January 24 Through February 4—TUCSON, ARIZONA: Annual show
Welcome to the GemologyOnline.com Forum
A non-profit Forum for the exchange of gemological ideas
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:48 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Yellow stone
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 3:12 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 4:27 pm
Posts: 1750
Quote:
Also the Chelsea filter reaction was inert in case you are wondering.


lol..red rag to a bull


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Yellow stone
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2013 12:26 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:22 pm
Posts: 21602
Location: San Francisco
Certainly BJBecker you can choose to spend your time and money anyway you wish.

I just don't want anyone reading this thread to get the impression that this instrument would be a serious option for someone working or hoping to work professionally within our industry. It's not.

This method is too time consuming, and the results are unreliable.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Yellow stone
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:36 am 
Offline
Gold Member

Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:00 am
Posts: 1133
Location: Monterey, CA
Barbra Voltaire wrote:
With all due respect, how long do you think one would last as a salaried gemologist/appraiser if it took 1/2 a day to compile enough information to make a "best guess" on a stone's identity.

I believe extrapolating from a beginner just learning how to use an instrument to a salaried appraiser is a bit of a stretch.
Quote:
Heaven forbid if this mystery stone was a yellow scapolite.

Why should that be so? One quick look would show if the B/D ratio was right or wrong.
But then, most gem ID teachers don't know about B/D because their training is 30 years out of date. Basil Anderson knew all this in 1980.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Yellow stone
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:16 am 
Offline
Gold Member

Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:00 am
Posts: 1133
Location: Monterey, CA
Barbra Voltaire wrote:
I just don't want anyone reading this thread to get the impression that this instrument would be a serious option for someone working or hoping to work professionally within our industry. It's not.

This method is too time consuming, and the results are unreliable.

Many of us believe all those “serious professional gemologists”, as well as students, could use a little help.

After all, gemological teachers haven’t adopted any new instruments for basic gem identification for over 45 years. As we all know, they are still stuck with OTL.

You previously acknowledged that you didn’t understand my method. Now, you say is too time consuming, and the results are unreliable.

May I ask, “Where is your data?” Time Consuming? Unreliable? Not a serious option for someone working or hoping to work professionally within our industry? I do not think so.

Certainly, this is not an instrument one would proudly display for showing off, but when the nitty gritty job of identifying OTL gems is at hand, it pays its way in the back room.

Suppose I gave to one of those “serious professionals,” or even a student, the task of identifying a lot of ten stones I wish to purchase for my collection. They are all round brilliants of less than 25 points in size. I know their names are supposed to be Sphalerite, Titanite, Zircon, Zinkite, Cerussite, Cassiterite, Powellite, and 3 OTL synthetics? All I want to know is if the names are correct. I do not need any a written certificate. How do you think one might proceed?

I am indeed serious to learn the approach to this simple problem in gemstone identification that you would recommend.


P.S. I would predict most “serious professionals” would opt out of that job, because they couldn’t see how to make a profit and/or they didn’t have the capability and wouldn’t admit it. On the other hand, students would probably do it for Free, just to get the experience. For you students, you have a time limit of 2 hours. :D :D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Yellow stone
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:53 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:53 pm
Posts: 2049
Location: Sweden
Bill Hanneman wrote:
After all, gemological teachers haven’t adopted any new instruments for basic gem identification for over 45 years. As we all know, they are still stuck with OTL.


I seems to me that Dr Hannemann has dismissed all modern instruments being produced. I know he was in discussion with the owners of the GemmoRaman at Tucson. And just for the record, the GemmoRaman do handle OTL minerals completely. It does not give the RI but it makes an ID which, if you are interested. can lead you to the RI.

If the Hannemann refractometer had been such a useful tool for jewelers and gemmologists it would have been standard by now, wouldn't it?

_________________
_____________
Conny Forsberg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Yellow stone
PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 7:09 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran

Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 9:44 pm
Posts: 711
Location: Las Vegas
This post died, and that's a shame. I am very interested in both sides of this argument as far as instrumentation is concerned. Any updates?

_________________
Life is to short to worry about what others think of you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 4 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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

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