need some honest opinions - rhodolite garnet

[chrono]

I''m too late to sway your decision but I''m with the majority. I find the tone too dark but the saturation acceptable.

(HD) Mark,
In terms of cut, the stone is well cut. There is not much extinction. The dark and light areas are well spaced and creates a sort of pattern which in turn, creates scintillation.

 

[Allison D.]

Trinity, please read Michael E.''s post thoroughly. I''m afraid you''re being scared off a stone (needlessly, in my opinion) that may be absolutely lovely in person.

I''ve spent a ton of time over the past year photographing colored stones, and I can tell you from firsthand experience that it can be an absolute challenge to capture color with the camera the way we see it in real life. I''ve come to really appreciate that there is only so much a photograph can convey. It can help with cut, and it can somewhat represent color, but it seldom captures the dimensions you see in person.

For months on this forum, I''ve read tons of posts saying "oh, it''s too GREY". I''ll tell you that likely has more to do with the way a camera''s programmed to default (18% grey) than anything else, and people not knowing enough to compensate for that with an extra stop''s exposure.

Michael''s right - there is no extinction evident.

Gary Braun is one of the many fine cutters we''re spoiled by here on PS; I''ve bought several stones from him, and I can tell you that his descriptions are pretty spot on. I''d refer back to his comments on this stone: "The rough looked much more pink before cutting so it was a bit of a surprise to see such a deep red color after it was finished." Given that he''s the only one who''s actually seen the stone, I''d weight his input far more. While folks here are well-meaning, we haven''t laid eyes on the stone. You''ve described what you want as "red-red-pink"; there''s every reason to think this stone might be a good fit.

Loving Diamonds rightly commented that sometimes one has to buy on photos if vendors don''t have return policies. However, that''s not the case here. Gary has a 7-day return policy, so you can look at the stone in person and decide if it''s too dark for you or not.

If it were me, I''d want to do that before ruling it out.

With respect to how "fine" materials are, colored stones aren''t much different from diamonds in that you have to balance your budget with your wants. Stones can be very appealing without being ‘the absolute finest example you’d ever see in that material’. Hey, I could be a purist too with enough $$...... I''d love a really nice blue sapphire, but I can assure you I''m not going to lay out $30K for a gorgeous Kashmir stone. That means I''m likely going to have to settle on a stone that''s pleasing to me, even though purists may scoff at it.

My point: not everyone is shopping for Kobe beef; some people are happy with a nice NY strip. And, some people actually prefer it.

 

[T L]

Date: 11/8/2009 8:38:31 PM
Author: Allison D.

Trinity, please read Michael E.'s post thoroughly. I'm afraid you're being scared off a stone (needlessly, in my opinion) that may be absolutely lovely in person.

I've spent a ton of time over the past year photographing colored stones, and I can tell you from firsthand experience that it can be an absolute challenge to capture color with the camera the way we see it in real life. I've come to really appreciate that there is only so much a photograph can convey. It can help with cut, and it can somewhat represent color, but it seldom captures the dimensions you see in person.

For months on this forum, I've read tons of posts saying 'oh, it's too GREY'. I'll tell you that likely has more to do with the way a camera's programmed to default (18% grey) than anything else, and people not knowing enough to compensate for that with an extra stop's exposure.

Michael's right - there is no extinction evident.

Gary Braun is one of the many fine cutters we're spoiled by here on PS; I've bought several stones from him, and I can tell you that his descriptions are pretty spot on. I'd refer back to his comments on this stone: 'The rough looked much more pink before cutting so it was a bit of a surprise to see such a deep red color after it was finished.' Given that he's the only one who's actually seen the stone, I'd weight his input far more. While folks here are well-meaning, we haven't laid eyes on the stone. You've described what you want as 'red-red-pink'; there's every reason to think this stone might be a good fit.

Loving Diamonds rightly commented that sometimes one has to buy on photos if vendors don't have return policies. However, that's not the case here. Gary has a 7-day return policy, so you can look at the stone in person and decide if it's too dark for you or not.

If it were me, I'd want to do that before ruling it out.

With respect to how 'fine' materials are, colored stones aren't much different from diamonds in that you have to balance your budget with your wants. Stones can be very appealing without being ‘the absolute finest example you’d ever see in that material’. Hey, I could be a purist too with enough $$...... I'd love a really nice blue sapphire, but I can assure you I'm not going to lay out $30K for a gorgeous Kashmir stone. That means I'm likely going to have to settle on a stone that's pleasing to me, even though purists may scoff at it.

My point: not everyone is shopping for Kobe beef; some people are happy with a nice NY strip. And, some people actually prefer it.

I don't think she's being scared off. If she wants, she should get it for review, but it will cost $$$ to send it back. Is it really worth it for a common stone that she can find cheaply somewhere else? This is not kashmir sapphires we're talking about, but rhodolite garnets, a completely different ball of wax, and well within many people's budget for a fine stone. As far as Gary's pictures are concerned, I've found they are usually better than IRL. I also disagree with you and Michael, the extinction is pretty evident. Garnets are prone to extinction, and this one is looking rather dark in those hand shots. It is your opinion and you're entitled to it, but I respectfully disagree.

I am someone who personally is really sick and tired of wasting money shipping back items for returns, so if we can help someone save a little, why not? That stone is a brick red stone. This is what I consider a fine purplish pink red garnet in the link. I also know that this stone was comparable in price per carat.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ajs-james-meyer-garnet-bezel-ring.112678/

Notice the pnk and purple in that stone, how bright it is, and not blackish or brown. Then compare it to the photos of Gary's stone.

 

[Michael_E]

I also disagree with you and Michael, the extinction is pretty evident. Garnets are prone to extinction, and this one is looking rather dark in those hand shots.

I think that you are mistaking the reflected color of the background in those shots with extinction, TL. The outside shot is obviously taken very close to or inside of some dark surroundings. The stone is also tilted so far that all you see is a light window of the hand holding it, the reflection of the dark surrounding space and a small bit of some reflectivity showing the colors of the stone. It''s a bad picture and shouldn''t be used to indicate what the stone looks like IRL. Similarly the incandescent shot shows extremely directional lighting with one half of the stone reflecting a dark surrounding space, as well as the camera having poor white balance, making everything look too yellowish. I suppose that you could call it GIGO,(Garbage In, Garbage Out), in reference to the quality of the light entering the stone in areas which you are considering extinction. I have a feeling that any stone would be poorly represented in those shots and I wouldn''t characterize those dark areas as extinction. My point is that with many stones, no one except the photographer can tell whether the dark areas are extinction or just a lack of light from a poor choice of the surrounding area where the stone is being shot. After all a gem is basically just a fancy mirror and can only reflect what is around it. Even some of the extinction example shots which we see are not really extinction, but a lack of light from poor surroundings. How can you tell from a picture what''s really going on in detail ? I think that if one is really attracted to a stone from a picture, that the best approach is to ask the seller about it since they do know what is going on. This, of course, assumes that the seller is up front about it. Buying from Ebay in this case is a MUCH larger risk than buying from a custom cutter, (who has a reputation to consider and so can''t be trying to fool people).

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 11/8/2009 8:47:36 PM
Author: tourmaline_lover

I don''t think she''s being scared off. If she wants, she should get it for review, but it will cost $$$ to send it back. Is it really worth it for a common stone that she can find cheaply somewhere else? This is not kashmir sapphires we''re talking about, but rhodolite garnets, a completely different ball of wax, and well within many people''s budget for a fine stone. As far as Gary''s pictures are concerned, I''ve found they are usually better than IRL. I also disagree with you and Michael, the extinction is pretty evident. Garnets are prone to extinction, and this one is looking rather dark in those hand shots. It is your opinion and your entitled to it, but I respectfully disagree.

I am someone who personally is really sick and tired of wasting money shipping back items for returns, so if we can help someone save a little, why not? That stone is a brick red stone. This is what I consider a fine purplish pink red garnet in the link. I also know that this stone was comparable in price per carat.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ajs-james-meyer-garnet-bezel-ring.112678/

Notice the pnk and purple in that stone, how bright it is, and not blackish or brown. Then compare it to the photos of Gary''s stone.

TL, it will cost her money to send it back.....it might be a whole $7!!!!!!! I hardly consider that tragic for the chance to look at a stone in person.

Comparing this garnet to Gene''s umbalite garnet is a bit disingenuous - they aren''t the same. Also, I bought a 3-ct garnet from that same parcel from Gene, and I can absolutely assure you it was more than $195. Not by a ton - it was closer to $270, but it was still higher.

Beyond that, the lighting in AJ''s shots isn''t remotely the same as the lighting in the handshots....not to mention the pink flower backdrop!

Also, comparing a deep red rhodolite to a purplish-pink umbalite and using that as the basis to knock it is a bit incredible. Yes, they are both garnets, but so is a tsavorite, and it''s green. Garnets come in many different flavors, from very deep red to light. There is no one universally correct color. Also, OP didn''t say she wanted a purplish/pink stone......she said she wanted red/red/pink. It would seem this might fit what she wants.

(It''s also worth pointing out that *well-cut* specimens aren''t exactly abundant. Sure, you can place a custom order IF the cutter happens to have the rough on hand, but sometimes he doesn''t. Then what? Better to have great color or great cut?)

I will respectfully disagree with you regarding the extinction; I concur with Michael that the cut display in Gary''s photo clearly shows otherwise. I''m frankly surprised you think the hand photos would be more indicative; in my experience, they are far LESS indicative. Most of them are taken with a quick point and shoot; they aren''t corrected for the proper lighting conditions, and they aren''t grey-scale corrected. If anything, they are worse to judge the stone from than the web photos.

I accept that your experience with Gary''s photos find them different from real life, but I have to say that I don''t share it. I bought a small pad from him earlier this year and it''s incredibly like the photo provided; this also goes for the two amethysts I purchased from him.

I can certainly appreciate that you individually are sick of shipping stones back, and I can see where you''d make a choice for yourself to reduce the chances of that happening. That said, though, I''d hate to see one''s personal intolerances cause someone to possibly miss out on what might be a great stone.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 11/8/2009 9:21:54 PM
Author: Michael_E

It''s a bad picture and shouldn''t be used to indicate what the stone looks like IRL. Similarly the incandescent shot shows extremely directional lighting with one half of the stone reflecting a dark surrounding space, as well as the camera having poor white balance, making everything look too yellowish. I suppose that you could call it GIGO,(Garbage In, Garbage Out), in reference to the quality of the light entering the stone in areas which you are considering extinction. I have a feeling that any stone would be poorly represented in those shots and I wouldn''t characterize those dark areas as extinction.

Amen, Michael - exactly echoed my concerns, and much more succinctly.

 

[T L]

Date: 11/8/2009 9:21:54 PM
Author: Michael_E


I think that you are mistaking the reflected color of the background in those shots with extinction, TL. The outside shot is obviously taken very close to or inside of some dark surroundings. The stone is also tilted so far that all you see is a light window of the hand holding it, the reflection of the dark surrounding space and a small bit of some reflectivity showing the colors of the stone. It's a bad picture and shouldn't be used to indicate what the stone looks like IRL. Similarly the incandescent shot shows extremely directional lighting with one half of the stone reflecting a dark surrounding space, as well as the camera having poor white balance, making everything look too yellowish. I suppose that you could call it GIGO,(Garbage In, Garbage Out), in reference to the quality of the light entering the stone in areas which you are considering extinction. I have a feeling that any stone would be poorly represented in those shots and I wouldn't characterize those dark areas as extinction. My point is that with many stones, no one except the photographer can tell whether the dark areas are extinction or just a lack of light from a poor choice of the surrounding area where the stone is being shot. After all a gem is basically just a fancy mirror and can only reflect what is around it. Even some of the extinction example shots which we see are not really extinction, but a lack of light from poor surroundings. How can you tell from a picture what's really going on in detail ? I think that if one is really attracted to a stone from a picture, that the best approach is to ask the seller about it since they do know what is going on. This, of course, assumes that the seller is up front about it. Buying from Ebay in this case is a MUCH larger risk than buying from a custom cutter, (who has a reputation to consider and so can't be trying to fool people).

I agree Michael, however when I see a photo of a brick red garnet, it almost always ends up being much darker IRL from what I've seen by disappointed buyers on PS, and my own first hand experience. It is important for the buyer to ask the right questions, and that is what this forum is about. I personally would ask if that stone closes up in certain lighting, if it has a brown modifier (believe me that many people, not just on ebay, are not up front about modifiers or do not know how to spot them), and I would ask if it's dark in tone. I think those are fair questions. I also wish the stone had more pink in it, and to me a rhodolite should have some visible pink that you shouldn't have to imagine being there in a flash or two. If one likes brick red rhodolite garnets, that's another story, and that's fine, but the market place values ones with more pink in them.

Again, the OP has the right to return the stone for inspection, so if you think it's worth it, and she thinks it's worth it, then so be it. I'm just a crab because all those S&H fees really add up. I am a person that returns way more than I keep. LOL!! If I had all the $$$ from the S&H I spent over the years returning stones, I could buy some awesome gem!!

 

[T L]

Date: 11/8/2009 9:26:47 PM
Author: Allison D.

Comparing this garnet to Gene's umbalite garnet is a bit disingenuous - they aren't the same. Also, I bought a 3-ct garnet from that same parcel from Gene, and I can absolutely assure you it was more than $195. Not by a ton - it was closer to $270, but it was still higher.

I saw the pricing on both since he was going to sell that stone to me if AJJ didn't want it. The price per carat is not very far off. If AJJ's size was larger, than the price would have been much higher, yes. BTW, umbalites are rhodolites so it is the same thing as far as species are concerned, if that's also what you're referencing. The umbalites just come from a specific place - Umba River valley in Tanzania.

 

[Allison D.]

I''m not trying to be contentious for the sake of it, TL.

My point is similar to the point that people make about color in diamonds. "The market" rewards whiter stones and charges a premium for them; that doesn''t mean my eye won''t like a warmer stone.

OP said she wanted a RED stone with some pink. Would you consider AJ''s stone red? I have one, and I don''t. It''s more purple/pink, but certainly not red.

I''m just on the devil''s advocate side that says "it may be what she wants, regardless of what the ''market'' would reward." The only question for her is, is it worth $7 to find out and see it in person herself?

 

[T L]

Date: 11/8/2009 10:07:16 PM
Author: Allison D.
I''m not trying to be contentious for the sake of it, TL.

My point is similar to the point that people make about color in diamonds. ''The market'' rewards whiter stones and charges a premium for them; that doesn''t mean my eye won''t like a warmer stone.

OP said she wanted a RED stone with some pink. Would you consider AJ''s stone red? I have one, and I don''t. It''s more purple/pink, but certainly not red.

I''m just on the devil''s advocate side that says ''it may be what she wants, regardless of what the ''market'' would reward.'' The only question for her is, is it worth $7 to find out and see it in person herself?

Fair enough Alison, I just don''t see any pink in that stone, just brown, in particular in the hand shots. However, as you and Michael have stated, perhaps she should inspect it first, and make the decision based on IRL if she feels it''s worth potentially losing out $7. The issue is that the OP wanted honest opinions on the pictures in this thread, and that''s what I''m trying to do, based on the photos.

 

[haagen_dazs]

this is a very lively debate.

exactly how much does this gemstone cost?
i have yet to see a price and its off the website.

 

[haagen_dazs]

Date: 11/8/2009 9:30:51 PM
Author: tourmaline_lover

(believe me that many people, not just on ebay, are not up front about modifiers or do not know how to spot them),

newbie qns
is there a way to spot modifier colours (i suppose they are also called secondary hues?)

do you hold the stone up with backlighting or view them at specific angles?
do you have to just look at the stone face up?

 

[bikes333]

It's beautiful!!!!

 

[Lovinggems]

JMO I don''t really like this type of red, looks like an oxidised red to me. I would try searching for more candidates and if none turns up, I would purchase this one to review.

 

[LD]

Could I just make a point about getting and returning gemstones to assess please? It may only cost $7 each way if you're in the US but if you're elsewhere and I don't know where Trinty is, the return costs, import duties etc etc, can add up to much much more.

As I'm in the UK I can tell you that returning gemstones is sometimes not only more hassle than it's worth but can be costly also. For many of us who buy more gemstones than we care to admit, shipping costs do become an issue

I have kept some gemstones because the cost of returning (and the shipping to get to me in the first place) make it prohibitive.

Trinity - why don't you speak with Gary about the stone? You've obviously got some reservations because you've posted on here. If you can afford to get the gemstone (and potentially return it if it's not what you expect) then it's obviously worth getting for a look. I can only tell you that, for me, a gemstone has to make me go "phwoar" to keep it so go with your gut instinct.

 

[chrono]

If Trinity is interested, it’s fair for her to ask Gary more questions. My concern is the tone being on the dark side, and definitely a question as to having a brown modifier. When I shop, it has to look great in the picture before I make an inquiry, regardless of the value of the stone. After all, all vendors try their hardest to present their gemstones in the best light.

 

[chrono]

Date: 11/9/2009 12:14:40 AM
Author: haagen_dazs
newbie qns
is there a way to spot modifier colours (i suppose they are also called secondary hues?)

do you hold the stone up with backlighting or view them at specific angles?
do you have to just look at the stone face up?

No, there is no specific trick or help. It takes viewing LOTS of gemstones, usually best in person. It''s sort of like any other skill where it takes time and practice.

 

[T L]

Date: 11/9/2009 8:32:17 AM
Author: Chrono

Date: 11/9/2009 12:14:40 AM
Author: haagen_dazs
newbie qns
is there a way to spot modifier colours (i suppose they are also called secondary hues?)

do you hold the stone up with backlighting or view them at specific angles?
do you have to just look at the stone face up?

No, there is no specific trick or help. It takes viewing LOTS of gemstones, usually best in person. It's sort of like any other skill where it takes time and practice.

I agree with Chrono. However, once you've seen some fine material, it is easier to see what has more distinct modifiers. For example, most people would think their stone does not have a particular modifier, then they go to a gemshow or a fine jeweler and see more and more of the same gemstone, and their stone then has an obvious modifier to their eyes.

After more than 15 years of collecting colored gems, you do get an eye for it. When I first started collecting gems, I bought all kinds of "learning" stones that had lots of brown and grey, and went extinct. I thought they were the greatest stones on earth at the time. Now I wish I could sell them. LOL!!

I know I always harp on modifiers, much to many people's chagrin. I also know that not everyone can afford to buy top gem vivid stones, and that's fine. However, if you see something that is overly brown or grey (unless you like those colors), I like to help people save a few dollars. Some of my gems still have grey and brown, but far less than the stones I originally purchased all those years ago.

 

[movie zombie]

Date: 11/9/2009 11:20:37 AM
Author: tourmaline_lover

Date: 11/9/2009 8:32:17 AM
Author: Chrono

Date: 11/9/2009 12:14:40 AM
Author: haagen_dazs
newbie qns
is there a way to spot modifier colours (i suppose they are also called secondary hues?)

do you hold the stone up with backlighting or view them at specific angles?
do you have to just look at the stone face up?

No, there is no specific trick or help. It takes viewing LOTS of gemstones, usually best in person. It''s sort of like any other skill where it takes time and practice.

I agree with Chrono. However, once you''ve seen some fine material, it is easier to see what has more distinct modifiers. For example, most people would think their stone does not have a particular modifier, then they go to a gemshow or a fine jeweler and see more and more of the same gemstone, and their stone then has an obvious modifier to their eyes.

After more than 15 years of collecting colored gems, you do get an eye for it. When I first started collecting gems, I bought all kinds of ''learning'' stones that had lots of brown and grey, and went extinct. I thought they were the greatest stones on earth at the time. Now I wish I could sell them. LOL!!

I know I always harp on modifiers, much to many people''s chagrin. I also know that not everyone can afford to buy top gem vivid stones, and that''s fine. However, if you see something that is overly brown or grey (unless you like those colors), I like to help people save a few dollars. Some of my gems still have grey and brown, but far less than the stones I originally purchased all those years ago.

everything Chrono and TL said. most of us that have developed an "eye" for fine stones don''t have the budget to support that "eye". we have an inventory of stones we bought when starting out: windowed, extinction, grey/brown overtones, etc. however, now that i''ve developed that "eye" i know i''m buying getting more bang for my buck when i do buy. but that didn''t happen overnight. those with an unlimited budget can start out collecting fine stones as they can afford to rely on the "eye" of a reputable cutter and/or vendor. most of us don''t have that option and need to get ourselves educated so that we can recognize a quality stone and then make the compromises that will fit our budget. personally, i''ll even do without a stone rather than buy one that i know isn''t going to perform.

mz

 

[innerkitten]

I haven''t read all the other posts yet. It''s a nice stone. It is kind of on dark side which seems to be the case with some rhodolites. I think it''s all about personal taste. Some people will love the dark moodiness of this stone, others would prefer a brighter pinker or more purple stone.

 

[packrat]

It looks like cherry red lipstick to me. It''s a...sexy color, for lack of better wording. If it''s not cost prohibitive, I think you should have it sent to look at!

 

[innerkitten]

Date: 11/9/2009 12:22:08 PM
Author: movie zombie

Date: 11/9/2009 11:20:37 AM

Author: tourmaline_lover

Date: 11/9/2009 8:32:17 AM

Author: Chrono

Date: 11/9/2009 12:14:40 AM

Author: haagen_dazs

newbie qns

is there a way to spot modifier colours (i suppose they are also called secondary hues?)


do you hold the stone up with backlighting or view them at specific angles?

do you have to just look at the stone face up?

No, there is no specific trick or help. It takes viewing LOTS of gemstones, usually best in person. It''s sort of like any other skill where it takes time and practice.

I agree with Chrono. However, once you''ve seen some fine material, it is easier to see what has more distinct modifiers. For example, most people would think their stone does not have a particular modifier, then they go to a gemshow or a fine jeweler and see more and more of the same gemstone, and their stone then has an obvious modifier to their eyes.


After more than 15 years of collecting colored gems, you do get an eye for it. When I first started collecting gems, I bought all kinds of ''learning'' stones that had lots of brown and grey, and went extinct. I thought they were the greatest stones on earth at the time. Now I wish I could sell them. LOL!!


I know I always harp on modifiers, much to many people''s chagrin. I also know that not everyone can afford to buy top gem vivid stones, and that''s fine. However, if you see something that is overly brown or grey (unless you like those colors), I like to help people save a few dollars. Some of my gems still have grey and brown, but far less than the stones I originally purchased all those years ago.

everything Chrono and TL said. most of us that have developed an ''eye'' for fine stones don''t have the budget to support that ''eye''. we have an inventory of stones we bought when starting out: windowed, extinction, grey/brown overtones, etc. however, now that i''ve developed that ''eye'' i know i''m buying getting more bang for my buck when i do buy. but that didn''t happen overnight. those with an unlimited budget can start out collecting fine stones as they can afford to rely on the ''eye'' of a reputable cutter and/or vendor. most of us don''t have that option and need to get ourselves educated so that we can recognize a quality stone and then make the compromises that will fit our budget. personally, i''ll even do without a stone rather than buy one that i know isn''t going to perform.


mz

Well said MZ.

 

[Michael_E]

Date: 11/9/2009 12:14:40 AM
Author: haagen_dazs

is there a way to spot modifier colours (i suppose they are also called secondary hues?)

Yes, there is. As with anything of this nature you have to know what sort of stone you''re dealing with, how it''s cut and then be able to distinguish the different colors that can emanate from the stone and separate them from any background colors that may be getting reflected at the same time. In order to eliminate background colors it''s best to view the stone on a white background inside of a light tent or in light colored, diffuse surroundings...something like a white or light colored room with lots of north daylight or a bright office type environment. If the stone is di or trichroic, then you need to be aware of that and tilt the stone along the axes which produce those colors in order to see clearly what sort of contribution they make to the overall color of the stone. Stones like tourmalines and sapphires are often quite dichroic and will show different colors as you tilt them. Often it''s best to close one eye to give yourself a better idea of what those colors are. Tourmalines which look like they have a brown modifier often actually have a green modifier, which is the color of the crystal on the "A-B" axes. That green color turns brown when mixed with the pink to red color of the "C" axis of the stone, (this use of green is also used in furniture stain to get a better brown BTW).

You also need to be aware of any problems which you may have in seeing some colors. Often people can be a bit color blind and will see grays and browns when the actual colors may be blues and greens, yellows or oranges and they are just not able to see them. Then you have the problem of how the colors in stones change in different lighting conditions, surrounding and color temperatures. I don''t think that I''ve ever seen a stone which dfidn''t change color a little bit in every different condition that it was in and this is even more pronounced when looking at pictures since every camera has adjustments and biases which just can''t be totally accounted for.

When you are looking at a stone you should look at it under as many conditions as possible and make sure that it looks good under the conditions under which it will be worn the most. Make absolutely sure that you don''t pass judgment on it under conditions which are guaranteed to make it look bad, (typically direct sunlight or a single incandescent bulb or other light source in a darkened room). I think that judging stones from pictures requires nearly as much experience with taking pictures and comparing them to the stones, as it does in just looking at lots of stone. It''s all fun though !

 

[T L]

Date: 11/9/2009 8:53:48 PM
Author: Michael_E


When you are looking at a stone you should look at it under as many conditions as possible and make sure that it looks good under the conditions under which it will be worn the most.

I agree that a stone should be judged under various lighting conditions. I can''t tell you how many times I returned a stone because while it looked nice under fluorescents, it looked hideous in indirect sunlight, or vice versa, or some other lighting conditions. I have tried very hard to find stones that look good no matter what the lighting condition. These types of stones tend to be more expensive, but I think they''re worth it. It may not be as important to someone else. For example, if you''re in an environment with fluorescent lighting all day (like I am), certain kinds of stones will shift to a less desirable color.

, so it''s really really important that my stones look good in fluorescents.

 

[MakingTheGrade]

Ditto TL!

It''s one of the reasons I like to see gems in real life when I can before buying, I always feel bad asking vendors to take a billion photos in different lighting, haha.

 

[T L]

Date: 11/9/2009 9:14:59 PM
Author: MakingTheGrade
Ditto TL!

It''s one of the reasons I like to see gems in real life when I can before buying, I always feel bad asking vendors to take a billion photos in different lighting, haha.

Well, I do ask if it changes in different lighting. I think that is a very fair question to ask. I''ve had vendors not up front with that question though, so I just deal with ones that really do understand and know how the color changes, and are honest about it.

 

[haagen_dazs]

Date: 11/9/2009 12:22:08 PM
Author: movie zombie

Date: 11/9/2009 11:20:37 AM
Author: tourmaline_lover

Date: 11/9/2009 8:32:17 AM
Author: Chrono

Date: 11/9/2009 12:14:40 AM
Author: haagen_dazs
newbie qns
is there a way to spot modifier colours (i suppose they are also called secondary hues?)
do you hold the stone up with backlighting or view them at specific angles?
do you have to just look at the stone face up?

No, there is no specific trick or help. It takes viewing LOTS of gemstones, usually best in person. It's sort of like any other skill where it takes time and practice.

I know I always harp on modifiers, much to many people's chagrin. I also know that not everyone can afford to buy top gem vivid stones, and that's fine. However, if you see something that is overly brown or grey (unless you like those colors), I like to help people save a few dollars. Some of my gems still have grey and brown, but far less than the stones I originally purchased all those years ago.

most of us don't have that option and need to get ourselves educated so that we can recognize a quality stone and then make the compromises that will fit our budget. personally, i'll even do without a stone rather than buy one that i know isn't going to perform.
mz

thanks mz tl and chrono
that's what this community is so important to help others.
its really important to hear the general opinions, filter through what is important before making a purchase decision.

 

[haagen_dazs]

Date: 11/9/2009 9:14:59 PM
Author: MakingTheGrade
Ditto TL!
It''s one of the reasons I like to see gems in real life when I can before buying, I always feel bad asking vendors to take a billion photos in different lighting, haha.

i think one cool thing is for vendors to put their gemstones on a revolving turntable.
the concept is similar to what gemrite does for their gemstones.
that way , at least its a step up better from static photos.

 

[RockHugger]

Rhod garnets are usually darker. If you love it get it! I have a 6 ct Rhodie garnet that is super dark (almost looks black when not hit with light) and its one of my fav stones!!