But it hasn't happend to rubies, sapphires or emeralds, despite the existence of synthetics for several decades.
On the other hand, there is the question of amethyst.
That's because natural Rubies, sapphires, emeralds, alexandrite etc have natural inclusions that show them to be natural. Diamonds by there nature are just carbon with the best having having no inclusions so there are no will be no identifiers to prove they are natural. Also synthetic Rubies, sapphires Etc have bubble type incusions. If there are no inclusions no well known lab will certify it as natural.
Thanks Doos. I am not saying that no one can tell a synthetic diamond now but when the art is perfected. Which I believe will be very soon. As you can tell, I'm not a big diamond fan.
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:42 pm Posts: 2846 Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
It's a shame that you missed the Chatham chat. He mentioned that the Russians have been slipping HPHT synthetic diamonds in their production for a while now.
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:39 pm Posts: 3528 Location: San Francisco Bay Area, CA
MJO wrote:
I am not saying that no one can tell a synthetic diamond now but when the art is perfected. Which I believe will be very soon. As you can tell, I'm not a big diamond fan.
That's one of the reasons that I've become interested in "exotic" inclusions. There's something about the "in your face" quality of these natural beauties that somehow surpasses (in some ways) even the awesome power of diamonds... Besides, it's nice to know that there's NO way that someone made the thing in a lab.
Somebody told me that synthetic diamonds were magnetic.
Has anybody heard this?
Do they stick to a regular magnet?
Are any natural diamonds magnetic?
Why or why not?
Thanks.
From what I'd come to understand, diamonds ( natural and synthetics) themselves are not magnetic, however their inclusions can be magnetic. Inclusions like nickel/iron will have magnetic response. Don't know exactly how powerful it is for synthetics, but it varies with magnetic inclusion volume. From what I've seen synthetic diamond of SI clarity really seemed to stick.
You need a neodymium boron ferrite for positive attraction, like a Hanneman Magnetic Wand. With natural diamonds you'll only get the slightest response in water suspension, even with a heavily included example. I've read that response was tested using a natural diamond with pyrrhotite and pentlandite inclusions -- iron sulphide minerals, related to pyrite. Don't believe I read what clarity the stones were that were tested for this, but that attraction seems quite rare and difficult to produce.
What I think is interesting is that a synthetic diamond which has or seems to have the same amount of magnetic inclusions as its natural counterpart will respond to the magnet and the natural will not.
Even though this is effect is more powerful with synthetics, the inclusions in these are so dramatic that they appear silvery and metallic themselves. But then, I didn't get very far into how this varies with different synthetics and range of colors. Ho hum. Isn't that just the way of life -- always have to dig deeper.
Since this is a hot topic, maybe I could arrange a second chat with both Linares and Chatham. Tell me if there is market for a round-table discussion on this.
I don't see what is the fuss on synthetic diamonds. It all boils down to use I guess.
For me if I were to use diamonds for:
1) rarity, etc, I'll get a natural diamond
2) deception, get a synthetic diamond. Get those smaller melee ones and mix them into a parcel of natural ones. Seperate them? Good luck. The equipment and tests required would probably cost you your parcel of diamonds.
3) for wearing, cubic zirconia will do. Don't tell me people can differentiate them because they can't at a distance(unless they are huge). When you are wearing jewellery I am sure people don't come up to you with a loupe to take a GOOD look at a stone. If there are gemmologists that can differentiate them when people are wearing the stone from a diamond on a necklace, please do share with us the techniques.
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 8:10 pm Posts: 436 Location: Australia
The point must be that deception hurts any industry - if customers get at all worried that their diamond may not be real, the effect to the whole industry will be similar to the effect of undisclosed treatments on coloured gems.
Substitution of synthetic rough into parcels of gems has been well known over a period of time - this stinks but profit comes before any principle with this type of thing. A real pity for the ones who love the industry for real reasons but Dollars Rule!
The effects of this type of trade hurt many honest operators in the game and affects consumer confidence in jewellery and gems as a whole. Sure cubic zirconia looks okay from a distance but if consumers start to worry that the more expensive gems are risky or a rip-off, then they could feel "why not just buy the cheap fakes as it doesnt matter anyway".
The diamond industry is much stronger than the coloured gem group (simply because of the tightly controlled marketing). This should hopefully mean that they will not follow the example set with coloured gems of simply ignoring the issues and spend some real money telling the true story. ( if its known?)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 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