Opinions on Emeralds?

[t86]

Hi everyone,

I'm on the hunt for a green gemstone. I think I'd like an emerald or a tsavorite and to that end have contacted JR Colombian Emeralds and Bruce Bridges.

JR pulled some emerald options in my price range and would like me to narrow them down to 3. I'd love your expert opinions on which stones look best, as I am very new to the world of emeralds. None of them are certified, but they have assured me they can send to any lab of my choosing if I am indeed ready to buy.

I told them 3ish carats, emerald cut, no windows, transparent, medium to medium dark green with blue undertones. Which of the following do you think are worth seeing? Right now, I think the 3.25 is probably too elongated, but other than that, am having trouble deciding. Thank you!!!

 

[t86]

Sorry, just wanted to add that this will be for a right hand ring! I'm thinking a three-stone ring flanked by half moons or traps.

 

[JPie]

I like the second 3.0 ct one the best.

 

[voce]

I like the 3.25 ct the best because of its color. Barring that one, my choices are:

1. 3.0 ct next to the 3.25 (next best color)
2. 3.49 ct
3. 4.04 ct

The reflection pattern in the 4.35 ct one, along with smaller face-up size despite more ct weight, suggests to me that that is not an emerald cut, but some variation of cushion-brilliant cut. I would not choose it. Also, the leftmost/bottom-most 3.0 ct, is just not appealing to me because it's lacking in color saturation a tad compared to the others.

 

[natasha-cupcake]

I preferred the 3.25 over all of the others, based on having the best color and sheen. I am no expert on emeralds but that's the one that stood out to me. I agree it's a little elongated, but my personal preference is that I'd rather have a little too elongated over a little too squarish. The 3.49 was my second favorite based on the combination of its color and shape. The first 3.0 (just below the 3.25) has a beautiful color, but a little too square for my tastes. Honestly, they're all pretty. And it's so difficult to tell what they'll look like in real life compared to the photographs.

 

[JPie]

I also liked the 3.25 the best, but since you didn’t like the shape I didn’t mention it.

 

[Seaglow]

I prefer the 3.25cts. as well.

 

[T L]

I like the 4.04 ct stone the best because to me it has the best cutting, no windows, and great clarity/color. I would just ask for a picture on its table so you can see the depth. Yes, it’s elongated, and you’ll need a custom setting, but I have an affinity for elongated emeralds, especially in Art Deco style settings.

I would also make sure it has no surface reaching fissures that are on the table, or can affect setting it safely.

 

[dk168]

I prefer the 3.0ct for its colour, cut and liveliness - it pops at me right away when I saw the pics.

DK

 

[t86]

Thank you all for being so helpful and generous with your time! I’m definitely going to eliminate the worse 3.0. I’m also going to eliminate the 4.35 based on voce’s astute observation about the weird faceting. The 3.25is gorgeous, but I wish it weren’t so long! I think I’m leaning towards the 4.04 being my favorite, but that’s because I’m a diva about size. . Really appreciate everyone chiming in!

 

[voce]

Thank you all for being so helpful and generous with your time! I’m definitely going to eliminate the worse 3.0. I’m also going to eliminate the 4.35 based on voce’s astute observation about the weird faceting. The 3.25is gorgeous, but I wish it weren’t so long! I think I’m leaning towards the 4.04 being my favorite, but that’s because I’m a diva about size. . Really appreciate everyone chiming in!

The 4.04 is nearly as elongated as the 3.25. Are you sure we can't persuade you?

 

[t86]

3.25 is definitely still in contention! It reminds me of a jolly rancher!

I’m now dreaming of traps and bullets flanking the center stone.

 

[T L]

3.25 is definitely still in contention! It reminds me of a jolly rancher!

I’m now dreaming of traps and bullets flanking the center stone.

The 3.25 seems to have a window, so I would just double check in that if it’s the one you’re interested in. I definitely prefer the color of the 4.04, and I think it has better proportions, but we all like what we like, and this particular grouping of stones is subjective.

 

[dk168]

Oops, did not realised there were 2 x 3.0cts, I liked the first one from the left.

DK

 

[t86]

Hi all,

Hopefully, you're not sick of me yet. I come bearing additional photos and details! I eliminated the two 3.0s because they were too square and the 4.35 due to the weird faceting. I have the 3.25, 3.49 and 4.04 left. I asked for close-ups, pictures of the emeralds on their tables, and pictures of them individually on a hand to see the size.

Am I crazy, or do they all appear to have windows? The 3.49 appears to have the worst one. I think I'm going to eliminate it based on the window and the general lifelessness. Let me know if I'm crazy.

It seems like the 3.25 has a small window and the 4.04 has an even smaller one. Of the two, the 3.25 seems livelier.

Here are additional details on the stones:

The 3.25cts measures 11.86mm x 6.94 x 5.08mm. No inclusions on the surface/cracks. White internal flaws are seen to the eye but nothing on corners that will potentially result in damage once being mounted. Colombian Emerald. Treatment is moderate, type not known exactly but can be taken to any lab you request.

3.49cts measures 10mm x 6.5mm x 5.8mm. No inclusions or cracks on the stone's surface. Flaws are minimal, nothing that is distracting to the eye. Nothing on the corners that will potentially result in a damaged stone once this emerald is being mounted. Colombian Emerald. Treatment is minor or moderate, the exact treatment level is not known until taken to a lab.

4.04cts measures 12.3mm x 8.2mm x 5.9mm, No inclusions on the surface nor cracks. Minor flaws visible to the eye, nothing that distracts from the emerald's beauty. Nothing on corners that will potentially result in damage once being mounted. Colombian Emerald. Treatment is minor or moderate, the exact treatment level is not known until taken to a lab.


Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated! I might have to see these in person next!

 

[Rad_Fan]

If none of them comes with cert stating the level of treatments, how do you know that they are priced accordingly? Maybe it's not very important to everyone.

That sheen of the 3.25 is awesome!

 

[t86]

I would ask the vendor to send to AGL prior to purchasing--they said they could do so.

 

[JPie]

Still liking the 3.25 best!

 

[lmyracle]

Ooh, that 3.25 is gorgeous. I would want a lab report for sure.

 

[T L]

I still like the 4.04 the best, as the windows on the other two are really large for my taste, and I prefer the color of the 4.04. The other two are a tad bit too pale for me, but the windows add to that pale color as well.

Depending on the price, I would get a lab report. I do suspect moderate treatment though.

 

[Rad_Fan]

I still like the 4.04 the best, as the windows on the other two are really large for my taste, and I prefer the color of the 4.04. The other two are a tad bit too pale for me, but the windows add to that pale color as well.

Depending on the price, I would get a lab report. I do suspect moderate treatment though.

I am asking this for educational purpose...Somehow 3.25 looks a bit deeper green on the hand shot from my monitor. Are you judging the hue/tone based on the picture of the pavillion or the group shot with white background?

 

[T L]

I am asking this for educational purpose...Somehow 3.25 looks a bit deeper green on the hand shot from my monitor. Are you judging the hue/tone based on the picture of the pavillion or the group shot with white background?

The window is so painfully obvious, it bothers me. I don’t want a sheen reflected along the edges and a dead part in the middle. Emeralds are notoriously difficult to photograph properly, so I’m looking at cutting and tone,, and I see less deadness in the larger stone. It’s just not in the right angle to give off as much light reflection. It seems a bit darker in tone because of that, and I would say that IRL, you would see it’s deeper in color as a result.

I would still ask the vendor which one had better color though.

I also dislike that the 3.25 looks more like a baguette due to the poor cutting. The 4.04 looks to have much nicer proportions and a true elongated emerald cut. I think it would make for a more regal looking stone when set.

However if IRL, the 3.25 had better color, I would ask the vendor if they had better cut stones. That window is too obvious.

 

[voce]

Now after seeing the more recent hand shots, I would agree with @T L. The window of the 3.25 is large and distracting, although it looks more velvety to me. What I don't like about the 4.04 is the inclusion along the window, which makes the window smaller, but is more distracting. Everything considered, the 4.04 looks better to me than the 3.25.

 

[T L]

Now after seeing the hand shots, I would agree with @T L. The window of the 3.25 is large and distracting, although it looks more velvety to me. What I don't like about the 4.04 is the inclusion along the window, which makes the window smaller, but is more distracting. Everything considered, the 4.04 looks better to me than the 3.25.

Clarity might be an issue in the 4.04, but they often look much worse in photos than IRL. I would ask the vendor if the inclusions in the 4.04 are as obvious IRL as in the photo.

Although the 3.25 has what appears to be better clarity, I attribute that to what may be paler color. Paler emeralds tend to be cleaner.

Also, in this shot, which I blew up and appears straight on to the camera, I see little to no window, and I don’t think it’s because inclusions are covering it. It’s just cut better.

 

[voce]

Clarity might be an issue in the 4.04, but they often look much worse in photos than IRL. I would ask the vendor if the inclusions in the 4.04 are as obvious IRL as in the photo.

Although the 3.25 has what appears to be better clarity, I attribute that to what may be paler color. Paler emeralds tend to be cleaner.

I find it perplexing you would say the 3.25 is paler. To me, the 3.25 one looks the same tone or darker in all of the hand shots, both these more recently posted ones and the ones in the first post. I think the only thing I can think of to explain why you see it differently from me is that maybe the light return is less due to the clarity issues, so you see more of the body color and not light return/flashes.

 

[T L]

I suspect it’s paler. I’m not sure, but because of the window, I’m thinking it will look paler IRL. Although they look pretty much all the same tone, that window has to affect the tone IRL, as they usually do in medium to medium light toned gems. If the emerald was much darker in tone, not as much.

I could be wrong though, but just knowing so much about how poorly emeralds photograph, that’s my suspicion.

Now obviously it looks darker here, but that’s the way it’s positioned on the hand. Looking at overall characteristics though, color, cut, clarity, the way it’s positioned in the photo, the 4.04 stood out to me, in particular in this shot,

 

[DauphineMucha]

OP, you picked some nice looking ones.

Maybe asking JR to video the final together would help you decide?

Good luck and keep up updated.

 

[t86]

Hi everyone,

I'm almost decided on the 4.04! I was told that it was treated with cedar oil only, no resin.

I'm planning to walk it over to AGL (I work a few blocks away) and ask them to do a Prestige Origin Report. They said that if I drop off the gem by nearly next week, they can fit in a verbal assessment within my 2-week return window to confirm origin, treatment (type and amount) and stability. Does this sound like a good plan?

The vendor provided some additional video for me, including some outdoors in the sunlight. My only hesitation is that the emerald looks a lot lighter in these pictures than in the previous ones. Is this because it's on a white background in the sunlight? I took some screenshots of the videos. Does this look okay to you, and will it be darker when set and on my hand? Or does it look way too light? If you give me the go-ahead, I'll order today for delivery tomorrow!

Thanks so much! I really appreciate all of your excellent advice!

 

[t86]

I went ahead and ordered it so that I can get it before the AGL staff goes off to Tuscon for the gem show! Will arrive tomorrow, and I will provide pictures!

 

[voce]

You will have the opportunity to return it if it doesn't impression you in real life, yes? Emeralds look better in real life than in pictures, so I withhold judgement until you see it in person. I think you made the right choice. Congrats!