their color is very different imo.

 

[Mrs_Strizzle]

Some say the GIA isn't the optimal source to grade colored gemstones. I have a "paraiba" that is graded that by the GIA which many here would tell me it's not. Never the less, I think they can be trusted with the treatment aspect, and we should buy what our eyes love. Your ring is very pretty, whatever you want to call it.

 

[LilAlex]

First: I think it is a gorgeous stone!

Second: it is shallow and maybe windowed but just a lovely, lovely color (and a window with that hue and your skin tone = not a problem to me). Spouse has a pair of shallow-cut antique similar Burmas (Mogok) that GIA called sapphire but the old-school colored-stone-savvy B&M vendor kept referring to as "rubies."

Third: As @Mrsz1ppy points out, true Burma-color is a pinkish or magenta-y pull and not the stop-light red that we have come to expect. So the canonical color from the canonical origin is not even trade-ideal. I suspect that one could even get an AGL "Classic Burma" origin for an outstanding non-pigeon-blood red ruby -- but I may be wrong.

I would not pay a pigeon-blood red premium but I think that's a show-stopping stone! (My wife its not a huge fan of red gems on the finger but she loves pink gems yet wears no pink)

 

[cluelesscat]

Thank you for everyone's replies! This is why I "lurk" around here. I learned something new again.

LilAlex - I did not know the classic Burma-color is actually pinkish and wondered if my ruby might be considered subpar trade color because it's not red-red, haha. I'm glad to see the affirmative responses because I do think it's very pretty myself. I'm curious what would be a reasonable pigeon-blood red premium? I see ruby prices can be all over the place.

Mrsz1ppy - Thank you for your compliments! This bit about 'saturation scale' is very interesting. I guess it does make sense that "redness" can be a subjective matter. I was also considering a pink sapphire at the time, so I was really curious where they draw the line -51% sounds about right to me