GIA Report – Page 3 – The Diamond Certification Laboratory of Australia (DCLA)

Sarine Ushers In Era of In-Factory Grading

Sarine Technologies has launched a new platform enabling manufacturers to tap its automated grading systems and issue a report in-house to support the needs of jewelers.

The company this week introduced its eGrading innovation via a video campaign on YouTube claiming the concept would “change diamond grading forever.” It allows manufacturers to self-execute third-party grading of the 4Cs — cut, carat weight, color and clarity — along with other personalized parameters required by the jeweler, without having to send the diamond to a grading laboratory.

“We believe the market is moving in this direction and our technology is now mature enough to make that happen,” CEO David Block told Rapaport News in a briefing at Sarine’s innovation center in Hod Hasharon, Israel.

“The digital aspect opens up the possibility to customize the report, which is difficult for a lab to achieve,” Block explained. “Once you grade the diamond at the source, the manufacturer is now responsible for its own destiny.”

The initiative builds on Sarine’s automated grading systems, with the company first announcing its ability to automate the grading of color and clarity, and therefore all the 4Cs, in 2016. It uses artificial intelligence (AI) machine learning to assess the grading results of tens of thousands of diamonds to arrive confidently at its color and clarity decision.

Empowering the manufacturer to execute the report enables it to provide a more personalized service to the jeweler. Block believes eGrading will improve efficiency for manufacturers, since they don’t have to send the stone out to the lab, while still using third-party verification. This saves on the time, expense, and opportunity cost of not having the diamond available to sell. And the retailer benefits from being able to tap the right goods from its supplier in a shorter period.

“Diamond grading is still in the Blockbuster days, where I need to send my diamond to the lab and wait for them to finish grading. They decide what goes in first and I get the stone back with certain criteria that are generally not good enough for me as I go out and sell the diamond,” he added, explaining that lab certificates are too generic.

While the retailer might want to emphasize other parameters such as the stone’s fluorescence, or different types of inclusions, among others, Block asserts it is difficult and expensive for the labs to go into the required level of detail.

Market ready

Sarine claims its technology will provide those details as the system evolves, using the same AI machine-learning principles in other parameters as it applies for color and clarity grading.

In that sense, its eGrading program isn’t a finished product, and probably never will be, because Sarine’s systems are constantly evolving and improving, according to Block. “We’re presenting our vision for where the market is heading and we have developed the technology that we believe makes this possible,” he stressed.

The company expects to reach several new milestones in 2020 as it rolls the program out to the market, Block assured, without divulging what those might be.

He believes the industry is more than ready to embrace the cultural change the company is proposing, observing that the “the midstream is very tech-savvy.”

A means to an end

Block also recognized that others may be entering the same space. Representatives from De Beers and the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) joined Block in a panel discussion at the Dubai Diamond Conference in September by asserting that automation of diamond processes will come “sooner than you think.” Each independently stressed that they’re ready to propose a solution.

Sarine is confident it can lead the way in the diamond industry’s “tech revolution,” given that technology is its core competency. Other companies that develop technology are also focused on other areas within the diamond pipeline. Technology, he emphasized, is going to play a big part in bringing about dramatic changes in the diamond industry.

In that spirit, the objective of Sarine’s eGrading initiative is to realign the emphasis currently placed on grading reports, Block added.

“Diamond grading is not a goal in and of itself. Rather, the objective is to help price a diamond and to help source what you’re looking for,” Block said. “We’re looking at how we can improve the process to get to that goal of how to source the diamond. How people source diamonds will change. It’s natural that the industry will shift in this direction.”

Source: Diamonds.net

GIA Suspends Diamond Sealing Services Following Tampering

GIA (Gemological Institute of America) has announced that it is suspending its diamond sealing services. The suspension is effective immediately and comes following the discovery that “a small number” of GIA sealing packets that had been compromised by third parties after the sealing packets left GIA.

The Institute said that in these cases, the original diamonds had been replaced with HPHT (high-pressure, high-temperature) treated natural diamonds.

The replacement diamonds superficially matched the GIA report information for the original diamonds, including information on the sealing packet data label.

GIA said that anyone who has concerns about a GIA-sealed diamond can submit the unopened packet to any GIA laboratory for verification services. If GIA concludes the diamond in the sealing packet is the diamond described in the original report, the Institute will issue a verification letter confirming the diamond matches the original report. If this is not the case, the Institute will issue a new report with the correct results.

The Institute will provide this verification service free-of-charge for diamonds received in a sealed packet. All sealed diamonds submitted will be returned unsealed.

Source: IDEX

Synthetic Diamond Fraudulently Inscribed To Match Natural Diamond Report

Improvements in diamond growth technology and methods have led to a noticeable increase in colorless synthetic gem diamonds in recent years. Concerns in the diamond industry focus on laboratory-grown diamonds not being properly disclosed or even being sold as natural stones. Through careful examination and analysis, gemological laboratories can separate natural from synthetic diamonds. Occasionally, however, fraud is involved in attempting to conceal a gem’s identity. The Carlsbad laboratory witnessed such an attempt.

On this occasion, a round brilliant cut (figure 1, left) was submitted for an updated diamond grading report. Its girdle was inscribed with an actual GIA report number issued in 2015 (figure 1, right). The older report was for a natural, untreated diamond and contained the following grading information: 1.74 ct, round brilliant cut, D color, Excellent cut grade, and VVS₁ clarity. Upon grading, the new submission was described as a 1.76 ct round brilliant cut with F color, Excellent cut grade, and VS₁ clarity. Moreover, our screening processes determined that the newly submitted sample needed additional testing to determine its origin. This examination revealed it to be an HPHT-grown synthetic diamond. Synthetic cuboctahedral growth structure and phosphorescence were clearly visible in DiamondView imaging (figure 2).

Figure 2. DiamondView imaging showed the synthetic growth structure and blue phosphorescence typical of HPHT-grown synthetic diamonds.

Aside from the observed discrepancies in weight (1.74 vs. 1.76 ct), color (D vs. F), and clarity (VVS₁ vs. VS₁), FTIR spectra clearly showed that these were not the same diamond. The natural diamond from the original report was type Ia with aggregated nitrogen impurities, while the new one was type IIb with boron impurities (figure 3). Careful examination of the report number inscribed on the synthetic diamond revealed a font different from the one used by GIA, proving that it was not an authentic inscription.

Figure 3. FTIR absorption spectra revealed that the synthetic diamond was type IIb, whereas the fraudulently inscribed report number referred to a natural type Ia diamond. The spectra are offset for clarity.

While most synthetic diamonds that come to the laboratory are properly disclosed, some are submitted out of concern that a stone presented as natural might be synthetic. Rarely do we encounter the type of blatant fraud described here. It is important for the industry and public to exercise caution, because these types of misleading practices do occur. We believe the submitting client noticed inconsistencies with the GIA report information and sent it to the lab for an updated report. If any doubt exists or some aspect of a diamond (such as an inscription) seems odd, the stone should be sent to a gemological laboratory for verification.

Source: GIA Education