trying to decide between two Rubelites

[kevinsp8]

That's a good point. Still, there is a certain 'cachet' about a stone that naturally attained its beauty over millions of years as opposed to something that can be essentially mass produced. In other words, I think part of what some people like about gems is their rarity.

This cutter has more comments about heating/irradiating tourmalines: http://www.faceters.com/how_to_buy/buy1.shtml

 

[T L]

That's a good point. Still, there is a certain 'cachet' about a stone that naturally attained its beauty over millions of years as opposed to something that can be essentially mass produced. In other words, I think part of what some people like about gems is their rarity.

This cutter has more comments about heating/irradiating tourmalines: http://www.faceters.com/how_to_buy/buy1.shtml

I agree, and I think green diamonds are one of the biggest examples of that price disparity. They are colored by natural radiation in the earth, and others are colored by man made irradiation. It is impossible to determine whether the radiation came from nature or man, but if the stone can be determined natural in color, a one carat natural green diamond is thousands upon thousands of dollars (upper five to lower six figures), and one colored by man is a tiny fraction of that cost (less than 5K). While treatment is nice and allows people to own some stones they could never afford if that color was made my mother nature, many times it is not disclosed, and that's my big gripe with treatment of any sort.

Thanks for the article from faceters.com. I wonder how true the "no color shift" property is for irradiated tourmalines. He said the same thing about irradiated indicolites (blue tourmaline).

 

[chrono]

So if the rubellite is found to not be heated, then it is safe to assume that it is not irradiated.

From my references, the radiation used to intensify the color in tourmaline is in the form of gamma rays which is the same radiation used to sterilize food, (using cobalt 60 as a gamma ray source). Therefore no heat is used. It's kind of funny that people get all worked up about the use of irradiation and heat in gems, since both processes occur in nature to color those same gems. The heat is obvious as many of these crystals grow in fractures and fluids produced in the outer layers of granitic pegmatites as they are cooling. Granites are well know producers of low level sources of gamma rays and so about the only hint that you might get that a stone had been irradiated, as opposed to being naturally irradiated, was some greater intensity of coloring in areas of a stone which received a greater dose of radiation after cutting, (slightly darker facet junctions perhaps?). If the stone were irradiated and then cut, well all bets are off and there is no way of telling.

Thanks for the info on the type of radiation used for nuking pink/red tourmalines. Your explanation, however, flies in the face of the very same information that I have heard/read which is the same as the one explained by Jeff Gram. He states that the stones are heated to very high temperatures, then irradiated. It bothers me greatly that most rubellites on the market has been heated & irradiated, yet this is not disclosed most of the time. It’s become a don’t ask and don’t tell situation where if one doesn’t ask, then the vendor doesn’t bother to say anything about the possibility of treatment. So of course, then even with the treatment (or lack of in doubt), vendors continue to charge normal pricing, whereas it should be discounted if the treatment is unknown (see Ed Bristol’s survey thread on treated/untreated gemstone pricing).

For me, the heating done by Mother Nature is different from the heating done by humans. Under high magnification, this is evident. For example, when if Mother Nature heated corundum, it still retains its wonderful rutile whereas when humans heat corundum, more often than not, this rutile melts and the colour is drastically different. I’d rather something special and unique that was made naturally over something humankind tampered with. Still, if the price is right, I can accept heat on certain gemstones. Irradiation, however, is a different matter. It is invasive and as Jeff said, putting colour there that was never there in the first place. To me, irradiated stones should be discounted heavily and always disclosed, whether asked by the consumer or not.

 

[Michael_E]

Thanks for the info on the type of radiation used for nuking pink/red tourmalines. Your explanation, however, flies in the face of the very same information that I have heard/read which is the same as the one explained by Jeff Gram. He states that the stones are heated to very high temperatures, then irradiated. It bothers me greatly that most rubellites on the market has been heated & irradiated, yet this is not disclosed most of the time. It’s become a don’t ask and don’t tell situation where if one doesn’t ask, then the vendor doesn’t bother to say anything about the possibility of treatment. So of course, then even with the treatment (or lack of in doubt), vendors continue to charge normal pricing, whereas it should be discounted if the treatment is unknown (see Ed Bristol’s survey thread on treated/untreated gemstone pricing).

I'm sure that some stones are probably heated, but then it depends on what you're trying to do. If you're merely trying to improve the color of a stone which is already pick to reddish, then why bother heating and risking ruining it? Don't ask, don't tell is pushing the reality of the situation a bit. In most cases it's "Don't know, Can't know". Once again, if a stone shows now evidence of treatment what does that mean? You can choose to believe whatever you'd like, but the reality is that you don't know and can't know what has been done to many stones. If you can't know what's been done, it doesn't matter what you want or what you think should happen. A stone SHOULD be discounted if the treatment is unknown ? Hmmm, discounted compared to what? If you don't know and can't know, then you are selling based on other characteristics of that stone and if it is prettier than it's competition, then it will command a higher priced. The market doesn't care about "what should be" but what is.

Ed's survey had a very predictable outcome from the start. Everyone, including me, wants untreated gems and feels that treated gems should command lower prices, (well except for paraiba tourmaline and tanzanite which are virtually all heated...but that's different right?). The problem comes when you can't tell what's been done. What do you do then? Quit buying anything that MIGHT have been treated? Make sure that anything that you buy is untreated regardless of cost? My contention is that when buying gems which may have been treated, you just accept it and buy based on beauty, durability and cost, otherwise you end up chasing rainbows in an attempt to gain some assurance that may never exist.

For me, the heating done by Mother Nature is different from the heating done by humans.

Yes, it is. But except for sapphire how can you tell?

Under high magnification, this is evident. For example, when if Mother Nature heated corundum, it still retains its wonderful rutile whereas when humans heat corundum, more often than not, this rutile melts and the colour is drastically different. I’d rather something special and unique that was made naturally over something humankind tampered with. Still, if the price is right, I can accept heat on certain gemstones.

I'd rather have something as natural as possible too, but except for sapphire the use of heat is NOT evident and that is the problem. We are talking about rubellite in this thread and so I would have to disagree that one can tell if the stone has been heated, (though they usually are not heated, since rubellite almost always has inclusions which would preclude the use of much heat or the stone will fall apart). You are correct about price. At lower price levels the use of treatments becomes very acceptable and almost mandatory to get some colors and sizes that people may want.

Irradiation, however, is a different matter. It is invasive and as Jeff said, putting colour there that was never there in the first place. To me, irradiated stones should be discounted heavily and always disclosed, whether asked by the consumer or not.

Sure it's invasive and yes it can put color there that was not there in the first place. So? If you can take a very pale tourmaline of good size and turn it into a deep red rubellite easily, safely and permanently, doubling or tripling it's value, what would you do? If you are living in a economically depressed area and selling to some rich westerner, would you tell them what they want to hear or what will sell your stuff? Disclosure is great between you and me, but you can't expect it to go all the way back to the hole that this gem came out of. Someone along the way is going to be tempted to be more concerned about selling than about anything else. Someday testing may be available and economic enough to test for lack of treatment in everything and with every treatment, until then you've just got to deal with things the way they are.

 

[T L]

Disclosure is great between you and me, but you can't expect it to go all the way back to the hole that this gem came out of. Someone along the way is going to be tempted to be more concerned about selling than about anything else. Someday testing may be available and economic enough to test for lack of treatment in everything and with every treatment, until then you've just got to deal with things the way they are.

Well, for me, "having to deal with it" is not good enough. If it ever turns out that one day all gem species will have undetectible treatments, I will give up this hobby. One of the reasons I stopped buying corundum and now, rubellite and indicolite, is because of undetectible treatment, and so be it. Fortunately, you can still find untreated corundum which has tell tale signs of no treatment, but who knows how long that will last. It's a very sad state of affairs if the consumer just has "to deal with it." I understand your point from a vendor standpoint, but from a consumer standpoint, I think all this unethical non-disclosure is bad business. Sorry.

 

[chrono]

Perhaps I am in the minority but if the treatment is unknown, then I refuse to purchase the gemstone. This is exactly why all sorts of new treatments constantly being invented and tested as we speak. If it cannot be detected by current methods, then obviously many miners/treaters/etc are going to keep doing this because it means major profits as the improved colours will command premium prices for something that is originally worth pennies. If more people are aware of this, perhaps it will force pricing to be lower or discounted for the unknown rather than blindly accepting whatever a vendor says. Outside of PS, how many people truly understand the myriad treatments out there, what it does, what the original stone looks like, and etc? It’s not that the market doesn’t care, I think it’s that the market doesn’t know any better (at least the mass market, not collectors).

Actually, I disagree about the heat treatment pricing of Paraiba tourmaline as well but again, I am in the minority. I have seen the original material from Brazil that are NOT heated at all (or at least it could have been heated naturally by Mother Nature, who knows?) and did not require heating.

Frankly, yes, if there is currently no method of detection, I will not buy anything that MIGHT have been treated. I refuse to accept it. If everyone accepts it, then the trade will continue to treat and sell at a premium that is falsely acquired. As of now, I will only purchase untreated corundum. Rubellite and indicolite are also in my no buy list, like TL. In time, many other currently untreated gemstones will also be treated without disclosure, and when that happens, I will no longer buy those as well until the day that a testing method is discovered/invented for the unknowns. Because when that happens, that unknown $5000 rubellite could end up being worth only $500. Maybe there are people out there who don’t care but I do.

 

[VapidLapid]

Just because the marketplace takes advantage of methods of treating pebbles and turning them into gems and that some treatments cannot be detected doesn't mean we should give in and lower our standards. If we don't stick to our guns then all will be lost but if we raise our standards and stand fast we might actually force a niche market of untreated stones being documented from the mine with documented chain of custody added to the lab reports we now get. At least this might happen for higher-end stones. I hope.

 

[kevinsp8]

I appreciate everyone's input. I gather that while crap tourmalines can be treated to make them nicer, there don't seem to be a surfeit of nice red stones out there, and the prices asked seem to be about the going rate. I actually in the end chose a different one from the asj site, based on the discussions here and what the owner told me. Here's the site picture... I'll let you know what I think of it when it arrives and post my own picture. It's 10.66 carats, a little pinker than the others, and supposedly quite clean and sparkly. It was $600 more. My only fear is it may be too much on the pink side... we'll see!



Here again are the other two I was considering, for comparison.

 

[kevinsp8]

So I got the stone I indicated in my last post and was very happy with it. Here are the photos of it in the ring as promised. Stone turned out NOT to be overly pink in real life, and is a very good red. These photos don't do it justice. It is not a subtle ring!

 

[T L]

That is not a subtle ring at all, it's huge! It's very unique and the design elements appear to have some retro sixties influence, like architects such as Charles Eames and Arne Jacobsen would use. Very nice. It is gold, platinum, silver????

 

[movie zombie]

not subtle is my fav kind of jewelry! nice ring design which goes great in making your rubelite the star of the show....and it looks great on you, too.

 

[Arkteia]

You know, two or three years ago I first read about irradiated bright-red rubellites (I do not remember where). And almost instantaneously, there were these immensely beautiful hot-red stones everywhere. And they were cheap. An upscale downtown jeweler was selling a pair of huge rubellite-and-diamond earrings and a ring for $ 5K (they were Hu-uge). They were staying in the display case for a while, then someone bought them. Now I see the same rubellites, but the price has gone up. It is as if people are used to the idea of nuked rubellites and do not mind them anymore. (Same with demantoids - no one asks about heat treatment these days.)

 

[Pandora II]

Very nice stone and blimey it's BIG!

Regarding the treatments discussion:

How many people buy citrine (nearly all heated), smoky quartz (nearly all irradited), praislolite (99.9% heated)? Nearly all aquamarine is either heated or irradiated, same for topaz and zircons. Nearly all emeralds are oiled. Almost all tanzanite is heated, pretty much all paraiba tourmaline is heated and the majority or red tourmalines are irradiated.

The market in general doesn't care and there isn't any chance IMHO that the traders at source are going to stop nuking and heating when it brings in a lot more money.

Personally my attitude is that if it's a standard treatment and undetectable then the price is what the market will pay, and you just have to assume that the stone is treated and whether you a) want to buy it at all and b) whether you like the stone for the price. After all, you can always go and buy an unheated ruby or a red spinel if you want something untouched by anything but the lapidary's hand - but you may have to pay a lot, lot more for a pretty red stone.

Burners in Thailand and the irradiation guys in Brazil are trying treatments on everything they possibly can so no gemstone is truly safe.

Even heat-treatment in corundum isn't always detectable easily - rutile doesn't start to dissolve till around 1100 degrees C and they can heat-treat for colour at well-below that.

 

[T L]

Regarding the treatments discussion:

How many people buy citrine (nearly all heated), smoky quartz (nearly all irradited), praislolite (99.9% heated)? Nearly all aquamarine is either heated or irradiated, same for topaz and zircons. Nearly all emeralds are oiled. Almost all tanzanite is heated, pretty much all paraiba tourmaline is heated and the majority or red tourmalines are irradiated.

I dont' mind a treated citrine, smoky quartz, or prasiolite, as they are cheap stones. I personally stay away from those, as well as aqua, topaz and zircons. I also stay away from emeralds, tanzanite, and I think paraiba tourmaline prices are a crime for a heated, moderately durable gem. I know some people will take offense to that last statement, but it's crazy to pay $50K/ct on a tourmaline, especially a treated one. I just don't get it, so sorry again if I offend anyone with that statement. It's just my own personal opinion. I also stay away from pretty much all tourmaline nowadays.

You're right though, almost everything will be treated at some point, it's just a matter of time before they figure out how to enhance stones that are not commonly enhanced. It's very sad. What's even scarier is that these newer treatments are becoming non-detectable. That probably disturbs me more than the treatment itself.

 

[Arkteia]

I think things will eventually be detectable, even (hopefully) irradiation, it is just that newer methods of detection always lag behind new ways of treatment. Or we as customers are unaware of new treatment.

I also think that one important thing that will happen as the result of it would be the reputation of the vendors selling potentially treated stones for untreated. For many years Pala was claiming that half of its demantoids were unheated, while they were heated (and it could be detected even at that time, it is just that no one cared to send the stones to GIA). A jeweler who got gorgeous stones from them at a show on a memo (the stones were claimed to be unheated) agreed to send them to GIA to check treatment per my request. The answer was, heated. So we returned them, and at least it made Pala list these awesome stones as heated. Half a year later, they made disclosure about heat-treatment of demantoids.

And if the level of treatment is not known to the vendors, then they should assume treatment and price accordingly... I concur with TL. And it is an issue of choice. If most (not all) aquas are heat-treated and sold at going prices, it is fine with me. If they are sold at prices of unheated aquas (which, as we all know, exist), then it becomes a problem. I do not remember where I read it, but it was a simple book, Schumann's or something like it, stated that "some researchers state that the color of Paraibas are due to specific treatment, but it has never been proven". I do not know whether he meant heating at specific conditions or (or, horror!) nuking, but this is what has been said... I shall find this statement if anyone is interested.

P.S. and the trade suffers from new treatments, not always willingly accepts it. If you read Wink's article about rubies, newer treatment actually led to destruction of an expensive stone, and I think he suffered financially.

On a side note - TL, you were right in mentioning that many hot-pink newer material spinels resemble tourmalines. Very sad, because it takes away that specific quality of spinels, but they are still sold at ludicrous prices because of their name.

 

[Pandora II]

I think things will eventually be detectable, even (hopefully) irradiation, it is just that newer methods of detection always lag behind new ways of treatment. Or we as customers are unaware of new treatment.

I also think that one important thing that will happen as the result of it would be the reputation of the vendors selling potentially treated stones for untreated. For many years Pala was claiming that half of its demantoids were unheated, while they were heated (and it could be detected even at that time, it is just that no one cared to send the stones to GIA). A jeweler who got gorgeous stones from them at a show on a memo (the stones were claimed to be unheated) agreed to send them to GIA to check treatment per my request. The answer was, heated. So we returned them, and at least it made Pala list these awesome stones as heated. Half a year later, they made disclosure about heat-treatment of demantoids.

And if the level of treatment is not known to the vendors, then they should assume treatment and price accordingly... I concur with TL. And it is an issue of choice. If most (not all) aquas are heat-treated and sold at going prices, it is fine with me. If they are sold at prices of unheated aquas (which, as we all know, exist), then it becomes a problem. I do not remember where I read it, but it was a simple book, Schumann's or something like it, stated that "some researchers state that the color of Paraibas are due to specific treatment, but it has never been proven". I do not know whether he meant heating at specific conditions or (or, horror!) nuking, but this is what has been said... I shall find this statement if anyone is interested.

P.S. and the trade suffers from new treatments, not always willingly accepts it. If you read Wink's article about rubies, newer treatment actually led to destruction of an expensive stone, and I think he suffered financially.

On a side note - TL, you were right in mentioning that many hot-pink newer material spinels resemble tourmalines. Very sad, because it takes away that specific quality of spinels, but they are still sold at ludicrous prices because of their name.

But if it is impossible to know whether or not a stone has been treated then exactly what does 'pricing accordingly' mean? After there aren't stones that can be proven to be untreated to use as a bench-mark.

On top of that the vendor of the stone has had to buy the stone in the first place so you would be expecting this to go right back to source which just isn't realistic.

PS consumers are a miniscule part of the buying public and the majority of people don't know, want to know, or if they do they aren't bothered.

ETA: Almost all Paraibas are heated at 'low' temperatures - they are on the whole extremely ugly stones in the natural state.

 

[kevinsp8]

In answer to the question, the ring is made from a combo of white and yellow gold. I have a local independent jeweller who does my designs... if you're in Toronto, pm me and I can tell you more. Although it is my biggest ring, I decided tasteful is for losers and I bought a >20 carat apatite which I'm having made into a ring. I'll find where people post their bling and post it when it's done.

 

[melave]

hi all

Kevin, that is one beautiful ring!! i love the style of it

Sorry to hijack but i am just getting into coloured stones (after lurking around on this site). I have been looking on the AJS site and noticed most of the stones say they are unheated, even the ones that have been listed on this thread as being common for being heated. So would they definitely not have been "fiddled" with?

Sorry if this seems like a dumb question

 

[Arkteia]

I think things will eventually be detectable, even (hopefully) irradiation, it is just that newer methods of detection always lag behind new ways of treatment. Or we as customers are unaware of new treatment.

I also think that one important thing that will happen as the result of it would be the reputation of the vendors selling potentially treated stones for untreated. For many years Pala was claiming that half of its demantoids were unheated, while they were heated (and it could be detected even at that time, it is just that no one cared to send the stones to GIA). A jeweler who got gorgeous stones from them at a show on a memo (the stones were claimed to be unheated) agreed to send them to GIA to check treatment per my request. The answer was, heated. So we returned them, and at least it made Pala list these awesome stones as heated. Half a year later, they made disclosure about heat-treatment of demantoids.

And if the level of treatment is not known to the vendors, then they should assume treatment and price accordingly... I concur with TL. And it is an issue of choice. If most (not all) aquas are heat-treated and sold at going prices, it is fine with me. If they are sold at prices of unheated aquas (which, as we all know, exist), then it becomes a problem. I do not remember where I read it, but it was a simple book, Schumann's or something like it, stated that "some researchers state that the color of Paraibas are due to specific treatment, but it has never been proven". I do not know whether he meant heating at specific conditions or (or, horror!) nuking, but this is what has been said... I shall find this statement if anyone is interested.

P.S. and the trade suffers from new treatments, not always willingly accepts it. If you read Wink's article about rubies, newer treatment actually led to destruction of an expensive stone, and I think he suffered financially.

On a side note - TL, you were right in mentioning that many hot-pink newer material spinels resemble tourmalines. Very sad, because it takes away that specific quality of spinels, but they are still sold at ludicrous prices because of their name.

But if it is impossible to know whether or not a stone has been treated then exactly what does 'pricing accordingly' mean? After there aren't stones that can be proven to be untreated to use as a bench-mark.On top of that the vendor of the stone has had to buy the stone in the first place so you would be expecting this to go right back to source which just isn't realistic.

PS consumers are a miniscule part of the buying public and the majority of people don't know, want to know, or if they do they aren't bothered.ETA: Almost all Paraibas are heated at 'low' temperatures - they are on the whole extremely ugly stones in the natural state.

Totally agree. Moreover, even if they are explained, they do not care. How many times I have heard from my friends that they buy diamonds and sapphires at Costco because "they are beautiful"! All explanations about Be-treatment and HPHT would fall on deaf ears. My friends did not care that they were, in fact, overpaying and could buy better stones for half the price on ebay!

At to the bench-mark...I was thinking of heated vs unheated aquamarines. Again, I do not want to say anything specific about Pala, just need to use it as an example because it is a good one. At the time when they were selling "my" wonderful deep-green stones for unheated, half of the stones on their website were sold as "heated". I have other examples of lack of disclosure, from other vendors, but I probably should stop here.

As to treatment, as I have noticed, there may be a certain lag between vendors finding out and consumers finding out. (Sorry for generalization, I do not want this statement to be derogatory for vendors, nor does it imply any specific vendor, but this is the nature of the trade... people buy beautiful things, so the general trend is to sell beautiful things, not to draw attention to lack of treatment). Sorry for perseverating on demantoids, but before the disclosure came out, for a while I heard statements from different vendors that garnets could be naturally heated in the earth by forming close to natural sources of heat. I even read about them being formed close to natural sources of radiation! (What idiot would agree to mine close to natural sources of radiation? Has anyone ever been to the Ural mountains? I was born there. Well, in the winter the temperature often falls down to -30 degrees Celcius so there is no time for the earth to get warm. As to natural sources of radiation, well, there are uranium mines there but I dread to think that my demantoid grew up close to one... Well, it has a certificate from GIA proving lack of treatment so that is comforting...) And then came the disclosure. Now one can read about garnets being "occasionally" heated, and some vendors on ebay started selling "unheated" garnets. All garnets. What should be my conclusion? Are all of them heated nowadays? Then why are prices going up, not down?

As to vendors buying stones, well, even between buying in Thailand and selling on a website, there is quite an overhead... Again, it is not meant to be derogatory in any way, vendors have to pay for the cost of the tickets, for hotels, be vaccinated, and if they go directly to mine owners, it can be, as we all know, extremely dangerous. And then there is the risk that the stone may not even sell! (And our vendors' prices are so much lower than what you see at B&M stores, than of course I am going to buy from PS vendors - the stones that I am still buying). But for me the statement that rubies from Thailand or Africa are not heated or treated may not be enough! If you don't know, just say, I do not know, I can only see in my microscope that it is not "healed". So I stopped buying these rubies. I am still buying unheated sapphires, but this, too, is becoming problematic. So far I have bought only two, one from Gary and one from Jeff, and both were confirmed to be unheated. Oh, and I bought one from the GemTrader, with a certificate, and then returned and now I regret it.

Now some ebayers started mentioning "spinel - no treatment!". What I know for today is that attempts to heat spinels did not lead to improvement of color, but it is my nightmare that a couple of years from now we'll be in for a very unpleasant surprise.

 

[Pandora II]

What idiot would agree to mine close to natural sources of radiation?

Just do a search on Mogok, Burma and Uranium...

 

[Arkteia]

What idiot would agree to mine close to natural sources of radiation?

Just do a search on Mogok, Burma and Uranium...

Yes, I know... Speaking of unethical mining. Moreover, as I was typing this post, I was thinking about getting uranium from the mines and how it may be done in Russia. How it used to be done. The only thought of demantoids being mined close to natural sources of radiation is horrible, and I hope it is not true, but we'll never know what happens in Russia.

Kevin - sorry, I wanted to say that your ring is beautiful. It looks smashing. Now it looks as threadjacking and I think I went too far from the topic but it is somehow disheartening to see how prices grow.

 

[blithesome71]

Bold & beautiful ring Kev! Congrats on ur purchase