Dec.20 to 22:SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA: Wholesale and retail show; Gem Faire Inc.; Scottish Rite Center; Fri. 12-6, Sat. 10-6, Sun. 10-5;
Welcome to the GemologyOnline.com Forum
A non-profit Forum for the exchange of gemological ideas
It is currently Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:10 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 6:59 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:23 am
Posts: 876
Location: GemClub
thank you fellows for sharing your opinions,
i have also emailed my Gemology Instructors Patrick Ball at GIA about this matter and he said he've forwarded my questions to their Laboratory and should get a response back in the next few days. so if i get any reply i will post here.

the name game is actually trader's game to make more money.
the name is based on how rare the gem is for example from total corundum rough each year what percentage are Rubies? for sure Red Rubies and Blue Sapphires are the most rare varieties of corundum. and they are very rare and hard to find. the so called Songea Rubies/Sapphire are Enhanced to produce that color, even to judge the fair price of Be Treated corundums we should have seen it before the treatment and compare how red it got after that!

i have been told by some traders from Chanthaburi Thailand that now Be Treatment is done to pink rubies from Madagascar and red rubies from tanzania so it is ruby!

because of this naming game the price of Be Treated corundums (i stick with corundum because not sure what varaity it is) has been raised up to 3 times and in red corundums even more comparing price from 2006! and very hard to find because of high demands of it!

Comparing the difference between natural vivid red and Be treated vivid red with royal blue sapphires and diffused vivid blue sapphire the Enhanced red is significantly higher that blue!? maybe its because the Enhancement procedure of Be that is more costly and takes more time (weeks of heating) or maybe its because the source of corundum rough to produce red Be rubies is rare or maybe both.

anyway now both customers and traders are welcoming Ruby name over sapphire because Be Enhanced produce high luster vivid Red or Orange/Red color and price is still much less than a pigeon blood Ruby from Burma. so laboratories adapt themselves with need of both customers and traders without clarifying the situation.

also i have read there are 3 types of beryllium Treatment Recipes with chrysoberyl or Beryllium oxide or flux of chrysoberyl and Beryllium oxide with corundum which each cooking leads to different result for example the thickness of layer of penetration (up to core) and inclusion resulting the threatment. if any one knows more of the procedure please share it.

every thing about this is so much in the dark, first there is no conclusion about naming the corundum, then the treatment itself has not been disclosed clearly weather its a type of diffusion or we should have a new name for it.

_________________
Farshid Roshanravan
http://diamondclub.us
Blog: http://roshanravan.tumblr.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 1:57 pm 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:23 am
Posts: 876
Location: GemClub
here is reply from GIA:

Quote:
Beryllium does not turn corundum red

Quote:
Songea material has a lot of iron

Quote:
Naming is it according to color agent and enough red hue


naming conclusion by GIA:
Quote:
If the corundum is predominately red (not pink) and naturally colored by chromium then it is a ruby. In the case of a beryllium treated stone, it would still be a ruby because beryllium does not make red color. The chromium had to be there in the first place.


treatment comment by GIA:
Quote:
We call beryllium treated stones ruby or sapphire (as appropriate) and then in the treatment field say “Indications of heating. Color induced by lattice diffusion from an external source.”


........................
well that clears many things
The the red color is indeed Ruby not sapphire variety. the Thailand trader was right.

_________________
Farshid Roshanravan
http://diamondclub.us
Blog: http://roshanravan.tumblr.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 3:13 pm 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:03 pm
Posts: 606
Location: Sweden
Thanks for relying their answer! They didn't say how they distinguish between red and pink?

Quote:
If the corundum is predominately red (not pink) and naturally colored by chromium then it is a ruby. In the case of a beryllium treated stone, it would still be a ruby because beryllium does not make red color. The chromium had to be there in the first place.

I find this bit strange, as I've been told that it is pink stones that mainly are used to produce red stones, by heating them with light elements to balance the blue part and deepen the colour, which would mean that purplish pink sapphire (by their definition) is turned into ruby.

Quote:
Comparing the difference between natural vivid red and Be treated vivid red with royal blue sapphires and diffused vivid blue sapphire the Enhanced red is significantly higher that blue!? maybe its because the Enhancement procedure of Be that is more costly and takes more time (weeks of heating) or maybe its because the source of corundum rough to produce red Be rubies is rare or maybe both.

It is both rarer to find the right rough and more expensive to treat, but I think the biggest reason for this is that the rarity and the general price level for rubies are a lot higher than for blue sapphire.

_________________
If it sounds good, then say it again!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 4:44 pm 
Offline
Gemology Online Übergod
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:24 am
Posts: 4997
Location: McDonough GA
Rosh, thanks so much for asking this question and pursuing the answer from the labs. This was MOST helpful.

Jason

_________________
http://www.selectgem.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:42 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:23 am
Posts: 876
Location: GemClub
Jason wrote:
Rosh, thanks so much for asking this question and pursuing the answer from the labs. This was MOST helpful.

Jason


hehehe thank you bro, i am always pain in the neck to get my answers. i have tried GIA lab before but lab never responded to me so i had to go through my Instructor :twisted: and gladly this worked

also i have asked more question from GIA and here is their reply:

my question wrote:
naming it is by considering ColorAgent+Hue. so my conclusion is any pink or red corundum is ruby, like pink rubies so we can't use Pink Sapphire. right? (sapphire is used for other varieties).


answer from GIA wrote:
When a Sapphire (synthetic or natural) has a dominant blue color, you do not need to record blue before Sapphire. When Sapphire is written alone, it is assumed to have a dominant blue color. If it is any other color then blue (or red which is Ruby), that is when we need to specify the color.


my question wrote:
about GIA lab comment for Be treated corundum there is no mentioning Beryllium?


answer from GIA wrote:
No, only the fact that it is treated.


their responds and comments is wisely and very carefully chosen ,

just for my understanding does it mean there is no pink sapphire? or not? :?: :!:

Jung Kee wrote:
Thanks for relying their answer! They didn't say how they distinguish between red and pink?

no they didn't :( they repied:
answer from GIA wrote:
color description is based on hue, tone and saturation descriptions.

but no further info

_________________
Farshid Roshanravan
http://diamondclub.us
Blog: http://roshanravan.tumblr.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:19 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:22 pm
Posts: 19945
Location: San Francisco
Excellent follow through roshanraven.
re:
Jung Kee wrote:
I find this bit strange, as I've been told that it is pink stones that mainly are used to produce red stones, by heating them with light elements to balance the blue part and deepen the colour, which would mean that purplish pink sapphire (by their definition) is turned into ruby.

I believe you have been misinformed.....

Secondly, I think too many hairs are split by trying to have someone in gemological authority DEFINE the difference between pink and red.

#-o Seriously, if you go into a shop to buy a red shirt do you need a tutorial to make sure you don't come home with a pink shirt? Is there anyone reading this who does not feel qualified to purchase a red shirt?
:D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:22 pm 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:03 pm
Posts: 606
Location: Sweden
Barbra Voltaire wrote:
I believe you have been misinformed.....

Okay, thanks for correcting that then :)
Do you know what the rough looks like before baking it?

Quote:
Secondly, I think too many hairs are split by trying to have someone in gemological authority DEFINE the difference between pink and red.

#-o Seriously, if you go into a shop to buy a red shirt do you need a tutorial to make sure you don't come home with a pink shirt? Is there anyone reading this who does not feel qualified to purchase a red shirt?
:D


Haha yeah, actually I think so too, this is purely for the matter of philosophical discussion! ;)

Personally I don't agree with the designation of pink sapphires, as I think that pink indeed is a washed out red, and that pink corundums therefore should be labeled rubies. This on the condition that it is washed out red, and not bluish, in which case it would be purple sapphire. But since it seems like most people thinks that pink is distinctive enough to be apart from red, and that it should be labeled pink sapphire rather than pink ruby, I'm pushing the case to know where the border is drawn for most people. As stated earlier in the thread, it isn't so much about agreeing or disagreeing on something, I'm more interested in getting different views on the matter. However it do feels like the topic is beginning to get exhausted now.

_________________
If it sounds good, then say it again!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:44 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:23 am
Posts: 876
Location: GemClub
Other Useful information :D

http://www.gemstone.org/index.php?optio ... &Itemid=14
International Colored Gemstone Association wrote:
Not realising that ruby and sapphire were actually the same mineral, our ancestors left us with a dilemma: how should pink shades be classified? Long ago, it was decided that all gemstones of the mineral corundum should be referred to as sapphire, except the red colour, which was called ruby. But pink is really just light red. The International Colored Gemstone Association has passed a resolution that the light shades of red should be included in the category ruby, since it is too difficult to legislate where red ends and pink begins. In practice, pink shades are now known either as pink ruby or pink sapphire. Either way, these gems are among the most beautiful of the corundum family.


International Colored Gemstone Association wrote:
The most valuable other fancy sapphire is an orange-pink or pinkish-orange variety called 'padparadscha' after the lotus blossom. Padparadscha sapphires are very rare, and the exact definition has always been a matter of debate: different dealers and laboratories around the world disagree on the exact colour denoted by this term. Some dealers even argue that the term should not be limited to the pastel shades of Sri Lankan sapphires, but also include the more fiery shades of reddish-orange from the Umba Valley in Tanzania. Padparadscha sapphires sell at a premium, their prices nearing those obtained for fine blue sapphires. Although the exact description of these rare gemstones is debatable, their beauty, with its delicate blended shades the colour of fresh salmon and sunsets, is not.



http://www.ruby-sapphire.com/ruby_sapphire_borders.htm

ruby-sapphire wrote:
Unfortunately, the powerful American market continues to use the term pink sapphire, leading producing countries both by the nose and all of us into needless problems.

_________________
Farshid Roshanravan
http://diamondclub.us
Blog: http://roshanravan.tumblr.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:48 pm 
Jung Kee wrote:
The point is that without marketing considerations, we wouldn't have any varietal names at all. Indicolite? Rubellite? Morganite? Heliodor? Kunzite? Hiddenite? All of it is marketing names that has become varietal names defining a perceived difference. There might be a scientific difference or not, but it doesn't matter, what matters is what people in general perceive and believe. You might dislike the "Mint" designation to garnets, but most people obviously do not, and sees a very real difference between Merelani Mints and Tsavorites. This is the razor edge gemmology needs to walk, to be able to be on the border between rational science and unrational reality.


The naming of things. The origins of many names are lost in antiquity. From the 18th cent there has been a deluge of new discoveries, all of which required naming somehow and this co-inciding with an emergent need to systematically categorise the names for not only the materials known from history but also of the new discoveries. In the case of elements, traditional names such as Iron or Gold were retained with newly identified elements commonly being named after some connected place, person, or quality of the element , to which the suffix -ium, fron the Latin, indicating a 'belonging to' (the genitive case) was added e.g Helium. Of Helios (Greek name for the Sun), being a major constituent of that star. A similar naming system was adopted for minerals formed of a single chemical compound or sometimes a defined mix - a root name followed by the suffix 'ite', of Greek derivation and indicating some affinity with the root word. E.g. Morganite the name accorded to pink Beryl to honour the US financier J.P. Morgan.

If you look at your list of six names, you will find this thinking behind them all - except for Heliodor, which (presumably) escaped the suffix 'ite' for some reason unknown to me. I don't think either of us wishes to see this naming system overturned, nor that any benefit might arise if it were. It works as it is.

The question is then simply whether a new material is sufficiently and definitively variegated from others of the same species to warrant a new varietal name being coined for it. How is Tsavorite to be properly distinguished from a green Grossular(ite) Garnet? Should it be so distinguished? OTOH this particular genie seems to have been allowed to crawl out of the bottle already. Which pink stones are Ruby and which are Sapphire? It's suggested that if the colouration comes from the presence of Chromium, then its Ruby. But there are plenty of examples of pink stones labelled as Sapphire and showing a strong Chromium emission doublet: are these to be re-labelled as Ruby? CIBJO implies, in its Ruby and Sapphire guides, that pink 'uns (Corundum) are all rubies 8)

Perhaps the last word on this should be left with Richard Hughes who says, effectively, 'It depends whether you are buying or selling' :twisted:

Quote:
The trade do steer a lot of the course of things regarding gems and especially the naming of it, to think it is the other way around would be rather conceited i think. At the same time it can't do entirely as it pleases, as it would be bad for the trade if things got too messy or it lost trust among the public because of it's doings, so it is pretty much self regulatory. What gemmology can do is to think deep and present good possibilities and a rational mean, rather than trying to apply stiff rules where there could be none.


My take is now different from that with which I joined this discussion. I do not see that gemmology is in a position to lead in this matter, not least because it has no recognised international ruling body. In matters of gemstone identification - which must stand on a set nomenclature - I think that gemmologists can do no other than to follow strictly the edicts of IMA/CNMNC. Any other course must lead to fundamental problems. Gemmologists need also to be completely familiar and at home with the naming conventions of the jewellery trade (that have no need to follow IMA direction). If and when gemmology creates an international gemmological authority, it might be in a position to lead in the development and continual updating of a 'translator' between CNMNC approved names and CIBJO names.

That said, I also think that this discussion is likely to remain open-ended for quite some time to come.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2011 11:25 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor

Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 8:20 pm
Posts: 354
Location: Texas
On my moniter it also looks too pink. So it's a pink ruby, just like so many set in jewelry from the 1950's. Simple. It's worth less; but consider that most of those were uheated Burmese, worth more? You choose...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 10:36 am 
Offline
New to the Forum or The Quiet Type

Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 6:55 am
Posts: 1
Sorry guys, as new as I am in this field, I think science has already made a stand in when what is called what and when or even where. Science as we all know uses its own naming process and well the trade invents its own. Al2O3 or Corundum is what we know as Sapphire or Ruby in the market. I won't repeat the details of when or what should be present to call it what. Many of you have already discussed that but to hit the bullseye, Let the trade call it whatever they want. That's their job anyway. Marketing has its own way of circumventing anything even the truth. On the other hand, the way I see it, science has already done its job. It has already classified sapphires and rubies as corundum, natural and lab produced. So it doesn't matter what trade calls it. What matters is that it is scientifically classified as a corundum that is Laboratory produced. Sapphire and ruby are trade names anyway not scientific names.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:22 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:22 pm
Posts: 19945
Location: San Francisco
Excellent points Silverrage.
Welcome aboard!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:28 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:31 am
Posts: 228
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
my question wrote:
about GIA lab comment for Be treated corundum there is no mentioning Beryllium?


answer from GIA wrote:
No, only the fact that it is treated.


Its not in the comments but in treatment i have a lab report from GIA That says

Indication of heating, color induced by lattice diffusion of beryllium from an external source

_________________
http://JMKjewellers.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:39 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 11:24 am
Posts: 7504
Location: Rome, Italy
Gemsandjewellery wrote:
Its not in the comments but in treatment i have a lab report from GIA That says

Indication of heating, color induced by lattice diffusion of beryllium from an external source



i'd be interested at how they come up with that, did they performed a LIBS or LA-ICP-MS test?? for what i know those tests requires a formal acceptance by the client that the stone must be submitted to laser ablation...... :roll:

ciao
alberto

_________________
GemmoRaman-532 - GemmoFTIR - GemmoSphere - EXA


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Why AIGS refers Songea Sapphire as Ruby
PostPosted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 2:44 pm 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:23 am
Posts: 876
Location: GemClub
Gemsandjewellery wrote:
my question wrote:
about GIA lab comment for Be treated corundum there is no mentioning Beryllium?


answer from GIA wrote:
No, only the fact that it is treated.


Its not in the comments but in treatment i have a lab report from GIA That says

Indication of heating, color induced by lattice diffusion of beryllium from an external source

would you please post the scanned report? what date is it?

i've just quoted from GIA,
but we know that gem treaters have been trying with a variety of "light elements cocktails" (beryllium, lithium, boron, etc.) so i guess GIA's policies has been changed since they are a mixture of light elements.

_________________
Farshid Roshanravan
http://diamondclub.us
Blog: http://roshanravan.tumblr.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 4 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Gemology Style ported to phpBB3 by Christian Bullock