Selecting a sapphire

[LtlFirecracker]

Hello,

This is my first post here, but I have used the information on this site over the last couple months and it has helped me out a lot. I have always loved jewerly, and I have recently started buying some small, but nice pieces for myeself. I am working on making a RH sapphire ring. I really want a high quality non-trated sapphire. I did a lot of reading and education and found 2 sapphires that I really liked. I had them both sent to me, and I have them for a few more days.

1.5 oval blue
http://www.cherrypicked.com/Gallery/Score.aspx?ItemID=1905

1.1 oval blue
http://www.cherrypicked.com/Gallery/Score.aspx?ItemID=1904

Well, I have looked at them under several light sources, and I have found while the smaller one is darker, it is more vibrant, and seems to give off more color under spotted lights. It seems to have a really lively purple undertone to it. The larger one is nice, a similar shade and more transparent, but more muted, in tone. I will try to put a pic in to show it, but the colors in the pics are not the same as the colors I am seeing.

My question is this. I am pretty sure I would like to get the 1.1 ct sapphire because I like the life and color to it, but I am concerned about it darkening too much in the setting. The seller said that sapphires darken 5-10% in a setting. I really want to put a diamond halo around it. Will this work with a darker sapphire? Thanks in advance.

 

[Missrocks]

Is it possible to get photos in a different lighting source? Its really hard to judge from the picture. And most of the online photographs I've seen don't represent the stone correctly in the majority of lighting situations. But from what I can tell, the smaller stone (top) does look more lively.

Ie. my sapphire photographs best in outdoor or fluorescent overhead lighting.


I believe they were correct in saying the stone will darken in the setting. And I love the halo idea.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Yeah, I have more photos, I wasn''t sure how much you guys would want to see. I am running late for work right now, so I will put them up in a couple hours.

BTW, I love your ring .

 

[Missrocks]

Date: 3/7/2008 9:44:29 AM
Author: LtlFirecracker
Yeah, I have more photos, I wasn''t sure how much you guys would want to see. I am running late for work right now, so I will put them up in a couple hours.

BTW, I love your ring .

Thanks for the compliment!

Looking forward to more photos.

 

[chrono]

Yup, need more pictures. Based on Cherrypicked pictures, I prefer the 1.5 ct oval. When trying to make your final decision, make sure you view the stones under various lighting conditions, not just the spotted lights. Look at them under poor lighting conditions too, so that you''ll know what to expect.

 

[pamplemousse]

They both look great. I think we definitely need more pictures

If you''re deadset on a halo, you might look at some of the halo settings that seem to get more light to the stone. More of an open basket or whatever. I don''t know if that will have a significant effect on the "darkening" of the stone (I suspect the conventional wisdom about darkening is correct... I haven''t set my sapphire yet, so I can''t speak from experience).

Can''t wait to see more pictures. Congrats on your new purchase either way!

 

[Linda W]

Ditto what Chrono said. I love the 1.5.

Linda

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Thanks for all your input.

Its a hard choice because the 1.5 does better with sun and the 1.1 does better under artifical light. Here are some other pictures under different lights, but they do not capture the violet in both the stones....sapphires like to hide for the camera I guess.

I was thinking a more open halo too...

#1 indoors no lights, away from a window

 

[LtlFirecracker]

#2 1.1 ct in the sun by a window at noon (I life in a condo complex with a small court yeard so I don''t feel confortable going outside. These things are slippery little suckers when they are loose)

 

[LtlFirecracker]

The 2 together in the sun

 

[LtlFirecracker]

The 1.5 alone in the sun

 

[surfgirl]

Honestly? I dont care for either and I think you can do way better elsewhere. Have you looked at NSC? They have gorgeous high quality untreated stones. There''s someone else who people have been recommending, I think it''s Wildfish gems?

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Thanks for the honest opinions everyone, I am glad I have a day or 2 more to think about it. Here is one more pic with my diamond studs, than I think I am done with the sapphires and the camera.

 

[Missrocks]

Based on your descriptions and the photographs, I would go with the 1.1. I personally do not like the 1.5 because it looks a bit dull, for lack of coming up with more precise wording. I can see your concern about the 1.1 being a bit dark. If it was just a hint lighter in tone, the decision would surely be easier. If you have the time, why not keep shopping and see if something better pops up?

 

[bar01]

The 1.1 is a wee bit darker in tone, but otherwise it is superior sapphire.


The tone is exactly the same as my gals sapphire, which when set with diamonds really pops and has never disappointed us.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

So....I took the stones to a jewelry store to see how possibly a setting would affect it. Kind of informative, kind of dissipointing. The jeweler told me that both the stones were "problems" and they looked "overheated". He kind of backed off after I told them they were unheated. He sated the lighter one was dull and had zoning (which I felt was disclosed on the website). He said the darker one had inclusions under the loop that were dulling the stone (I was not surprized about the inclusions either). He brought out one of his stones, which he stated was heat treated, but had no other treatments. It was 1.17 cts but faced up much larger. It seemed like the same color as the 1.1, but it had much more of the sparkle under it. I tried to look at it by the window, but it was too late in the day. So I don''t know what it looked like without spotlighting. He suggested I do a white gold setting at this time, and than when I have the money, add diamond side stones instead of a halo.

So I am taking his comments about the sapphires with a grain of salt, because he had a slight conflect of interest. However, the experience did make me re-think heated stones. Also, he is the second jeweler to state I should do side stones insead of the halo. Another jeweler stated the look would work better on my hands, so I am starting to reconsider that.

So the 1.5 is out for sure. I think it has some good qualities, like in the sun and indirect light it gives off this beautiful blue like the ocean. But it isn''t the stone for me because fades into the background when diamonds are next to it. I think it is a stone that is best set alone.

I am still considering the 1.1, it is beautiful, it has character, it can hold its own next to a diamond, and it is a very good price. I am still worried it is a bit oversaturated. I guess I have expensive tastes

.

I am also considering sending both stones back, and really taking my time to see some more stones in person and deciding what I truely want in a sapphire. I am giving it till tomorrow night.

 

[desertgem]

Hi,

As both of your stones are of size to need custom setting, might I offer the one below
as a possibility.If you are interested in a pear shaped natural unheated sapphire at reasonable price. 2.2 ct. no heat cert.


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260218196668

I have purchased a dozen or more from this dealer and have been more than happy
with the stones. There is an 800 number for info and a 31 day return. This is a BIN rather than an auction. I once bought a tourmaline he called awful, pitiful, and irradiated from him for a couple of dollars and gave it to a 10 yr old girl at the gem and mineral group and she is now intellectually interested in gems.

Jim

 

[Pandora II]

My instinct here is that you are not 100% sold on either stone.

I would keep hunting.

Why don''t you contact Gary or Wink and see what they could find for you? They have access to way more stones than you will be able to find.

 

[marcy]

I agree with Pandora, if you aren''t 100% sure you want the smaller stone I would return it. If something is right, you know it and it doesn''t sound like this one is it.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Thanks for all your honest opinion.

I think Miss Rocks said it best when she stated that this decision would have been so much easier if the 1.1 was had a little less tone. It wouldn''t be so much of an issue, except I want to do a bezel setting as the temp setting until I can afford a nice diamond setting of some sort.

I decided to send the stones back. The just don''t give me the feeling my diamond studs give me, and I have had those almost a year. I am going to look around before I start contacting anyone again.

I have to say this form has been great. When I went to that jewelry store, the owner asked me if I was getting a GIA degree

. I just told him that science comes easy to me.

Anyways, the search continues....