 |  |
| Sign in or Register Home |
|
|
|
| Buy | Sell | Education | Forum | Directory | Blog | |||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| HOME : FORUM : EDUCATION : DIAMONDS : Emerald gemstones |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Post#1 @
05-09-01
, 04:24 PM
Are emerald gemstones really too fragile to wear. Also would a very good quality emerald in a 1 carat size be very expensive or much cheaper than an equivalent very good quality diamond? Can you get emeralds that are completely clean or do they all have some type of inclusion? |
|
|
|
|
Post#2 @
05-09-01
, 06:07 PM
Thank you for your reply. Would eye clean not relate then to SI1 in a diamond or is it that scale that is different - as emeralds usually have inclusions. Do they use SI1, VS1 terms etc. |
|
|
Did you say emerald!
Post#3 @
05-09-01
, 08:39 PM
GIA teaches a clarity system for colored gemstones in which emerald is classed a Type III stone (almost always found with inclusions) and clarity grades of VVS (eye clean, but easily seen at 10x), VS (not eye clean) easily seen at 10x, SI1/2 (prominant & numerous), I1/2/3 (inclusions which have a negative effect on appearance/durability) and Dcl (Declasse - inclusions make stone translucent - not transparent - HSN types of stones  ). This system is not recognized in the trade, where you use terms like, flawless (no inclusions at 10X), eye clean, slightly-, moderately-, heavily-included.The accompanying pic is of a reasonably good stone, please don't tell my wife that because it's hers and she LOVES it, of just over 9ct. Regards,
|
||
|
I agree with Rockdoc
Post#4 @
05-10-01
, 02:21 AM
You do have to be careful with emeralds as they are often treated for color and that's not permanent. I agree that a tourmaline or tsavorite is nicer. The fact is that most emeralds are very included and just don't sparkle much. It's not the only green stone, though people tend to think it is. I would also recommend a Chatham lab created emerald. I've seen some of the Chatham gems and they are really beautiful and well cut. http://www.chatham.com Good luck, Shelby
|
|
|
Re: I'l probably get flamed for stating a personal preference
Post#5 @
05-10-01
, 05:48 PM
Quote:
*I* would never flame you for stating a personal preference! I just have to observe that it is interesting that with all your experience with gemstones you did not have the wisdom to recommend Burmese *ruby* over an emerald! AGBF  (Edited to unstick two sets of words that had stuck together...NOT due to my typing or anything! It must be the computer. Broken, you know.) [Edited by A Girl's Best Friend on 05-10-01 at 04:50 PM] |
||
|
Post#6 @
05-11-01
, 01:11 AM
Hello everyone! This is going to be my first post, anyway why not also take a look at Russian Diopside as an alternative. |
|
|
Post#7 @
05-11-01
, 01:37 AM
Tsavorite is my absolute favorite! Waaaaay back before I knew anything about stones, I got annoyed at emeralds and their inclusions, and actually (I'm almost embarrased to admit) liked the synthetics better (past tense, past tense, I've seen the error of my ways). Saw the president's wedding rings at my local GIA Alumni group meeting recently -- a 1.5 ct or so round brilliant, yellow gold, flanked by two trilliant tsavorites. About had a heart attack right there at the meeting!
|
|
|
|
|
Post#8 @
05-11-01
, 07:20 AM
How about the nice electric green Paraiba tourmaline? |
|
|
Chrome diopside is too soft for daily wear. |
|
|
|
| Read Messages in: | DIAMONDS | All forums | ||||
| Newer: |
|
|
||||
| Older: |
|
|
||||
|
| ||||||
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
| Contact Us - Guidelines - Privacy Policy - Refer a Friend - Top^ |
|
|
