Question regarding fluorescence rating

[Lufrit]

I am wondering if I need to be concerned with "fluorescence" rating of a "Strong blue". I have a GIA grading report with the following specs:
1.15 carat,
Color grade = g
Clarity grade = vvs1
Cut grade = very good

Shape = round

I am curious what a fair price would be for this diamond? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

 

[iluvdiamonds2]

I have another diamond from way back - it's an I colored stone with Strong Blue flouresence - the result can be a milky affect.....
I am no gemologist, but from what I have learned, strong blue flouresence is beneficial for stones like I, J, K etc. to help them appear "whiter" or less yellow.

You have a G, idunno if you really want a strong blue flour. for that color - which G is pretty good.
I saw a G w/ strong blue f. once, and it looked plastic-y like a cz - it looked bluish - kind of strange. I'm pretty color sensitive, too.

HOw about these stones?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1539997.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond-1530213.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI2-Very-Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1533914.asp

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I have read that poor performance with fluorescence can be related to poor clarity in the diamond. I have a G VS1 with strong blue and it is gorgeous!

Here is a search tool and you can compare prices. SBF will lower the price somewhat.

https://www.pricescope.com/diamond-search-results

Actually, I would be more concerned about the very good cut. I'd stick with excellent cut only since it is a pretty broad category.

 

[04diamond<3]

I am wondering if I need to be concerned with "fluorescence" rating of a "Strong blue". I have a GIA grading report with the following specs:
1.15 carat,
Color grade = g
Clarity grade = vvs1
Cut grade = very good

Shape = round

I am curious what a fair price would be for this diamond? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Nope. You absolutely do not need to worry about that. Especially with GIA diamonds. Here's a comp:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VVS1-Very-Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1544064.asp it has medium flo and looks gorgeous!

I wouldn't suggest paying for a VVS1. You can find a gorgeous stone that's an SI1 for a lot less. Example:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-SI1-Very-Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1465220.asp

 

[04diamond<3]

I have another diamond from way back - it's an I colored stone with Strong Blue flouresence - the result can be a milky affect.....
I am no gemologist, but from what I have learned, strong blue flouresence is beneficial for stones like I, J, K etc. to help them appear "whiter" or less yellow.

You have a G, idunno if you really want a strong blue flour. for that color - which G is pretty good.
I saw a G w/ strong blue f. once, and it looked plastic-y like a cz - it looked bluish - kind of strange. I'm pretty color sensitive, too.

HOw about these stones?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1539997.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond-1530213.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI2-Very-Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1533914.asp

I wouldn't suggest any of these. The inclusions are just terrible.

 

[John P]

I hope 04diamond does not mind if I take a different position here.

I am wondering if I need to be concerned with "fluorescence" rating of a "Strong blue"...

Nope. You absolutely do not need to worry about that. Especially with GIA diamonds.

I may be jaded by experience, but I would not put that blanket over every SB and VSB diamond outright. When it comes to Strong Blue it's typically not a problem, but we have rejected rough diamonds and re-cut candidates at that level as well as Very Strong.

Perhaps more importantly, I feel it's a good idea to know if the wearer of the diamond will find the influence of SB and/or VSB in a diamond appealing. Depending on intensity and saturation it will visibly impact the diamond's appearance in daylight and other environments where UV is present. I enjoy it quite a bit...and the wearer may love it, but some people don't.

Buying Strong Blue and Very Strong Blue Fluorescent diamonds is much like buying SI1 and SI2 clarities. Those brief terms cover a wide range while giving limited information. It's a sliding scale, so one SB can differ notably from another SB. As with clarity and cut-quality, I suggest to see the diamond yourself before committing, or work with someone you trust to deliver what you're comfortable with in terms of optics at high fluorescence levels.

For those who love it, the trade discounts diamonds with fluorescence. This can be a benefit to a shopper who doesn't mind, or enjoys the influence. Some collectors and enthusiasts actively seek strong and very strong fl because they enjoy the groovy effects.

This thread shows a pretty serious VSB (4 carats). The photo and discussion may be interesting.
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/photo-very-strong-blue-fluorescence.183070/

Here's a comp:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VVS1-Very-Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1544064.asp it has medium flo and looks gorgeous!

Again I'm going to take a different position: With the 62% table and 41.4 pavilion angle this diamond's proportions are predicted to receive AGS 5 in light performance, which is pretty low. The table reflection (which is quite visible in the static photo) will create notable under-table darkness in diffused lighting, and the low, spread crown will reduce the amount of dispersion it can produce. Someone looking for G VVS1 as the primary criteria may like it, but it's not a strong candidate in terms of cut quality.

I wouldn't suggest paying for a VVS1. You can find a gorgeous stone that's an SI1 for a lot less. Example:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-SI1-Very-Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1465220.asp

This diamond is a better cut candidate, but not optimal. While weighing 1.21ct the girdle runs to thick, causing a 6.79mm average girdle diameter, so it faces up like a well-cut 1.13ct diamond. The proportions are predicted to receive AGS4 in light performance, with reductions in overall light return as a result of the PA/CA pairing.

 

[Niel]

for me, as you can see, I love flour. And i think its just as good in a K as it is in a E. The nerd i me finds the chemical aspect of the four interesting, and the diamond lover in me likes that it can visually benefit the diamond (as long as it doesnt have negative effects, which can be easily assessed by a reputable vendor

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.150-i-vs2-round-diamond-ags-bl-104062571011

 

[alma123]

I also have a question about fluorescence, especially as quoted by this guy from truthaboutdiamonds.com

http://www.truthaboutdiamonds.com/truth-about/diamond-fluorescence/

"you might have read about a certain GIA study claiming that even strong blue fluorescence is almost always entirely imperceptible to the average diamond consumer.

I can tell you with absolute certainty, that their research is bunk. I have seen tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of diamonds in my career and I can tell you without question the following:

Strong/Very Strong Blue Fluorescent diamonds usually appear hazy
Medium Blue Fluorescent diamonds rarely appear hazy
Slight/Faint Blue Fluorescent diamonds never appear hazy"

How does this compared with your personal experience?

 

[John P]

I also have a question about fluorescence, especially as quoted by this guy from truthaboutdiamonds.com

http://www.truthaboutdiamonds.com/truth-about/diamond-fluorescence/

"you might have read about a certain GIA study claiming that even strong blue fluorescence is almost always entirely imperceptible to the average diamond consumer.

I can tell you with absolute certainty, that their research is bunk. I have seen tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of diamonds in my career and I can tell you without question the following:

Strong/Very Strong Blue Fluorescent diamonds usually appear hazy
Medium Blue Fluorescent diamonds rarely appear hazy
Slight/Faint Blue Fluorescent diamonds never appear hazy"

How does this compared with your personal experience?

Everyone's experience is different.

RE Perception:

I agree the effects of Strong Blue are often perceptible. Any normally observant person will see SB of a nominal level - remember some SB are weaker than others - when UV is present, especially if it's explained to them.

To me, the GIA Study's comment (p254) about "average observers unable to discriminate" (sic) lacks context. Were the viewers prepared and prompted correctly? Did the viewing environments, described as "similar to those in which jewelry is purchased and worn" even have a UV component? Indoor showrooms do not.

My process, when training professional salespeople, is to have them examine any diamond that has strong or very strong fluorescence; first in normal daylight, then under the UV lamp to note actual intensity (remember some are weaker than others) and then in daylight again. This helps them understand and correctly represent the diamond to clients. Once explained, the typical client easily perceives the effects of SB in sunlight, especially when prompted. But remember that not every SB is the same. An SB at the border of Medium will be quite reduced in influence from an SB at the border of Very Strong.

RE Overblues, or SB and VSB with reduced transparency:

Long ago the Premier Mine in South Africa (since renamed the Cullinan) had a stretch where a percentage of the rough coming out was overblue. This was prior to the emergence of Australia and Canada as diamond-producers so the presence of those diamonds in the pipeline was easier to notice. The result of that period of time is the warning you might still hear from many sales clerks today.

The GIA Study from 1997 says 1000 diamonds were screened for the report, but they could not find enough examples of "overblues" to include them. http://lgdl.gia.edu/pdfs/W97_fluoresce.pdf

A survey of six notable appraisers from a 2008 survey - including Neil Beaty and Dave Atlas who post here - said of overblues: (1) "Few come in for grading" (2) "Rare, bordering on an obscure anomaly" (3) "It doesn't happen very often" (4) "Rarely" (5) "In older jewelry we tend to see more" and (6) "In 28 years I've run across less than 20." (sic)
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/“appraise_appraiser”_help_consumers

Personal Experience

I have personally seen the occasional example of a diamond with such strength of fluorescence that affects transparency.

At the present time I am active in acquiring and re-cutting old or damaged diamonds. While infrequent, I get submissions that I reject due to fluorescence I consider not-right. These are often estate goods. In fact, in general, the strongest fluorescing stones I have seen appear in older jewelry, which is in-keeping with the information above. There is great activity on the secondary market right now. Due to the high price of precious metals some folks are selling mom or grandma's unused treasures, so some older diamonds are returning to market. These are sometimes sold as-is and sometimes recut and sold through normal supply pipelines.

Infinity has bought rough parcels with some fluorescent crystals we reject for our purposes. We move them elsewhere. But over the years we have regularly produced S and VS fluorescent diamonds (AGS standard) with no compromise in optics which have been sold to extreme cut-enthusiasts. Indeed, there is a niche of clients who even seek out such diamonds for their appeal.

With that said, the rough diamonds and re-cut candidates we and others reject will wind up somewhere. So even though I consider the scare bigger than the reality it won't stop me - or any responsible pro - from due diligence in this area. It's a stone-by-stone call.

I hope it's helpful. Thanks for asking.

 

[Christina...]

Hi Lufrit! Welcome to PS! If you would like to tell us what you are looking for, we could help you find something. Are you searching for a specific size, color or clarity? Everyone has a different criteria, some want the largest ct weight and will sacrifice color and clarity, others want a colorless stone, some flawless, and most with a compromise of all three. The one quality that I would not sacrifice is cut. The cut is what give the stone it's life, it's sparkle and brilliance. A well cut stone will appear larger, whiter and brighter than stone with an inferior cut. Because it's the least commonly understood of the 4C's most B&M vendors will put emphasis on color and clarity because we tend to understand the better. A good vendor will help you understand cut and why it's the most important aspect of the stone.

For me personally the best value is a G/H VS2/SI1 (eye clean), however if size was the goal I would sacrifice a bit more of each to reach my goal.

 

[Christina...]

I'm bored so I thought I'd make some suggestions without your input.


http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond-1522145.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1493105.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1541942.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1500710.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond-1494716.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1418797.asp


http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2805423.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2668678.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2777304.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2696771.htm

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9958/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10141/

 

[Christina...]

and because I think fluorescence is super cool and maybe you do too.....BGD has his own line.

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.202-i-vs1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104062571023
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.227-i-vs1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104061421001
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.100-h-vs2-round-diamond-ags-bl-104061006003#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/1/
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.135-h-vs1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104059901011

 

[alma123]

Everyone's experience is different.

RE Perception:

I agree the effects of Strong Blue are often perceptible. Any normally observant person will see SB of a nominal level - remember some SB are weaker than others - when UV is present, especially if it's explained to them.

To me, the GIA Study's comment (p254) about "average observers unable to discriminate" (sic) lacks context. Were the viewers prepared and prompted correctly? Did the viewing environments, described as "similar to those in which jewelry is purchased and worn" even have a UV component? Indoor showrooms do not.

My process, when training professional salespeople, is to have them examine any diamond that has strong or very strong fluorescence; first in normal daylight, then under the UV lamp to note actual intensity (remember some are weaker than others) and then in daylight again. This helps them understand and correctly represent the diamond to clients. Once explained, the typical client easily perceives the effects of SB in sunlight, especially when prompted. But remember that not every SB is the same. An SB at the border of Medium will be quite reduced in influence from an SB at the border of Very Strong.

RE Overblues, or SB and VSB with reduced transparency:

Long ago the Premier Mine in South Africa (since renamed the Cullinan) had a stretch where a percentage of the rough coming out was overblue. This was prior to the emergence of Australia and Canada as diamond-producers so the presence of those diamonds in the pipeline was easier to notice. The result of that period of time is the warning you might still hear from many sales clerks today.

The GIA Study from 1997 says 1000 diamonds were screened for the report, but they could not find enough examples of "overblues" to include them. http://lgdl.gia.edu/pdfs/W97_fluoresce.pdf

A survey of six notable appraisers from a 2008 survey - including Neil Beaty and Dave Atlas who post here - said of overblues: (1) "Few come in for grading" (2) "Rare, bordering on an obscure anomaly" (3) "It doesn't happen very often" (4) "Rarely" (5) "In older jewelry we tend to see more" and (6) "In 28 years I've run across less than 20." (sic)
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/“appraise_appraiser”_help_consumers

Personal Experience

I have personally seen the occasional example of a diamond with such strength of fluorescence that affects transparency.

At the present time I am active in acquiring and re-cutting old or damaged diamonds. While infrequent, I get submissions that I reject due to fluorescence I consider not-right. These are often estate goods. In fact, in general, the strongest fluorescing stones I have seen appear in older jewelry, which is in-keeping with the information above. There is great activity on the secondary market right now. Due to the high price of precious metals some folks are selling mom or grandma's unused treasures, so some older diamonds are returning to market. These are sometimes sold as-is and sometimes recut and sold through normal supply pipelines.

Infinity has bought rough parcels with some fluorescent crystals we reject for our purposes. We move them elsewhere. But over the years we have regularly produced S and VS fluorescent diamonds (AGS standard) with no compromise in optics which have been sold to extreme cut-enthusiasts. Indeed, there is a niche of clients who even seek out such diamonds for their appeal.

With that said, the rough diamonds and re-cut candidates we and others reject will wind up somewhere. So even though I consider the scare bigger than the reality it won't stop me - or any responsible pro - from due diligence in this area. It's a stone-by-stone call.

I hope it's helpful. Thanks for asking.

John-- thank you so much for your in-depth explanation. It was tremendously helpful! Always reassuring to know that overblues are uncommon in the newer diamonds.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I also have a question about fluorescence, especially as quoted by this guy from truthaboutdiamonds.com

http://www.truthaboutdiamonds.com/truth-about/diamond-fluorescence/

"you might have read about a certain GIA study claiming that even strong blue fluorescence is almost always entirely imperceptible to the average diamond consumer.

I can tell you with absolute certainty, that their research is bunk. I have seen tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of diamonds in my career and I can tell you without question the following:

Strong/Very Strong Blue Fluorescent diamonds usually appear hazy
Medium Blue Fluorescent diamonds rarely appear hazy
Slight/Faint Blue Fluorescent diamonds never appear hazy"

How does this compared with your personal experience?

Everyone's experience is different.

RE Perception:

I agree the effects of Strong Blue are often perceptible. Any normally observant person will see SB of a nominal level - remember some SB are weaker than others - when UV is present, especially if it's explained to them.

To me, the GIA Study's comment (p254) about "average observers unable to discriminate" (sic) lacks context. Were the viewers prepared and prompted correctly? Did the viewing environments, described as "similar to those in which jewelry is purchased and worn" even have a UV component? Indoor showrooms do not.

My process, when training professional salespeople, is to have them examine any diamond that has strong or very strong fluorescence; first in normal daylight, then under the UV lamp to note actual intensity (remember some are weaker than others) and then in daylight again. This helps them understand and correctly represent the diamond to clients. Once explained, the typical client easily perceives the effects of SB in sunlight, especially when prompted. But remember that not every SB is the same. An SB at the border of Medium will be quite reduced in influence from an SB at the border of Very Strong.

RE Overblues, or SB and VSB with reduced transparency:

Long ago the Premier Mine in South Africa (since renamed the Cullinan) had a stretch where a percentage of the rough coming out was overblue. This was prior to the emergence of Australia and Canada as diamond-producers so the presence of those diamonds in the pipeline was easier to notice. The result of that period of time is the warning you might still hear from many sales clerks today.

The GIA Study from 1997 says 1000 diamonds were screened for the report, but they could not find enough examples of "overblues" to include them. http://lgdl.gia.edu/pdfs/W97_fluoresce.pdf

A survey of six notable appraisers from a 2008 survey - including Neil Beaty and Dave Atlas who post here - said of overblues: (1) "Few come in for grading" (2) "Rare, bordering on an obscure anomaly" (3) "It doesn't happen very often" (4) "Rarely" (5) "In older jewelry we tend to see more" and (6) "In 28 years I've run across less than 20." (sic)
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/“appraise_appraiser”_help_consumers

Personal Experience

I have personally seen the occasional example of a diamond with such strength of fluorescence that affects transparency.

At the present time I am active in acquiring and re-cutting old or damaged diamonds. While infrequent, I get submissions that I reject due to fluorescence I consider not-right. These are often estate goods. In fact, in general, the strongest fluorescing stones I have seen appear in older jewelry, which is in-keeping with the information above. There is great activity on the secondary market right now. Due to the high price of precious metals some folks are selling mom or grandma's unused treasures, so some older diamonds are returning to market. These are sometimes sold as-is and sometimes recut and sold through normal supply pipelines.

Infinity has bought rough parcels with some fluorescent crystals we reject for our purposes. We move them elsewhere. But over the years we have regularly produced S and VS fluorescent diamonds (AGS standard) with no compromise in optics which have been sold to extreme cut-enthusiasts. Indeed, there is a niche of clients who even seek out such diamonds for their appeal.

With that said, the rough diamonds and re-cut candidates we and others reject will wind up somewhere. So even though I consider the scare bigger than the reality it won't stop me - or any responsible pro - from due diligence in this area. It's a stone-by-stone call.

I hope it's helpful. Thanks for asking.

I agree with John here.
There are very few SB and not very many Very Strong Blue fluoro diamonds that have a negative transparency effect.
But as John alludes - it depends on where and how you look.
In direct sunlight there will be a hazy effect in many stones, but well cut non fluoro stones look dark and ugly in direct sunlight. VSB's look an attractive glowing blueish hue - much more fun and nicer than dark and dead non's. It is not difficult for experienced appraisers and dealers to screen this out and reject those few stones.

There is one other potential negative - and that is that many SB and VSB's will drop a grade or two when you screen out UV light used for color grading. Michael Cowing points to an unusual e.g. of a 4 grade drop.
However in my experience when the light is good enough to really see color well, there is usually enough UV that the blue cancelling yellow effect is strong enough to improve the face up color appearance - so its a win win.