SSEF Announces New Wording on Emerald Certificates

Moderators: PinkDiamond, John

Post Reply
User avatar
PinkDiamond
Posts: 15409
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:30 pm
Location: Ozark Mountains

SSEF Announces New Wording on Emerald Certificates

Post by PinkDiamond »

From Ron Ringsrud's Emerald News, this one has to do with certificates, and how the labs need to differentiate facts from opinions. ;)

Image

SSEF Announces New Wording on Emerald Certificates

>> It is Sensible

>> It is Conservative

>> It Respects the Honest Emerald Dealers


"The latest bulletin from SSEF is titled, “Emeralds and the Saga of Cleaning and Filling Fissures.” The two page article outlines the traditional ways of clarity enhancement in emeralds and the lab’s different comments describing varying degrees of fissure filling. The report states the current situation of the emerald market, especially in Europe, of a preference for cedarwood oil rather than resins or hardening resins like Excel, Perma, Gematrat etc. They state that in response to that reality, some dealers have been found to be receiving emeralds that are resin-filled and, using harsh chemicals, cleaning out the enhancement. Once this is done and the fissures are empty of any filling material, the stone is submitted for analysis. It will get a certificate stating the opinion, “No indications of clarity enhancement in the fissures.” With this on the cert, the salability of the emerald is greatly increased.


Unfortunately, some unscrupulous dealers have refilled the fissures with cedarwood oil and sold the stone using the certificate that describes the unenhanced emerald. This is a deception, and when found out and reported, tarnishes the reputations of all emerald dealers even the honest ones.


In order to adress this possibility SSEF has added the comment “No indications of clarity modification in fissures at the time of testing.” The purpose of this, is to point out that there are visible fissures that could be filled at a later date and that the final customer should be aware of this. By having the comment “in fissures at the time of testing,” the final customer can know that there are fissures present. They are empty but if they are not visible, then there may have been some dishonest refilling of those fissures.


The reason that I applaud the conservative way that this issue was dealt with, is that some years back, another Gem Lab Director (I’ll leave him unamed) announced with great fanfare that emeralds have been found to be color-enhanced by radiation. He then put out a general email to the entire industry – right before Tucson ! ! – and created a stir of confusion and doubt in the industry. Of course emerald sales were down as a result. Besides being insensible, rude and inconsiderate it was WRONG. Yes there have been attempts to radiate emeralds and some even made it to the market, but the radiation increases the yellowish component which makes the stones ugly. Have you heard in the last few years of any radiated emeralds? No? – that is because they are not an issue!


It is for the above reason that I commend SSEF for handling this issue without overblowing it. Many emerald dealers devote valuable time educating their clients about fissure filling and the appreciation of emerald beauty. This development of trusting relationships increases over time and, in the case of the client, it places the certificate among other considerations of beaury, cut and color rather than over-reliance on just the certificate. For this reason SSEF deserves a tribute for their circumspect work. "



Gem Labs Use Both Science and Opinion


"The determinations of the degree of clarity enhancement (Minor, moderate or significant) will often vary from one gem lab to another. Even the NY lab and the Carlsbad lab of a prominent gem institution have been shown to not always agree. This is not to criticize the the labs or the lab personnel; it is just to show that the determination of the degree of clarity enhancement is very difficult.


I agree with Swiss CIBJO diretor Charles Abouchar that the laboratories should separate “factual” and “opinionated” information clearly in their report


Factual information would be the weight, dimensions, spectra, and color description.


Opinionated information would be the degree of clarity enhancement, and in some cases, the origin.

This suggestion is a positive step towards improving the integrity of the gem report as a communication tool and a better document for its users. I have stated in the past that gem lab reports, if they want to be correct in their assessments, should precede the determination of the degree of clarity enhancement with the word “approximate.” That would be an honest way to recognize the reality that such determinations are subjective.


Emerald News hopes that all is well with you and your family. We hope to see you at Tucson!"


Ron Ringsrud
PinkDiamond
ISG Registered Gemologist


· ´¨¨)) -:¦:-¸.·´ .·´¨¨))
((¸¸.·´ ..·´ There are miracles left for you to do .... -:¦:- -:¦:-
-:¦:- ((¸¸.·´* It all begins inside of you. ;)
Post Reply