It would help the community to understand how Dr. Perreti determined this result. I'm aware that, strictly speaking, 'no indication of treatment' does grammatically not state 'free of inclusions' but the uninformed buyer may well believe it means the color is of natural origin.
Dr. Perreti has examined the gem before cutting and I wonder if he gained insight from that process which eludes our knowledge.
Respectful
Edward Bristol
If anybody has Perreti's direct email, please drop him a line.
_________________ Edward Bristol http://www.WildFishGems.com & http://www.EdwardBristol.com Exclusively Untreated Gemstones
Post subject: Re: GRS report for 'untreated blue topaz'
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:39 am
Valued Contributor
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 4:36 am Posts: 283
Answer was fast in coming, if not very helpful:
"Dear Mr. Bristol, If you have the stone, than you can come to one of our offices of GRS, register yourself, show the stone, and sign to our terms and limitations and (in that case being the proven owner of the stone at that moment), I will talk to you. Greetings, Dr. A. Peretti Director GRS"
That's that.
_________________ Edward Bristol http://www.WildFishGems.com & http://www.EdwardBristol.com Exclusively Untreated Gemstones
Post subject: Re: GRS report for 'untreated blue topaz'
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:00 pm
Valued Contributor
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 4:36 am Posts: 283
SOP? Standard Operating Procedure?
I'm pestering the owner to demand an answer since he has paid extra $$ for the report, but so far to no avail.
I don't think anybody will pay a no-treatment premium on the gem without an explanation. Those who buy untreated gems, are usually well enough informed to understand the issue.
A pity, I really would have loved to get that stone in my inventory, but like this, I feel it is too risky. I'll keep you posted if anything happens.
_________________ Edward Bristol http://www.WildFishGems.com & http://www.EdwardBristol.com Exclusively Untreated Gemstones
Post subject: Re: GRS report for 'untreated blue topaz'
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2018 11:58 pm
New to the Forum or The Quiet Type
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 9:34 pm Posts: 9
Hello Everyone,
firstly I'd like to introduce myself. I am Ricardo Barfuss and my father Uwe own the 2 Topaz in this discussion. Abit of background. These days we mostly mine Yowah Opals in Queensland, Australia however we have other mines for rubies as well. Ive been in the industry for 25 years and my father started mining for Sapphires in 1962 and has been a miner ever since of various gemstones and minerals.
We've had this Topaz in the safe for 30 years and it was only when Victor Tuzlukov came to Australia to teach me the finer arts of gem faceting that we showed him the rough and decided to have it cut. Dr. A Peretti, one of the worlds leading gemologists, inspected the rough before cutting commenced. It was certified as natural untreated blue topaz before and after cutting.
As for how he came to the conclusion, he won't tell anyone without first that person being the owner and secondly signing a confidentiality agreement. Peretti simply wouldn't fake results! Why would he? For the small sum of a certification to put his whole business as risk by making false certifications it just isn't worth it. Being at the forefront of gem testing technology he likely has access to technology and processes that other gemologists don't even know about yet. So he wouldn't want to give away trade secrets. If someone bought the stone and found it to be treated, then Peretti would be liable for legal action as well.
Attachments:
File comment: 2 stones were cut from the same piece of rough. 1 is 170.9ct and the other of better colour is 59ct
20180112_074722.jpg [ 1.07 MiB | Viewed 808 times ]
Post subject: Re: GRS report for 'untreated blue topaz'
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:22 pm
Site Admin
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:22 pm Posts: 21600 Location: San Francisco
Ricardo, thank you very much for your follow-through.
Why should discussing how you determined a stone to be untreated be "giving away trade secrets"? That's a new one for a scientific community. Isn't it? Has anyone encountered this before?
Sounds more like something a magician would say after pulling a rabbit out of his hat.
That being said, your blue topaz is beautiful. The cut is extraordinary. And, just as we can't determine if it is untreated, we can not determine if it has been treated. We are speculating because of strong saturation.
firstly I'd like to introduce myself. I am Ricardo Barfuss and my father Uwe own the 2 Topaz in this discussion. Abit of background. These days we mostly mine Yowah Opals in Queensland, Australia however we have other mines for rubies as well. Ive been in the industry for 25 years and my father started mining for Sapphires in 1962 and has been a miner ever since of various gemstones and minerals.
We've had this Topaz in the safe for 30 years and it was only when Victor Tuzlukov came to Australia to teach me the finer arts of gem faceting that we showed him the rough and decided to have it cut. Dr. A Peretti, one of the worlds leading gemologists, inspected the rough before cutting commenced. It was certified as natural untreated blue topaz before and after cutting.
As for how he came to the conclusion, he won't tell anyone without first that person being the owner and secondly signing a confidentiality agreement. Peretti simply wouldn't fake results! Why would he? For the small sum of a certification to put his whole business as risk by making false certifications it just isn't worth it. Being at the forefront of gem testing technology he likely has access to technology and processes that other gemologists don't even know about yet. So he wouldn't want to give away trade secrets. If someone bought the stone and found it to be treated, then Peretti would be liable for legal action as well.
Hello Ricky- As the stone's owner, did Dr. Peretti confide in you exactly how he determined this stone is untreated? When the GIA tried to determine heated/unheated pink Imperial in the mid 90's, their final determination was- we are not 100% sure ,further study is needed. There was no secrecy, all testing was disclosed.(G&G Winter96 pg. 240-241). A buyers only protection is to pay the price of a heated/treated stone. Maybe a second report from the AGL stating untreated is needed. As is I would pay $5./ct. X 59 or $295 for the stone. This is just the opinion of an unqualified collector.
On the one hand there are some metrics that labs do keep to themselves for things like origin determination, presumably detailed elemental analyses of large groups of samples and such. But that's a matter of large expensive datasets rather than fundamentals. No matter how good their reputation is I would not put much faith in a completely secret technique for determining treatment status, and I suspect most buyers would feel similarly. I'm not suggesting dishonesty on his part, but if he's doing something that's had no formal scientific review I'd have trouble putting any confidence in it.
On the one hand there are some metrics that labs do keep to themselves for things like origin determination, presumably detailed elemental analyses of large groups of samples and such. But that's a matter of large expensive datasets rather than fundamentals. No matter how good their reputation is I would not put much faith in a completely secret technique for determining treatment status, and I suspect most buyers would feel similarly. I'm not suggesting dishonesty on his part, but if he's doing something that's had no formal scientific review I'd have trouble putting any confidence in it.
Stephen- If you look at the comment section of the GRS report, Dr. Peretti states no indication of treatment. I'm sure he is being 100% honest using the technology that is available. My pink topaz might come back with a similar report, but the truth is that the technology to be 100% sure was not available in the 90's nor is it today. The comment about trade secrets was from the seller not Peretti.
The comment about trade secrets was from the seller not Peretti.
True, however this sentence seems to indicate that Peretti does claim to have some sort of trade secret.
RockSolidinc wrote:
As for how he came to the conclusion, he won't tell anyone without first that person being the owner and secondly signing a confidentiality agreement.
Personally I think it would be a bit irresponsible to put "no indication of treatment" on a topaz of that hue without some sort of extra knowledge, since generally speaking the color is itself an indication of treatment.
Post subject: Re: GRS report for 'untreated blue topaz'
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:40 pm
Site Admin
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:22 pm Posts: 21600 Location: San Francisco
But truth be told, every blue topaz will show "no indication of treatment" regardless of saturation at this moment in history because there are no known mechanisms for treatment determination.
Post subject: Re: GRS report for 'untreated blue topaz'
Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:41 am
Gold Member
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:29 pm Posts: 1047 Location: Paris
I suppose trouble will start the day the owner wishes to part with his allegedly untreated stone. Because no knowing people from the trade will be able to believe that, with this color, the stone is likely to be untreated, and the way the cert is written does nothing to reassure. And nobody will be willing to pay more than the price per carat suggested by Nicky. Besides, the shape, color and general look of the rough, from the picture, would do nothing to reassure me either
Other possibility, could the stone have been treated after the cert was issued ? Somehow on the cert the picture of the super-blue stone seems to be glued or something. Is it the normal way or am I over suspicious ?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
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