Passed down! Ruby, sapphire, and not sure! Thoughts??

[pokerface]

I have read each and every post extremely carefully. Here is what you wrote: "But thoughts, direction, identification, even sarcasm is welcome." In response, I wrote this informative post: "The first stone is highly included (and likely synthetic or highly treated). I assume the rubies are synthetic given the large sizes, general appearance and the fact that they appear to be the exact same color." Even though you may not like this information, it is, in fact, information (that you requested). I have no stake in the outcome here. Though of course you are welcome to spend your money in any way you choose, I personally think it is unkind to recommend spending more money on verifying stones than the stones are worth. I do wish you all the best, and I hope in the future that posters on the forum stop leading inexperienced collectors in the wrong direction and giving them unrealistic hopes.

 

[Eric Nations]

I don’t understand why either. Must be covid

 

[voce]

The dull appearance of the largest pink sapphire and the two pairs in the background as well as the round in the foreground, suggest to me high heat treatment, which usually indicates flame fusion or Czochralski. The most neon pink gems on the right look to have not quite windows, but look to have a lower refractive index than corundum. I'd call none of these natural ruby or sapphire for certain, and based on the size and exact same hues of the matched stones, agree with @chrono, @lovedogs, and @pokerface they are likely synthetic.

I think @LilAlex likes to be contrarian. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that. I just think in this case there are indeed reasons to suspect high heat processes involved in the creation of the pinks. The blue-greens could be tourmalines. There are many lab materials, YAG for example, that would be harder than glass and harder even than corundum.

 

[JackTrick]

I have read each and every post extremely carefully. Here is what you wrote: "But thoughts, direction, identification, even sarcasm is welcome." In response, I wrote this informative post: "The first stone is highly included (and likely synthetic or highly treated). I assume the rubies are synthetic given the large sizes, general appearance and the fact that they appear to be the exact same color." Even though you may not like this information, it is, in fact, information (that you requested). I have no stake in the outcome here. Though of course you are welcome to spend your money in any way you choose, I personally think it is unkind to recommend spending more money on verifying stones than the stones are worth. I do wish you all the best, and I hope in the future that posters on the forum stop leading inexperienced collectors in the wrong direction and giving them unrealistic hopes.

I’m a person who recommends gemologists! I think your feedback is fair, but I just tend to be weary of folks looking for information one way or another online, when ideally to get a solid answer they’re better off finding someone to evaluate it in person. Noting this doesn’t *have* to be an expensive report from GIA, etc, but there certainly are challenges in finding good gemologists IRL too.

In general though, I suspect you and I likely agree more than we disagree

 

[Eric Nations]

@voce Awesome, thank you for that, especially terms I don’t know, I can learn them. I’m going to put up another picture for your opinion if you are wouldn’t mind sharing. @pokerface you must not understand, to your thoughts I responded in beginning of thread, and they were only thoughts, no reason or definition to support and still no direction on why I should believe what you said, @voce said the exact same thing you did with terms that explain the characteristics seen that would verify synthetic. Which is what I asked for. And as far as the rest of your post I do thank you and hope the best for you as well.

 

[ForteKitty]

If that's really an 8.9ct natural pink sapphire, you'd want a GIA or AGL report stating treatments and origin. Most gemologists don't have the equipment to tell whether it's BE treated, and even under a microscope, many lab inclusions will mimic natural ones. Send it in to a legit lab (GIA, AGL) if you don't care about the cost.

There's been an abundance of "Is this real" posts here lately We cannot tell you if it's natural or not through a computer. From the photo, it could be fingerprint inclusion, two-phase, gas bubbles, or lead-glass filled... there's no way for any of us to tell. https://www.gia.edu/gems-gemology/summer-2017-inclusions-sapphire

 

[pokerface]

@JackTrick Yes, I agree. And specifically, in this case, OP is running into the problem of finding a good gemologist. If you don't know anything about colored stones, you may also be ill-equipped to decipher whether or not someone else is a colored stone expert. Here, OP took his gems to a gemologist, and was told that they "weren't real." He was clearly disappointed in that answer, and chose to seek a second opinion. The second opinion was that these were "amazing" stones. Now, OP is confused - but hopeful! So he takes the gems to a third person, who again tells him that they are not worth a full consultation. It seems to me that OP has come to this forum in hopes of validating the second gemologist's opinion, and for the most part, has been gently rebuffed. I am not sure what OP's options are at this point beyond sending these stones to a lab, if he is not willing to accept the advice of either of the two gemologists he has already spoken to. I will say again that OP can spend his money how he likes, but I believe the recommendation to send off two stones is a poor one, because I do not think there is any reasonable chance that these stones hold any real value. Were OP's grandparents exceedingly wealthy pirates with a secret collection of jewels (stored all together in a little baggie) or were they regular people who collected inexpensive bits and bobs during their travels? As @ForteKitty just stated, there are a lot of "Is this real" posts happening on this forum, and like, the answer is always no. Please show me one thread where the gem in question ends up being something of value. This thread is not going to be an exception. I am not trying to be rude or mean, and believe me, I would LOVE it if one day someone stumbles on a pile of priceless ancestral gems, but I believe it's important to evaluate all the facts in context. OP, I hope these stones bring you joy and fond memories of your grandparents.

 

[voce]

@voce Awesome, thank you for that, especially terms I don’t know, I can learn them. I’m going to put up another picture for your opinion if you are wouldn’t mind sharing. @pokerface you must not understand, to your thoughts I responded in beginning of thread, and they were only thoughts, no reason or definition to support and still no direction on why I should believe what you said, @voce said the exact same thing you did with terms that explain the characteristics seen that would verify synthetic. Which is what I asked for. And as far as the rest of your post I do thank you and hope the best for you as well.

No idea what this is; however, there's lots of facets, and it looks like it has a lower refractive index. You can tell lower refractive index when there's a window or tilt window kind of look even though the pavillion is not cut shallowly (i.e. the shallow cut is not the cause of the window, but the low refractive index of the gem material itself is what causes the window or tilt window look).

 

[Eric Nations]

Hahahaha @pokerface some of your own added details in that explanation huh. But you can listen to the first answer you receive, it has done me well not to. Either way non real hopes per say and as for pirate the man spent decades traveling the world with enough off white mahogany to build you a dungeon. But this is actually becoming entertaining. @pokerface did you see the picture of the stone I just posted. I’d like your opinion. @voce thank you.

 

[qubitasaurus]

So I rubbed each one on glass and it didn’t mark the stone or leave any of its color on the glass, however it did leave a mark on the glass. They are noticeably cooler to the touch when handling. They were in a box individually in like small weird looking pouch there are more stones than in pictures and some of those were were all in the same pouch. My grandfather was an international boat caption that brought all kinds of strange things home like 5’ tall wooden which doctor. Hahaha I keep getting answers like glass. I have a tester that determines if something is organic. How reliable are those?
I don’t how long they were stored?

Sorry the testers are not reliable. You can get synthetics that are chemically identical to natural stones. Ultimately as many have suggested you need to send to a lab to verify. Unfortunately shipping is expensive as is the lab fee -- and you could have corollary problems as to how to insure something to value X when you have no proof its not glass. If I wanted a well recognized lab to look at a stone. Then Id need to pay ~$1000. You'll get away with spending less as you probably live closer to the lab but you should be expecting $200-400 if you have to ship it to and from the lab with insurance (most of us do). Most people will continue to give the probable answer (in the abscence of more information) which is that theyre synthetic, until you get this lab report done. So its not like you will be able to sell them without sending them to a lab. No matter what people here say.

People are trying to offer you various ways of making an informed guess before taking this leap of faith. They cant answer the question 'what did my grandad put in this box?'. Its illogical for us to attempt this. They cant relaibaly id on the basis of a photo either. There are even several GIA accredited gemologists here (I dont think theyre commenting on this thread and for good reason though). People here can suggest things that are suspect -- so many stones look very similar in colour and are not exactly small chips or flecks of rock. This is unusual. You buy two gemstones of exactly the same type, described in exactly the same way at different times and they reliably do not look the same colour. Your stones are suprisingly big and uniform in colour.
If these are real then some of them have diffetent properties to others. Some should be harder than others and if stored together will have scratched the others. Some will have higher dispersion than others and if put together on someones hand theyll appear differently as you move them arround. People are trying to get at this information to save you the hundreds of dollars sending it to the lab will cost you. But I can see it is probably better if you just send the big red one to AGL.

 

[pokerface]

@Eric Nations, glad you can tell I mean no harm. I did see the new picture you posted, and I don't have anything new to add. I am not a gemologist or real expert, and I am not versed in the scientific explanations that others like @voce are able to give. All I can say is that I have looked at a lot (literally millions) of gems, and that 100% of the time, gems that look like your pink gems are synthetic, simulated, or highly treated with something like lead glass. Here, I guess they are synthetic corundum or synthetic spinel. If you have a loupe, and you see curved growth lines, that would be a positive identification for synthetic corundum. I will try to attach a few pictures for your reference.

Synthetic spinel





Synthetic corundum


Natural pink spinel


Natural pink corundum

Link to pink sapphire ring with GRS report

 

[LilAlex]

I think @LilAlex likes to be contrarian. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that.

I did not say they are real. I simply did not declare them to be fake, like many others here did. I suggested the OP send them to a lab. I did not expect that to be controversial advice. On this forum of all places.

Not to mention the subsequent "scholarship" about diagnosing real vs synthetic from unmagnified internet photos. Just send it to a decent lab. Not very hard and not very expensive. If they were mine, I would not throw them away based on a few randos' opinions on here.

I've read and given the same advice a thousand times here. When did that fall out of favor?

And how do we as a community choose which fragile egos to massage with good news and whose hopes we crush with cruel abandon? I thought we just told the truth -- but there's clearly a lot more to it than that . Here it's not even the OP who's fragile.

 

[pokerface]

I'll just be over here crying into my sad, sad sapphire. Lol. I am now done with this totally insulting dialogue. Good luck to OP!

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Is it me, or are people on here getting crankier by the day? I don't like what I'm seeing lately.

Remember that tread a wee ago that talked about are we nice enough to new members ?

 

[DiaLuv]

Hi Eric,

I don’t have a clue if your stones are natural or not. But I like the colors and suggest making jewelry out of some of them. Nice way to remember grand parents.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Hi Eric,

I don’t have a clue if your stones are natural or not. But I like the colors and suggest making jewelry out of some of them. Nice way to remember grand parents.

I second that !
Some thing does not need to be worth a gazillion dollars to be beautiful

 

[icy_jade]

Offhand I recall a few sapphires where people felt that the sapphires were too cheap to be real/unheated etc but turned out to be real/unheated.

Maybe an option for OP is to go to a nearby appraiser instead of straightaway sending in to AGL or GIA. Cost is lower. Then if appraised as real, then can send in the rest? If not real, at least the outlay is smaller and not as painful. Perhaps go with a smaller stone from the lot so that it costs less (depending on whether the appraisal is cheaper for smaller stones).

No matter the outcome, it settles things once and for all.

 

[lovedogs]

Honestly your only real option to get an answer once and for all is to either 1) go to a local trustworthy appraiser who doesn't buy/sell jewelry but rather works doing independent appraisals, or 2) pay the money to send to a reputable lab

 

[Pinkmartini87]

@Eric Nations Welcome! I’ve found overall this forum to be helpful and kind with cheery folks like @Daisys and Diamonds supporting each other, even if we don’t always know what the answer is.

Here’s a pretty recent success story on a stone that most thought might be synthetic and turned out to be the real deal: https://www.pricescope.com/communit...ive-me-a-ballpark-blue-sapphire-value.259791/

My two cents: most folks give their opinions on this forum to try to help out a stranger—that in itself is admirable. And also because when one posts, one is asking for opinions (be it good opinions, bad opinions, dumb opinions, etc, I suppose that’s entirely subjective).

But then they are just that, opinions (best guesses). No sense in arguing over opinions that one solicits in the first place; there will always be people who disagree with us, be it here on the forum or in real life. Instead, you have the harder job now of taking (or not taking) these opinions and deciding yourself what is the pretest probability that these stones are real, and if it’s worthwhile for you to pay to have them looked at by a reliable gemologist.

With that said, I would guess these are synthetic (or simulants) based on the photos you provided for the same reasons that @voce @lovedogs and many of the others have already said much more eloquently than I have. And for me, not worth the money to test them further given the low pretest probability that they might turn out to be real.

But then again, for someone else, to satisfy one’s curiosity, it might be worth the time and money to send one of the stone off to GIA, AGL, etc.

 

[prs]

I will say again that OP can spend his money how he likes, but I believe the recommendation to send off two stones is a poor one, because I do not think there is any reasonable chance that these stones hold any real value. Were OP's grandparents exceedingly wealthy pirates with a secret collection of jewels (stored all together in a little baggie) or were they regular people who collected inexpensive bits and bobs during their travels?

I'll just be over here crying into my sad, sad sapphire. Lol. I am now done with this totally insulting dialogue. Good luck to OP!

@pokerface you may feel insulted, but it does seem you too have insulted your fair share of people today, including poor, little, innocent me! One thing I've learned over the past two years is that on threads like this one post is usually enough, two at the most. Everyone on here is entitled to their opinion and is entitled to give it. Most times somebody will give advice that's different from yours. It's up to the OP to decide which advice they want to follow, and if it's not yours, then so be it.

It's never productive to start attacking other posters who don't necessarily agree with your advice. I have found here on PS you sometimes have to put on your big boy pants, and just roll with the punches! If you ever have the misfortune to have an argument with two well respected, long term, multi-thousand posters coming at you with all guns blazing, you'll know what I mean.

You obviously have a lot to offer here. How about you have a relaxing evening, maybe a glass of wine, forget this ever happened, and come back tomorrow with a smile on your face,

 

[Eric Nations]

Okay, thank you, all of you for everything. I am new here but not to world and I expected nothing more nothing less. Certabundus but no harm here. I know what is next where I was unsure if had anymore options personallly.

 

[voce]

And how do we as a community choose which fragile egos to massage with good news and whose hopes we crush with cruel abandon? I thought we just told the truth -- but there's clearly a lot more to it than that . Here it's not even the OP who's fragile.

A bit melodramatic here, aren't you? When it comes to threads like this, as you imply, it's impossible to know with 100% certainty from internet photos, and of course the surest way is to send them off to a lab. Based off internet photos, not with the actual stones and lab equipment in front of us, the best any of us can do is produce educated guesses.

Why do you concern yourself with how the PS community acts? Have your yourself really just simply told the truth, the objective truth, not your opinion which you're passing off as truth? I find many of your posts, including the section I just quoted, brimming with facetiousness, and a disdainful attitude, which I find most unbecoming. You do have a flair for prose, I'll give you that, but the drama your words have caused, in past threads and past pasta, makes your words redolent of something called hypocrisy. Are you completely oblivious to how your words sound calculated to stir up drama?

I hope you're not purposefully trying to stir things up. It's best to leaves things such as egos out of gem appreciation.

 

[Cerulean]

Okay, thank you, all of you for everything. I am new here but not to world and I expected nothing more nothing less. Certabundus but no harm here. I know what is next where I was unsure if had anymore options personallly.

Welcome - I’m glad that you were able to start a thread and get some input. There are many knowledgeable people on this forum, and like anywhere in the world - we don’t *always* get along, but debates are frankly far more civil here than most places.

I love the idea of getting your favorite stone in mounted!

 

[LilAlex]

You do have a flair for prose, I'll give you that, but the drama your words have caused, in past threads and past pasta, makes your words redolent of something called hypocrisy.

I'm sorry about the pasta. It's something I've struggled with for years.

 

[MjK1]

....I'll be in the car....

 

[Eric Nations]

What is pasta @LilAlex sorry for your struggle. I struggle with pasta too but I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Auto correct is not always a freind

 

[voce]

It's the Google keyboard input method on phone. It's supposed to read posts. English would take too long to type in the phone if I had to tap on one letter at a time. It is an inefficient language to write compared to other languages.

 

[LilAlex]

It's the Google keyboard input method on phone. It's supposed to read posts. English would take too long to type in the phone if I had to tap on one letter at a time. It is an inefficient language to write compared to other languages.

I'm just teasing.

I love your posts. And I love your imaginative multi-stone rings!

 

[slksapphire]

don't know if i should be jumping into this one, but in my mind, this is really simple.

if there is one thing i've learned over the years, the ONLY way to know, for sure, about what you have in a gem is to send it to a high-quality lab. trust me, it's worth it.

i just pulled the price list for agl.

Price List — American Gemological Laboratories

www.aglgemlab.com

your sapphire is too big for a gem brief, but a verbal id is only $120. if they say it's real, you can go all out. otherwise, you're out $120 and the cost of shipping. if you have a synthetic, the id is expensive on a relative basis. but if it's real, the cost of the id is just a tiny fraction of the value.

just my 2 cents.