shape
carat
color
clarity

Questions for Mr. Zarakhani of d.neadiamonds.com lab created diamonds

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Date: 6/16/2008 10:37:37 AM
Author: DiaGem
Date: 6/16/2008 10:08:39 AM
Alexei...,


When it comes to production, marketing, and value..., how would you compare between synthetic vs. natural Diamonds and synthetic vs. natural colored gem stones?


Is it comparable? Or similar?

Despite the question is rather short it requires a long detailed answer. If you don''t mind, I''ll rephrase it – will synthetic diamonds have the same fate as synthetic colored stones in regard to their natural counterparts? - I have no crystal ball, time will tell. And that''s would be a simple prudent answer.

Nevertheless, I do think that a phenomena of synthetic diamonds is fundamentally different from synthetic colored stones case.
It all started with technology which for colored stones from the very beginning was relatively simple and easily accessible, relatively small capital investments needed to acquire know how, equipment and skills, it had relatively low cost of production and high output, etc. In other words, one could start a synthetic stone production in his backyard, like the Chinese did with pig iron not so long ago. Such a low threshold entry into the field lead to rapid expansion of capacity and mass production which, in its turn, lead to inevitable price competition. Besides, the situation on a colored stone market was enhanced by wide availability of large quantities of inexpensive treated stones. Those two factors combined resulted in very low prices for synthetic stones vs. their natural counterparts. A relative rarity of untreated natural colored stones helped them to re-gain price levels and retain a crown of “the real thing”. Both treated and synthetic stones turned out to be not so “real thing”. In this line-up synthetics were in the very low-end. Somewhat similar to 10K gold – it is gold, off course, but not that much. And value... well, bigger cleaner stones of top colors at very low prices – this is a value proposition for created colored stones.

With synthetic (lab-grown) diamonds it''s completely different situation. First of all, available technologies are not simple and readily accessible, high capital investments are necessary to build equipment and acquire know how, highly trained personnel is required, relatively high cost of production and low output yield. Those all factors combined prevent a widespread expansion of production capacity. The threshold to enter into synthetic diamond area (I''m talking about large gem-quality monocrystals, not powders) is rather high. I don''t see any new participants joining in over past several years. Secondly, the situation on a diamond market is totally different from colored stones. Majority of stones offered and sold are untreated natural diamonds. Volume of treated stones is not large, a few percentage points of the overall market and a price difference between treated and non-treated diamonds is not as significant (50% at best for white stones) as for colored gemstones. Quantities of lab-grown diamonds that we have on the market today are anecdotal. Besides, their much discussed potential to become 10% of world diamond trade won''t lead to overproduction and oversaturation of this market for the years to come. As I pointed out earlier, a high investment cost per carat of production should prevent a rapid capacity build-up for lab-grown diamonds and a price competition issues won''t be as acute as was in the case of synthetic colored stones. Also, investment and capital cost per carat combined with relative high production costs of lab grown diamonds makes them less attractive investment than into natural diamond mining. So, on one hand, I don''t dispute the forecast of 10% of the market for potential demand in the next 10 years, it''s quite realistic; on the other hand, I have doubts that a capacity to meet such a demand will be available at that time.

Now, let''s get to marketing and pricing. Colored lab created diamonds are being sold at a significant discount to similar natural stones. For, example 1 ct VS fancy intense blue AOTC Created diamond goes for $10,000 retail which is, probably, 25 times less than its natural counterpart. For yellow diamonds the difference in price is at least a factor of 2. So, in the the case of colored created diamonds marketing goes the same way as for synthetic colored gemstones – prices are more affordable for the comparable quality and look. And here all similarities end, for this is not exactly low cost proposition. Our blue diamonds are priced higher than top end of natural colorless stones which can''t be treated as inexpensive. Same goes for our yellows, they are just slightly less expensive that similar whites. Most of our colored diamonds are being sold into a fashion market to make high end designs more affordable. Affordability and availability has nothing to do with a low-end. For example, try to make a necklace of 50 blue color matched diamonds. With natural diamonds the cost will be prohibitive and, most likely, you''ll have to collect matching stones not for one year. With created diamonds it''s much less expensive and easier. You may ask, why our blue prices are 25 times less than natural and not, say, 10 times since there not much competition? Our pricing model is cost driven. However, over past three years we fine tuned our prices several times to reflect a customer demand and preference for a particular color and clarity. It resulted in higher prices for our lighter goods and better clarities.

Our colorless stones is completely different story. To grow a white diamond is the most difficult thing in synthetics and the most expensive. So, a cost of production of whites is much higher that yellows and slightly higher than blues. However, in whites we do not have such a luxury as natural blue diamond prices. Instead, we have a price ceiling established by the market and we have to deal with it. So, why do we grow whites then? The answer is quite simple. There is a definite demand for colorless created diamonds for a bridal market at natural diamond prices. As I mentioned earlier in my posts, D.NEA is also our research tool. The statistics we collected over several years says that over 85% of all requests are for white stones, 10-12% - for blue and the rest – for yellows. Now, out of those 85% the majority is looking for significantly lower prices for synthetics, and that is understandable. The perception that a lab grown diamond has to be inexpensive, as well as big, internally flawless and of a top color, is still there. But there is another group bridal of customers that consciously ask for our diamonds regardless of price mainly because of environmental issues. Most of them have scientific or technical background and they know what they are asking for. In whites we cater to this group. Apparently, it''s not small in numbers and has tendency to grow. We estimate that over several years it could reach 15% of the US bridal market.

So, speaking about values, they undergo significant changes these days. It is being amplified by everyday media reports on global warming, pollution, etc. Computer savvy younger generation is more susceptible to those ideas. And they soon will be in a bridal age. They will have a different scale of values.

So, answering to your question, we shall see. Time will tell.
 
Date: 6/17/2008 3:07:51 PM
Author: Alexei Zarakhani

Date: 6/16/2008 10:37:37 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 6/16/2008 10:08:39 AM
Alexei...,


When it comes to production, marketing, and value..., how would you compare between synthetic vs. natural Diamonds and synthetic vs. natural colored gem stones?


Is it comparable? Or similar?

Despite the question is rather short it requires a long detailed answer. If you don''t mind, I''ll rephrase it – will synthetic diamonds have the same fate as synthetic colored stones in regard to their natural counterparts? - I have no crystal ball, time will tell. And that''s would be a simple prudent answer.

Thank you Alexei..., both for the rephrasing of my question (I did have a hard time putting the right words down...
12.gif
) and the detailed answer...


Nevertheless, I do think that a phenomena of synthetic diamonds is fundamentally different from synthetic colored stones case.
It all started with technology which for colored stones from the very beginning was relatively simple and easily accessible, relatively small capital investments needed to acquire know how, equipment and skills, it had relatively low cost of production and high output, etc. In other words, one could start a synthetic stone production in his backyard, like the Chinese did with pig iron not so long ago. Such a low threshold entry into the field lead to rapid expansion of capacity and mass production which, in its turn, lead to inevitable price competition. Besides, the situation on a colored stone market was enhanced by wide availability of large quantities of inexpensive treated stones. Those two factors combined resulted in very low prices for synthetic stones vs. their natural counterparts. A relative rarity of untreated natural colored stones helped them to re-gain price levels and retain a crown of “the real thing”. Both treated and synthetic stones turned out to be not so “real thing”. In this line-up synthetics were in the very low-end. Somewhat similar to 10K gold – it is gold, off course, but not that much. And value... well, bigger cleaner stones of top colors at very low prices – this is a value proposition for created colored stones.

With synthetic (lab-grown) diamonds it''s completely different situation. First of all, available technologies are not simple and readily accessible, high capital investments are necessary to build equipment and acquire know how, highly trained personnel is required, relatively high cost of production and low output yield. Those all factors combined prevent a widespread expansion of production capacity. The threshold to enter into synthetic diamond area (I''m talking about large gem-quality monocrystals, not powders) is rather high. I don''t see any new participants joining in over past several years. Secondly, the situation on a diamond market is totally different from colored stones. Majority of stones offered and sold are untreated natural diamonds. Volume of treated stones is not large, a few percentage points of the overall market and a price difference between treated and non-treated diamonds is not as significant (50% at best for white stones) as for colored gemstones. Quantities of lab-grown diamonds that we have on the market today are anecdotal. Besides, their much discussed potential to become 10% of world diamond trade won''t lead to overproduction and oversaturation of this market for the years to come. As I pointed out earlier, a high investment cost per carat of production should prevent a rapid capacity build-up for lab-grown diamonds and a price competition issues won''t be as acute as was in the case of synthetic colored stones. Also, investment and capital cost per carat combined with relative high production costs of lab grown diamonds makes them less attractive investment than into natural diamond mining. So, on one hand, I don''t dispute the forecast of 10% of the market for potential demand in the next 10 years, it''s quite realistic; on the other hand, I have doubts that a capacity to meet such a demand will be available at that time.

The reason I am interested in the information you are giving is the fact that I am a great believer in ''niche''s''..., and there is definitely a potential here..., at least in ''niche'' terms...

Now, let''s get to marketing and pricing. Colored lab created diamonds are being sold at a significant discount to similar natural stones. For, example 1 ct VS fancy intense blue AOTC Created diamond goes for $10,000 retail which is, probably, 25 times less than its natural counterpart. For yellow diamonds the difference in price is at least a factor of 2. So, in the the case of colored created diamonds marketing goes the same way as for synthetic colored gemstones – prices are more affordable for the comparable quality and look. And here all similarities end, for this is not exactly low cost proposition. Our blue diamonds are priced higher than top end of natural colorless stones which can''t be treated as inexpensive. Same goes for our yellows, they are just slightly less expensive that similar whites. Most of our colored diamonds are being sold into a fashion market to make high end designs more affordable. Affordability and availability has nothing to do with a low-end. For example, try to make a necklace of 50 blue color matched diamonds. With natural diamonds the cost will be prohibitive and, most likely, you''ll have to collect matching stones not for one year. With created diamonds it''s much less expensive and easier. You may ask, why our blue prices are 25 times less than natural and not, say, 10 times since there not much competition? Our pricing model is cost driven. However, over past three years we fine tuned our prices several times to reflect a customer demand and preference for a particular color and clarity. It resulted in higher prices for our lighter goods and better clarities.

Thats where I think the potential lies..., designers have a possibility which doesnt exist in the natural option..., collecting 50 (even way less) natural blue colored Diamonds for a project is nearly an impossible task (not even mentioning time frame or the crazy cost...), but...., it does take the rarity factor out of the equation for the exchange of fashion....

Our colorless stones is completely different story. To grow a white diamond is the most difficult thing in synthetics and the most expensive. So, a cost of production of whites is much higher that yellows and slightly higher than blues. However, in whites we do not have such a luxury as natural blue diamond prices. Instead, we have a price ceiling established by the market and we have to deal with it. So, why do we grow whites then? The answer is quite simple. There is a definite demand for colorless created diamonds for a bridal market at natural diamond prices. As I mentioned earlier in my posts, D.NEA is also our research tool. The statistics we collected over several years says that over 85% of all requests are for white stones, 10-12% - for blue and the rest – for yellows. Now, out of those 85% the majority is looking for significantly lower prices for synthetics, and that is understandable. The perception that a lab grown diamond has to be inexpensive, as well as big, internally flawless and of a top color, is still there. But there is another group bridal of customers that consciously ask for our diamonds regardless of price mainly because of environmental issues. Most of them have scientific or technical background and they know what they are asking for. In whites we cater to this group. Apparently, it''s not small in numbers and has tendency to grow. We estimate that over several years it could reach 15% of the US bridal market.

Sounds a bit overly-optimistic..., but who am I to estimate..., I realy dont see a reason for consumers to pay the same value for synthetic whites as they would do for natural ones..., but I may be completely wrong...

So, speaking about values, they undergo significant changes these days. It is being amplified by everyday media reports on global warming, pollution, etc. Computer savvy younger generation is more susceptible to those ideas. And they soon will be in a bridal age. They will have a different scale of values.

So, answering to your question, we shall see. Time will tell.
Yep..., I agree, time will tell and it will be interesting to follow.

One thing is for sure..., if these volatile times we are currently experiencing in the high end ''natural'' Diamond sector is here to stay for the long term..., I do see a good potential for ex-(natural Diamond)-industry members (cutters, manufacturers, jewelry designers etc..., etc...) to change paths and start creating with synthetics...

It happened in the past..., during the war times (like for example WWII)..., a lot of first class jewelry designers incorporated synthetic colored gem materials into their superb jewelry creations..., and funny enough these pieces still fetch heavy $$$ even these days!
1.gif


Thanks for your answers...
 
te:[/b] 6/17/2008 5:16:57 PM
Author: DiaGem

Thats where I think the potential lies..., designers have a possibility which doesnt exist in the natural option..., collecting 50 (even way less) natural blue colored Diamonds for a project is nearly an impossible task (not even mentioning time frame or the crazy cost...), but...., it does take the rarity factor out of the equation for the exchange of fashion....

A true rarity will always stay with only exceptional natural stones which are few in numbers. So, 50 natural diamonds in a necklace won''t add rarity to it either... I would say, a design of a jewelry piece and sophisticated craftsmanship makes it unique and rare, not always stones used. Take a look at Italian jewelry, say, for one of a kind pieces by Palmiero. They mainly use melee diamonds (which in my view have no rarity factor at all)and create unique and rare pieces of art.

We estimate that over several years it could reach 15% of the US bridal market.


Sounds a bit overly-optimistic..., but who am I to estimate..., I realy dont see a reason for consumers to pay the same value for synthetic whites as they would do for natural ones..., but I may be completely wrong...

Consumers, I was talking about, refuse to consider a natural diamond for ethical reasons, mainly environmental. On their scale of values a natural diamond is not an option. It''s quite sad for them to realize that in order to get an undisputed symbol of love mining companies have to remove several thousand tonnes of rock (to get one carat). So, for them all "traditional diamond values" like rarity, millions of years, etc. are of secondary importance.


So, speaking about values, they undergo significant changes these days. It is being amplified by everyday media reports on global warming, pollution, etc. Computer savvy younger generation is more susceptible to those ideas. And they soon will be in a bridal age. They will have a different scale of values.


So, answering to your question, we shall see. Time will tell.







Yep..., I agree, time will tell and it will be interesting to follow.


One thing is for sure..., if these volatile times we are currently experiencing in the high end ''natural'' Diamond sector is here to stay for the long term..., I do see a good potential for ex-(natural Diamond)-industry members (cutters, manufacturers, jewelry designers etc..., etc...) to change paths and start creating with synthetics...




[/quote]

Diamond industry, both high and low end, is here to stay. I just don''t see a contradiction between natural and synthetic diamond industry, except, maybe, for miners. Why would a cutter or a jewelry designer should "change paths"? Our cutters work with both natural and synthetic stones and see no problem with that. Well-known designers, whom we work with, use both natural and synthetic diamonds stones. They just expand their color palette and embrace clientèle that would never opt for a natural diamond.
 
Sorry, DiaGem. Pressed a wrong button. My answers are below your highlighted comments.
 
Date: 6/16/2008 8:00:39 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Date: 6/16/2008 10:37:37 AM

Author: DiaGem

Alexei...,


When it comes to production, marketing, and value..., how would you compare between synthetic vs. natural Diamonds and synthetic vs. natural colored gem stones?


Is it comparable? Or similar?

That is probably unfair because the cost of a mined stone includes the cost of prospecting which is never quoted in the miners 100% mark up DG
1.gif

Hi Garry,

I can''t figure out how your comment relates to DiaGem''s question. Anyway, annual cost of diamond prospecting runs around $850 mln. So, when you add it to mining costs ($7 bn) there still will be a hefty margin left for miners (13.95 - 7.0 - 0.85 = $6.1 bn, or 78%).
 
Date: 6/17/2008 6:29:00 PM
Author: Alexei Zarakhani

Date: 6/17/2008 5:16:57 PM
Author: DiaGem

Thats where I think the potential lies..., designers have a possibility which doesnt exist in the natural option..., collecting 50 (even way less) natural blue colored Diamonds for a project is nearly an impossible task (not even mentioning time frame or the crazy cost...), but...., it does take the rarity factor out of the equation for the exchange of fashion....

A true rarity will always stay with only exceptional natural stones which are few in numbers. So, 50 natural "BLUE" diamonds in a necklace won''t add rarity to it either (you forgot to add blue...
27.gif
)
...
I would say, a design of a jewelry piece and sophisticated craftsmanship makes it unique and rare, not always stones used. Take a look at Italian jewelry, say, for one of a kind pieces by Palmiero. They mainly use melee diamonds (which in my view have no rarity factor at all)and create unique and rare pieces of art.

True..., some present jewelry designs might fall into the ''unique and rare'' category..., but it has to pass the test of time first!
Palmiero..., is one of those as the Company is still relatively young!
Natural Blue Diamonds dont have to pass this test..., they are automatically considered ''rare''....




We estimate that over several years it could reach 15% of the US bridal market.


Sounds a bit overly-optimistic..., but who am I to estimate..., I realy dont see a reason for consumers to pay the same value for synthetic whites as they would do for natural ones..., but I may be completely wrong...

Consumers, I was talking about, refuse to consider a natural diamond for ethical reasons, mainly environmental. On their scale of values a natural diamond is not an option. It''s quite sad for them to realize that in order to get an undisputed symbol of love mining companies have to remove several thousand tonnes of rock (to get one carat). So, for them all ''traditional diamond values'' like rarity, millions of years, etc. are of secondary importance.

Ok..., I can see some consumers taking this route..., but in my opinion they are a tiny drop in the ocean of consumers..., but estimating a 15% market share within "several" years is another story....
20.gif



So, speaking about values, they undergo significant changes these days. It is being amplified by everyday media reports on global warming, pollution, etc. Computer savvy younger generation is more susceptible to those ideas. And they soon will be in a bridal age. They will have a different scale of values.


So, answering to your question, we shall see. Time will tell.







Yep..., I agree, time will tell and it will be interesting to follow.


One thing is for sure..., if these volatile times we are currently experiencing in the high end ''natural'' Diamond sector is here to stay for the long term..., I do see a good potential for ex-(natural Diamond)-industry members (cutters, manufacturers, jewelry designers etc..., etc...) to change paths and start creating with synthetics...





Diamond industry, both high and low end, is here to stay. I just don''t see a contradiction between natural and synthetic diamond industry, except, maybe, for miners. Why would a cutter or a jewelry designer should ''change paths''? Our cutters work with both natural and synthetic stones and see no problem with that. Well-known designers, whom we work with, use both natural and synthetic diamonds stones. They just expand their color palette and embrace clientèle that would never opt for a natural diamond.



Unfortunately..., while looking at the reality and the current state of the ''natural Diamond industry'' and comparing it to the (not so far) past..., I see and witness a lot of cutters, jewelry manufacturers, and merchants etc..., disappearing from the scene as they cant find their direction in this industry anymore...

Thats where I see/notice a growth potential in synthetics...
 
Date: 6/18/2008 3:53:47 AM
Author: DiaGem
Date: 6/17/2008 6:29:00 PM

Author: Alexei Zarakhani


Date: 6/17/2008 5:16:57 PM

Author: DiaGem


Thats where I think the potential lies..., designers have a possibility which doesnt exist in the natural option..., collecting 50 (even way less) natural blue colored Diamonds for a project is nearly an impossible task (not even mentioning time frame or the crazy cost...), but...., it does take the rarity factor out of the equation for the exchange of fashion....


A true rarity will always stay with only exceptional natural stones which are few in numbers. So, 50 natural ''BLUE'' diamonds in a necklace won''t add rarity to it either (you forgot to add blue...
27.gif
)
...
I would say, a design of a jewelry piece and sophisticated craftsmanship makes it unique and rare, not always stones used. Take a look at Italian jewelry, say, for one of a kind pieces by Palmiero. They mainly use melee diamonds (which in my view have no rarity factor at all)and create unique and rare pieces of art.


True..., some present jewelry designs might fall into the ''unique and rare'' category..., but it has to pass the test of time first!

Palmiero..., is one of those as the Company is still relatively young!

Natural Blue Diamonds dont have to pass this test..., they are automatically considered ''rare''....






We estimate that over several years it could reach 15% of the US bridal market.



Sounds a bit overly-optimistic..., but who am I to estimate..., I realy dont see a reason for consumers to pay the same value for synthetic whites as they would do for natural ones..., but I may be completely wrong...


Consumers, I was talking about, refuse to consider a natural diamond for ethical reasons, mainly environmental. On their scale of values a natural diamond is not an option. It''s quite sad for them to realize that in order to get an undisputed symbol of love mining companies have to remove several thousand tonnes of rock (to get one carat). So, for them all ''traditional diamond values'' like rarity, millions of years, etc. are of secondary importance.


Ok..., I can see some consumers taking this route..., but in my opinion they are a tiny drop in the ocean of consumers..., but estimating a 15% market share within ''several'' years is another story....
20.gif




So, speaking about values, they undergo significant changes these days. It is being amplified by everyday media reports on global warming, pollution, etc. Computer savvy younger generation is more susceptible to those ideas. And they soon will be in a bridal age. They will have a different scale of values.



So, answering to your question, we shall see. Time will tell.









Yep..., I agree, time will tell and it will be interesting to follow.



One thing is for sure..., if these volatile times we are currently experiencing in the high end ''natural'' Diamond sector is here to stay for the long term..., I do see a good potential for ex-(natural Diamond)-industry members (cutters, manufacturers, jewelry designers etc..., etc...) to change paths and start creating with synthetics...







Diamond industry, both high and low end, is here to stay. I just don''t see a contradiction between natural and synthetic diamond industry, except, maybe, for miners. Why would a cutter or a jewelry designer should ''change paths''? Our cutters work with both natural and synthetic stones and see no problem with that. Well-known designers, whom we work with, use both natural and synthetic diamonds stones. They just expand their color palette and embrace clientèle that would never opt for a natural diamond.






Unfortunately..., while looking at the reality and the current state of the ''natural Diamond industry'' and comparing it to the (not so far) past..., I see and witness a lot of cutters, jewelry manufacturers, and merchants etc..., disappearing from the scene as they cant find their direction in this industry anymore...


Thats where I see/notice a growth potential in synthetics...


DiaGem,

Being the innovative "out of the box" thinker that you are you should easily recognize the fact that cutters etc are disappearing due to one thing...the reluctance to change! The model of buying a small parcel of rough, polishing it and flipping it on the market in Antwerp are all but done. The rough and polished markets have change tremendously but most in our industry have not changed with the times...if you are not big or have carved out a niche for yourself...you are done in this business!!!

Mark my words the last men standing will be the innovators and the consolidators.

Cheers,
Clark
 
Date: 6/18/2008 3:53:47 AM
Author: DiaGem
Date: 6/17/2008 6:29:00 PM

Author: Alexei Zarakhani


Date: 6/17/2008 5:16:57 PM

Author: DiaGem


Thats where I think the potential lies..., designers have a possibility which doesnt exist in the natural option..., collecting 50 (even way less) natural blue colored Diamonds for a project is nearly an impossible task (not even mentioning time frame or the crazy cost...), but...., it does take the rarity factor out of the equation for the exchange of fashion....


A true rarity will always stay with only exceptional natural stones which are few in numbers. So, 50 natural ''BLUE'' diamonds in a necklace won''t add rarity to it either (you forgot to add blue...
27.gif
)
...
I would say, a design of a jewelry piece and sophisticated craftsmanship makes it unique and rare, not always stones used. Take a look at Italian jewelry, say, for one of a kind pieces by Palmiero. They mainly use melee diamonds (which in my view have no rarity factor at all)and create unique and rare pieces of art.


True..., some present jewelry designs might fall into the ''unique and rare'' category..., but it has to pass the test of time first!

Palmiero..., is one of those as the Company is still relatively young!

Natural Blue Diamonds dont have to pass this test..., they are automatically considered ''rare''....






We estimate that over several years it could reach 15% of the US bridal market.



Sounds a bit overly-optimistic..., but who am I to estimate..., I realy dont see a reason for consumers to pay the same value for synthetic whites as they would do for natural ones..., but I may be completely wrong...


Consumers, I was talking about, refuse to consider a natural diamond for ethical reasons, mainly environmental. On their scale of values a natural diamond is not an option. It''s quite sad for them to realize that in order to get an undisputed symbol of love mining companies have to remove several thousand tonnes of rock (to get one carat). So, for them all ''traditional diamond values'' like rarity, millions of years, etc. are of secondary importance.


Ok..., I can see some consumers taking this route..., but in my opinion they are a tiny drop in the ocean of consumers..., but estimating a 15% market share within ''several'' years is another story....
20.gif




So, speaking about values, they undergo significant changes these days. It is being amplified by everyday media reports on global warming, pollution, etc. Computer savvy younger generation is more susceptible to those ideas. And they soon will be in a bridal age. They will have a different scale of values.



So, answering to your question, we shall see. Time will tell.









Yep..., I agree, time will tell and it will be interesting to follow.



One thing is for sure..., if these volatile times we are currently experiencing in the high end ''natural'' Diamond sector is here to stay for the long term..., I do see a good potential for ex-(natural Diamond)-industry members (cutters, manufacturers, jewelry designers etc..., etc...) to change paths and start creating with synthetics...







Diamond industry, both high and low end, is here to stay. I just don''t see a contradiction between natural and synthetic diamond industry, except, maybe, for miners. Why would a cutter or a jewelry designer should ''change paths''? Our cutters work with both natural and synthetic stones and see no problem with that. Well-known designers, whom we work with, use both natural and synthetic diamonds stones. They just expand their color palette and embrace clientèle that would never opt for a natural diamond.



Hi DiaGem,

[/i]

Natural Blue Diamonds dont have to pass this test..., they are automatically considered ''rare''....




What about heavily included blue natural diamonds? Are melee blue diamonds rare enough? What about HPHT treated blue diamonds, are they considered to be rare as well? (For sure, they are in very small numbers compared to "natural" natural blue stones)


Ok..., I can see some consumers taking this route..., but in my opinion they are a tiny drop in the ocean of consumers..., but estimating a 15% market share within ''several'' years is another story....
20.gif


I wouldn''t underestimate a number of those non-traditionally thinking people. Changes in mentality and habits develop relatively quickly now, especially in the United States.
 
Date: 6/18/2008 8:48:50 AM
Author: Clark McEwen
Date: 6/18/2008 3:53:47 AM

Author: DiaGem







Unfortunately..., while looking at the reality and the current state of the ''natural Diamond industry'' and comparing it to the (not so far) past..., I see and witness a lot of cutters, jewelry manufacturers, and merchants etc..., disappearing from the scene as they cant find their direction in this industry anymore...



Thats where I see/notice a growth potential in synthetics...



DiaGem,


Being the innovative ''out of the box'' thinker that you are you should easily recognize the fact that cutters etc are disappearing due to one thing...the reluctance to change! The model of buying a small parcel of rough, polishing it and flipping it on the market in Antwerp are all but done. The rough and polished markets have change tremendously but most in our industry have not changed with the times...if you are not big or have carved out a niche for yourself...you are done in this business!!!


Mark my words the last men standing will be the innovators and the consolidators.


Cheers,

Clark

Hi Clark,

I absolutely agree with you. I would also add that your statement holds true for wholesalers and retailers as well.
 
Date: 6/18/2008 9:56:35 AM
Author: Alexei Zarakhani

Hi DiaGem,

[/i]

Natural Blue Diamonds dont have to pass this test..., they are automatically considered ''rare''....




What about heavily included blue natural diamonds? Are melee blue diamonds rare enough? What about HPHT treated blue diamonds, are they considered to be rare as well? (For sure, they are in very small numbers compared to ''natural'' natural blue stones)


Ok..., I can see some consumers taking this route..., but in my opinion they are a tiny drop in the ocean of consumers..., but estimating a 15% market share within ''several'' years is another story....
20.gif


I wouldn''t underestimate a number of those non-traditionally thinking people. Changes in mentality and habits develop relatively quickly now, especially in the United States.
Hi Alexei,

Naturally the majority of "natural" blue Diamonds are included...., but yes..., as long as its a ''natural'' blue Diamond of whatever size and clarity it will be rarer than any treated or synthetic non-natural blue...

I guess it''s the laws of nature....

And you see it in the prices they fetch as well...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess time will tell how these non-traditional thinking people will act in the near future..., it will be interesting to follow....
1.gif
 
I have some questions about inclusions which you may not want to answer for IP reasons and that is ok.

What is the most common inclusion type?
Is it also the most common one found in natural rough?
What is the effect of rate of growth on inclusion? i.e. could you get IF stones if you grew them slower? faster? not possible?
How does the purity of the source carbon affect the presence of inclusions?
 
Date: 6/18/2008 11:44:39 AM
Author: strmrdr
I have some questions about inclusions which you may not want to answer for IP reasons and that is ok.

What is the most common inclusion type?
I can give the basics:

In HPHT-grown diamond flux can be trapped in the growing crystal which results in metallic inclusions; usually enlongated crystals or flat tabular crystals. There can also be growth lines caused by boundaries between sectors. Both characteristics are evidence of synthetic origin. Things have come a long way; historically HPHT diamonds had many more flux inclusions than today.

In CVD-grown diamond there can be a thin layer on the table or culet which is a remnant of the seed. Carbon-like opaque inclusions and/or microfractures (which look like pinpoints) can also occur. When they occur they're always parallel with the direction of growth; table-to-culet or culet-to-table. Sometimes they will have clouds lying in a plane perpendicular to the growth direction. These characteristics are indications of origin but are not conclusive; more testing is necessary.

Of course I defer to Clark and Alexei to give more current or relevant into based on their daily experience.
 
Date: 6/18/2008 11:44:39 AM
Author: strmrdr
I have some questions about inclusions which you may not want to answer for IP reasons and that is ok.


What is the most common inclusion type?

Is it also the most common one found in natural rough?

What is the effect of rate of growth on inclusion? i.e. could you get IF stones if you grew them slower? faster? not possible?

How does the purity of the source carbon affect the presence of inclusions?

The most common type of inclusions in lab grown diamonds are metallic ones. I have already posted replies on 6/12/2008 3:29:07 PM and 6/12/2008 3:29:07 PM (page 2) on a HPHT process. You won''t find this type inclusions in a natural diamond, they are non-metallic since solvent in that case was a molten rock, not a metal.

Inclusions usually occur when diamond grows fast enough to trap a solvent inside. So, theoretically when we'' ll grow a diamond in an ideally prepared solvent at extremely low rate we can get a very clean rough. However, very low rates mean very long growth times. During that growth period you have to maintain and control many parameters, not only temperature and pressure. It is not an easy task.
Besides, economics would would work against you. For all those years I haven''t seen a single created IF rough, regardless of method of its production – HPHT or CVD. You can make it IF during cutting, though, but other issues like yield, cost, etc. will come to play. In HPHT process, in any case, you will always have inclusions in a seed area, but that could be easily cut off. There are numerous other things that affect clarity of a diamond during its growth. That''s why every diamond we grow is different from another, same way as natural diamonds do.

Well, purity and morphology of a graphite powder that we use as a source is of a paramount importance. Impurities affect growth rate and our ability to control it, sometimes unwanted impurities form other compounds that precipitate and act as new centers for crystallization. Also, both two parameters affect on distribution of carbon in a molten solvent, it should be a homogeneous solution. If it is not, then again we have issues with growth rate control and, hence, inclusions.
 
Date: 6/18/2008 12:41:10 PM
Author: John Pollard
Date: 6/18/2008 11:44:39 AM

Author: strmrdr

I have some questions about inclusions which you may not want to answer for IP reasons and that is ok.


What is the most common inclusion type?

I can give the basics:


In HPHT-grown diamond flux can be trapped in the growing crystal which results in metallic inclusions; usually enlongated crystals or flat tabular crystals. There can also be growth lines caused by boundaries between sectors. Both characteristics are evidence of synthetic origin. Things have come a long way; historically HPHT diamonds had many more flux inclusions than today.


In CVD-grown diamond there can be a thin layer on the table or culet which is a remnant of the seed. Carbon-like opaque inclusions and/or microfractures (which look like pinpoints) can also occur. When they occur they''re always parallel with the direction of growth; table-to-culet or culet-to-table. Sometimes they will have clouds lying in a plane perpendicular to the growth direction. These characteristics are indications of origin but are not conclusive; more testing is necessary.


Of course I defer to Clark and Alexei to give more current or relevant into based on their daily experience.

Hi John,

It''s a correct assessment. Just a few minor notes.

I saw many feather-like inclusions as well. And clouds (constellation of pinpoints),off course.

Sector boundaries are not inclusions or imperfections in a gemological meaning. They are not visible by microscope. See my post of 6/12/2008 3:29:07 PM and pictures below it.

I also saw whitish inclusions close to a culet in CVD diamonds.
 
Date: 6/18/2008 1:20:38 PM
Author: Alexei Zarakhani

Date: 6/18/2008 12:41:10 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 6/18/2008 11:44:39 AM

Author: strmrdr

I have some questions about inclusions which you may not want to answer for IP reasons and that is ok.


What is the most common inclusion type?

I can give the basics:


In HPHT-grown diamond flux can be trapped in the growing crystal which results in metallic inclusions; usually enlongated crystals or flat tabular crystals. There can also be growth lines caused by boundaries between sectors. Both characteristics are evidence of synthetic origin. Things have come a long way; historically HPHT diamonds had many more flux inclusions than today.


In CVD-grown diamond there can be a thin layer on the table or culet which is a remnant of the seed. Carbon-like opaque inclusions and/or microfractures (which look like pinpoints) can also occur. When they occur they''re always parallel with the direction of growth; table-to-culet or culet-to-table. Sometimes they will have clouds lying in a plane perpendicular to the growth direction. These characteristics are indications of origin but are not conclusive; more testing is necessary.


Of course I defer to Clark and Alexei to give more current or relevant into based on their daily experience.

Hi John,

It''s a correct assessment. Just a few minor notes.

I saw many feather-like inclusions as well. And clouds (constellation of pinpoints),off course.

Sector boundaries are not inclusions or imperfections in a gemological meaning. They are not visible by microscope. See my post of 6/12/2008 3:29:07 PM and pictures below it.

I also saw whitish inclusions close to a culet in CVD diamonds.
Thank you Alexei. I have only seen a few candidates - all HPHT-grown. Fascinating stuff. It''s nice to have you here to comment.

One question: I thought I was shown and noted graining/growth lines in patterns following cubo-octahedral growth sectors. These were seen in darkfield illumination. Are they not considered inclusions?
 
Date: 6/18/2008 1:42:55 PM
Author: John Pollard
Date: 6/18/2008 1:20:38 PM

Author: Alexei Zarakhani


Date: 6/18/2008 12:41:10 PM

Author: John Pollard


Date: 6/18/2008 11:44:39 AM


Author: strmrdr


I have some questions about inclusions which you may not want to answer for IP reasons and that is ok.



What is the most common inclusion type?


I can give the basics:



In HPHT-grown diamond flux can be trapped in the growing crystal which results in metallic inclusions; usually enlongated crystals or flat tabular crystals. There can also be growth lines caused by boundaries between sectors. Both characteristics are evidence of synthetic origin. Things have come a long way; historically HPHT diamonds had many more flux inclusions than today.



In CVD-grown diamond there can be a thin layer on the table or culet which is a remnant of the seed. Carbon-like opaque inclusions and/or microfractures (which look like pinpoints) can also occur. When they occur they''re always parallel with the direction of growth; table-to-culet or culet-to-table. Sometimes they will have clouds lying in a plane perpendicular to the growth direction. These characteristics are indications of origin but are not conclusive; more testing is necessary.



Of course I defer to Clark and Alexei to give more current or relevant into based on their daily experience.


Hi John,


It''s a correct assessment. Just a few minor notes.


I saw many feather-like inclusions as well. And clouds (constellation of pinpoints),off course.


Sector boundaries are not inclusions or imperfections in a gemological meaning. They are not visible by microscope. See my post of 6/12/2008 3:29:07 PM and pictures below it.


I also saw whitish inclusions close to a culet in CVD diamonds.

Thank you Alexei. I have only seen a few candidates - all HPHT-grown. Fascinating stuff. It''s nice to have you here to comment.


One question: I thought I was shown and noted graining/growth lines in patterns following cubo-octahedral growth sectors. These were seen in darkfield illumination. Are they not considered inclusions?

John,

Visible in a darkfield microscope twinning and growth planes are considered to be internal inclusions. But short growth lines are, apparently, not. We''d better ask gemologists what do they think. Also, I haven''t seen clear growth planes in synthetics while I''ve seen many of those in naturals.
 
Date: 6/13/2008 12:43:50 AM
Author: somethingshiny


Are the same ''impurities'' added to lab grown diamonds as that occur naturally to achieve color?

Basically, yes.

Let''s start with yellow diamonds. Nitrogen, a natural impurity, when enters a diamond during its growth replaces an atom of carbon in a diamond lattice creating a local color center which absorbs visible light except for only a yellow color which is reflected back. More nitrogen enters a diamond, more yellow diamond will be. With a certain approximation one can say that color saturation of a grown diamond depend on a nitrogen content in a diamond. When there are a lot of nitrogen in a stone it turns yellowish-brown. Majority of industrial synthetic diamonds have this brownish hue.
We can control color nitrogen content in a diamond, and, thus, saturation of color. We do it by adding certain additives (“getters”) to a mix of solvent and graphite (see my reply on 6/12/2008 3:29:07 PM on HPHT growth method) to trap nitrogen and do not let it build itself into growing diamond lattice. That way we produce our yellows – from fancy light to fancy vivid yellow.

If we continue with this method and remove all the nitrogen, or rather don''t let it in, a resulting stone will be colorless. We produce colorless diamonds in a range from D to I.

Speaking of natural diamonds, in majority of them nitrogen is present in abundance. Nitrogen concentration in most of natural diamonds is higher than in lab grown ones. Despite that fact, most of gem grade natural diamonds are white (colorless, near colorless, etc). The explanation of that is quite simple. Initially, majority of those diamonds were yellow but over millions of years under heat and pressure those nitrogen atoms migrated to each other and formed so-called aggregations of two, four and more atoms forming new color centers which do not absorb light. Hence, those diamond should be white. Not all of them are truly white, color varies from colorless to faint yellow and to cape. It only means that not all nitrogen could get to those aggregation and some portion of it is not associated, or so-called free nitrogen..
There is one more distinct type of nitrogen - aggregation of three N atoms, it''s called N-center or cape-center. It is another color center that also absorbs visible light and emits a washed-out yellow color (cape color). Those centers are characteristic for cape diamonds.
An amount of yellowish tint in natural diamonds depends on free nitrogen and cape centers content.
Only 2% of all natural diamond don''t contain nitrogen and, therefore, they are of top color.

To produce blue diamonds we simultaneously add boron and stop nitrogen from entering a diamond lattice the same way as we produce whites. Boron replaces a carbon atom in a diamond lattice creating a blue color center which absorbs visible light except for only blue color. As it was with nitrogen, more boron enters diamond, more blue a diamond becomes.
We could control boron content in a growing diamond and, therefore, produce diamonds from light blue to deep blue color. However, most of our customers prefer lighter colors, that''s why we produce mostly from fancy light to fancy intense blue diamonds.
In blue natural diamonds boron is also responsible for their blue color. The mechanism is the same as with nitrogen.
Btw, both natural and lab grown diamonds are electroconductive (because of boron presence) and could be tested positive on some moissanite testers.

We do not grow pinks, we produce them by irradiation of light yellow as-grown diamonds. We don''t add anything at a synthesis stage, just controlling a nitrogen content.
 
As a materials scientist with major interests in diamond research, I have found the discussions on this forum very interesting and informative.
If I may add a few words on nitrogen in diamond and its effect on color, from a scientist’s perspective:

Diamonds are basically divided into two categories – Type 1 having Nitrogen impurity, and Type 2 with no Nitrogen impurity.
These are further divided into four sub categories or types – 1a, 1b, 2a & 2b - depending on their impurities and how they exist in the crystal lattice.

Type 1a diamond has Nitrogen as 2 atom or 4 atom clusters.
Nitrogen present as 2 atom clusters are known as A centers, and diamonds with A centers are further classified as Type 1aA.
Nitrogen present as 4 atom clusters are known as B centers, and diamonds with B centers are further classified as Type 1aB.
Some diamonds may be a mixture of these two types, Types 1aA & 1aB, and may be designated as Type 1aA/B.
Nitrogen may also be present as platelets of ~300 atoms across and a few atoms thick; also in voidites, usually in Type 1aA/B and Type 1aB.

Type 1b diamond has Nitrogen present as isolated single atoms, known as C centers.
Nitrogen may also be present as cluster of 3 atoms, known as N3 centers.

Type 2a diamond has no impurities.



Type 2b diamond has Boron as impurity, normally of the order of parts per million.




The cause for color in diamonds is impurities and ‘structural defects’.
In Type 1a with Nitrogen:
If Nitrogen is present as A center or B center, the crystal would be colorless.
If Nitrogen is present as C center or N3 center, the crystal would be yellow, depending on concentration of C and N3 centers.
Typically, C centers would give a richer yellow color (Canary Yellow) and N3 centers (~100 ppm) would give a washed out yellow color (Cape Yellow). Change of N3 center concentration could lead to improvement of color, and also improvement of brilliance through “ultra violet downshifting”.

Therefore, improvement in the color of man made diamonds may be achieved by:
a) preventing Nitrogen in the crystal growth medium
b) using suitable getter material to take up the Nitrogen and prevent its incorporation into the growing diamond crystal lattice.
Or,
c) post-growth treatment of man made diamonds to facilitate the Nitrogen existing as C and N3 centers to diffuse and combine to form A or B centers in the diamond crystal lattice.

KC

 
Thank you for your input to this thread.

Just to clarify a few points for readers.

1. Synthetic yellow diamonds are all of Ib type. Depending on a producer a slight concentrations of A-centers could be detected.
2. An orange modifying color in yellow diamonds comes from centers created by trace impurities getting in a diamond from a solvent.
3. Synthetic blue diamonds are all of type IIb.
4. Synthetic colorless diamonds are all of type IIa with some concentration (sometimes undetectable by FTIR) of "free" nitrogen.

Other types of diamond mentioned by Dr. Cherian are solely attributable to natural diamonds, speaking of untreated stones.

Our company does not perform post-growth HPHT treatment of as-grown diamonds. First, it adds considerably to a cost of production. Second, HPHT treatment may lead to a loss of a stone if it has inclusions. Third, an HPHT treated diamond is more brittle and easily chips off. I could go on and on...
In other words, we don''t think that HPHT treatment is beneficial to our products. We grow diamonds that doesn''t require further improvement of color except for pinks which we do by irradiation treatment of our yellows grown with low levels of "free" nitrogen.
 
Alexei,

What are the maximum pressure and temperature operating conditions possible with your BARS equipment?

Karl
 
A question for both Cark and Alexei (and thank you both for being so frank and helpful).

Do you price clarity in your MMD''s the same way as is normally done for mined diamonds?
( I expect colour is done the against a rap type scale).


 
Date: 6/27/2008 3:07:29 AM
Author: kcherian
Alexei,


What are the maximum pressure and temperature operating conditions possible with your BARS equipment?


Karl


Karl,

That I can''t tell. Sorry.
 
Date: 6/27/2008 12:56:41 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
A question for both Cark and Alexei (and thank you both for being so frank and helpful).


Do you price clarity in your MMD''s the same way as is normally done for mined diamonds?

( I expect colour is done the against a rap type scale).





Garry,

Certainly, our prices for both colored and colorless diamonds depend on clarity grades. It would be strange to market VVS and I1 stones at the same prices. Besides, major labs (GIA, IGI, EGL) grade lab-created diamonds the same way they do naturals - weight, shape, color, clarity, cut, fluorescence, etc.

As for color, colorless diamonds are, indeed, done against the Rap while colored are priced completely differently vs. colored natural. We price lighter colors (to certain levels) higher than deeper ones. For example, our fancy blue diamond will cost more than similar deep blue. Or, another example, a vivid orange yellow will be much less expensive as fancy intense yellow. In natural diamonds it''s completely different.

Right now our prices do not depend on shape, except only for blue PRINs which are higher than for other shapes, and quality of cut. As soon as we start producing more and more colorless diamonds we will introduce cut quality differential.
 
Date: 6/27/2008 3:02:44 PM
Author: Alexei Zarakhani



Date: 6/27/2008 3:07:29 AM
Author: kcherian



Alexei,


What are the maximum pressure and temperature operating conditions possible with your BARS equipment?


Karl


Karl,

That I can''t tell. Sorry.
Alexei,
Well, never mind. I was inclined to suggest a modification to the current processing profile, for your R&D personnel to try out if interested, to see whether/how far “in situ” conversion from synthetic Type 1b to Type 1a would be possible after completion of the crystal growth process and before cooling down and release of pressure…
Karl
 
Date: 6/28/2008 3:55:49 AM
Author: kcherian


Well, never mind. I was inclined to suggest a modification to the current processing profile, for your R&D personnel to try out if interested, to see whether/how far “in situ” conversion from synthetic Type 1b to Type 1a would be possible after completion of the crystal growth process and before cooling down and release of pressure…

Karl

Karl,

I re-post and expand my answer from the other thread.

A reported 80% of conversion from type 1b to type 1a by post-synthesis HPHT treatment is not enough. A resulting color won''t be spectacular - at best it will be washed out yellow. What''s a practical use of that? To convert a nice yellow diamond into something which is neither white nor yellow? I, personally, don''t see any benefit of doing that.

It would be a different case should a 100% conversion be attainable. Unfortunately, it''s not the case. Otherwise, all of synthetic diamond growers would be producing nice colorless diamonds. But this is still a hypothetical scenario. A reality is completely different.

For example, there will be a risk of loosing a stone by doing a HPHT treatment on a synthetic rough with inclusions which are always there, at least around a seed area.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP

Featured Topics

Top