3 ms·
>And with about 15 minutes of reading you'd know there's no WS1. Or VS3. At least not according to the GIA scale, which is the most common in Northern America.
by deveac 14y ago
>And with about 15 minutes of reading you'd know there's no WS1. Or VS3. At least not according to the GIA scale, which is the most common in Northern America. VS3 is a marketing term to make an SI1 sound better. I'd assume WS1 is really VVS1
I did far, far, far more than 15 minutes of reading. I think this just underscores my point ;)
While I was able to easily identify higher quality stones compared to others under the lens, I was wholly unable to rate them other than comparatively to each other. Unfortunately for consumers of these products, we don't have access to 6 months of time and a slew of 'practice diamonds' to check out.
I wonder what the variance in ratings for a typical gem is if you were to have it independently appraised many times over?
- groby_b 14y agoThe Wikipedia page on Diamond Clarity points out the possible grades :) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_clarity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_clarity) But even if it didn't: Yes, doing some things requires specific training. The same is true for any kind of appraisal system. You won't be able to judge antiques with 15 minutes training, either. Or paintings. Or even something as common as cars. As for the rating, diamonds are usually rated comparatively, so you had the right approach. If you're a professional diamond grader, you often have a set of reference diamonds. (Yes, that's kind of hard to come by. But diamond grading is hardly the only job that requires specific tools) The variance should be very low. Part of the certification process from GIA is that you grade a bunch of stones, and you better get it right, or no cert for you. Yes, you can occasionally squabble over a stone that's right on the borderline between two grades.