If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"created diamond"
Out of all the diamond simulants out there....is there a "best kind/type"?
As has been pointed out, "created diamond" would suggest a true synthetic, which is actually diamond, just man made. These, of course are best in terms of duplicating the properties and appearance of natural diamonds. However, their price is also commensurate with the fact that although man made, they are still diamonds. For a simulant, there are a number of things on the market, but the two that are used in any quantity these days are moissonite and cubic zirconia. Moissonites are initially a bit closer in appearance, though their very strong double refraction makes them easy to differentiate when you know what to look for. The fact that some people have more trouble telling them apart is probably due to the fact that they are newer, less commonly seen, and people even in the industry are not yet as used to checking to see if a stone is moissonite. They offer the distinct advantage over CZ of being much harder and more durable, so in use they will hold up well for a good long time. Not as well as diamond, but enough to be called a quite hard and durable stone. Their drawbacks are that in general, their color is not as nicely white, with them usually looking a tad greyish or greenish, rather than really white, and they are MUCH more costly that C.Z. I personally feel they are currently overpriced, and expect the cost of the things to drop dramatically (as it did with C.Z.) in coming years as other producers learn how to make them. C.Z., in contrast, is the most widely used simulant for diamond. it's color is very white and bright, and it's got more fire/dispersion than diamond, which consumers like. But that greater fire actually makes them also easy to distinguish from diamond, so if you want the closest appearance to diamond, moissonite may have an edge. In addition, CZ is, while not butter soft, much softer than diamond, which means many stones on the market have somewhat less crisp facet edges, which makes them look easily different from diamonds when you know what to look for. And, in wear, they're soft enough that while they will last for a while, they're not an exceptionally durable stone. But it's not a big issue, because they're dirt cheap. Even high grade well cut stones are only a few dollars each, so replaceing a worn or abraded one is not a big deal And, regarding overall similarity in appearance to diamond, although the fire is greater than diamond, if the stone is really well cut with good sharp facets and a properly cut girdle, they can be quite tricky to differentiate without very careful examination. Moissonites, while slightly closer in actual optics to a diamond, are, at least for me, easier to spot due to that strong double refraction (which, when viewed at an angle, makes the image of back facet edges look doubled or fuzzy). I've seen some C.Z. where I had to look quite carefully, with more magnification than just a simple loupe, to be sure a C.Z. was not a diamondl. Not often, mind you, but it's happened, especially withs smaller stones, and those in mountings that hide more of the side and back of the stone. Hope that helps. Peter |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Lawrence" wrote in message
... Out of all the diamond simulants out there....is there a "best kind/type"? As has been pointed out, "created diamond" would suggest a true synthetic, which is actually diamond, just man made. These, of course are best in terms of duplicating the properties and appearance of natural diamonds. However, their price is also commensurate with the fact that although man made, they are still diamonds. For a simulant, there are a number of things on the market, but the two that are used in any quantity these days are moissonite and cubic zirconia. Moissonites are initially a bit closer in appearance, though their very strong double refraction makes them easy to differentiate when you know what to look for. The fact that some people have more trouble telling them apart is probably due to the fact that they are newer, less commonly seen, and people even in the industry are not yet as used to checking to see if a stone is moissonite. They offer the distinct advantage over CZ of being much harder and more durable, so in use they will hold up well for a good long time. Not as well as diamond, but enough to be called a quite hard and durable stone. Their drawbacks are that in general, their color is not as nicely white, with them usually looking a tad greyish or greenish, rather than really white, and they are MUCH more costly that C.Z. I personally feel they are currently overpriced, and expect the cost of the things to drop dramatically (as it did with C.Z.) in coming years as other producers learn how to make them. A question. I heard that Moissonite production is a matter of a patent held by a single company - therefore, anyone who wishes to make them has to pay for "instructions" and permission. Isn't that true (read it online)? C.Z., in contrast, is the most widely used simulant for diamond. it's color is very white and bright, and it's got more fire/dispersion than diamond, which consumers like. But that greater fire actually makes them also easy to distinguish from diamond, so if you want the closest appearance to diamond, moissonite may have an edge. In addition, CZ is, while not butter soft, much softer than diamond, which means many stones on the market have somewhat less crisp facet edges, which makes them look easily different from diamonds when you know what to look for. And, in wear, they're soft enough that while they will last for a while, they're not an exceptionally durable stone. But it's not a big issue, because they're dirt cheap. Even high grade well cut stones are only a few dollars each, so replaceing a worn or abraded one is not a big deal And, regarding overall similarity in appearance to diamond, although the fire is greater than diamond, if the stone is really well cut with good sharp facets and a properly cut girdle, they can be quite tricky to differentiate without very careful examination. Moissonites, while slightly closer in actual optics to a diamond, are, at least for me, easier to spot due to that strong double refraction (which, when viewed at an angle, makes the image of back facet edges look doubled or fuzzy). I've seen some C.Z. where I had to look quite carefully, with more magnification than just a simple loupe, to be sure a C.Z. was not a diamondl. Not often, mind you, but it's happened, especially withs smaller stones, and those in mountings that hide more of the side and back of the stone. Hope that helps. Peter |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
C3 corporation.
It is actually a 'side' business to that of creating improved substrates for the electronics industry. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the patent was ignored by someone overseas eventually. Carl 1 Lucky Texan m4816k wrote: "Lawrence" wrote in message ... Out of all the diamond simulants out there....is there a "best kind/type"? As has been pointed out, "created diamond" would suggest a true synthetic, which is actually diamond, just man made. These, of course are best in terms of duplicating the properties and appearance of natural diamonds. However, their price is also commensurate with the fact that although man made, they are still diamonds. For a simulant, there are a number of things on the market, but the two that are used in any quantity these days are moissonite and cubic zirconia. Moissonites are initially a bit closer in appearance, though their very strong double refraction makes them easy to differentiate when you know what to look for. The fact that some people have more trouble telling them apart is probably due to the fact that they are newer, less commonly seen, and people even in the industry are not yet as used to checking to see if a stone is moissonite. They offer the distinct advantage over CZ of being much harder and more durable, so in use they will hold up well for a good long time. Not as well as diamond, but enough to be called a quite hard and durable stone. Their drawbacks are that in general, their color is not as nicely white, with them usually looking a tad greyish or greenish, rather than really white, and they are MUCH more costly that C.Z. I personally feel they are currently overpriced, and expect the cost of the things to drop dramatically (as it did with C.Z.) in coming years as other producers learn how to make them. A question. I heard that Moissonite production is a matter of a patent held by a single company - therefore, anyone who wishes to make them has to pay for "instructions" and permission. Isn't that true (read it online)? C.Z., in contrast, is the most widely used simulant for diamond. it's color is very white and bright, and it's got more fire/dispersion than diamond, which consumers like. But that greater fire actually makes them also easy to distinguish from diamond, so if you want the closest appearance to diamond, moissonite may have an edge. In addition, CZ is, while not butter soft, much softer than diamond, which means many stones on the market have somewhat less crisp facet edges, which makes them look easily different from diamonds when you know what to look for. And, in wear, they're soft enough that while they will last for a while, they're not an exceptionally durable stone. But it's not a big issue, because they're dirt cheap. Even high grade well cut stones are only a few dollars each, so replaceing a worn or abraded one is not a big deal And, regarding overall similarity in appearance to diamond, although the fire is greater than diamond, if the stone is really well cut with good sharp facets and a properly cut girdle, they can be quite tricky to differentiate without very careful examination. Moissonites, while slightly closer in actual optics to a diamond, are, at least for me, easier to spot due to that strong double refraction (which, when viewed at an angle, makes the image of back facet edges look doubled or fuzzy). I've seen some C.Z. where I had to look quite carefully, with more magnification than just a simple loupe, to be sure a C.Z. was not a diamondl. Not often, mind you, but it's happened, especially withs smaller stones, and those in mountings that hide more of the side and back of the stone. Hope that helps. Peter -- to reply, change ( .not) to ( .net) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 09:38:31 -0700, in "m4816k"
wrote: A question. I heard that Moissonite production is a matter of a patent held by a single company - therefore, anyone who wishes to make them has to pay for "instructions" and permission. Isn't that true (read it online)? It's been a few years since I paid attention to how they structured their affairs, but moissonite was, and still is, made by only a single company. My recollection is that rather than publicly disclosing their technology, they kept it secret to avoid the problems of overseas manufacturers ignoring patents, as happened rather quickly after the development of cubic zirconia. Moissonite is silicon carbide a material made fairly easily and simply, and widely used as an abrasive. However, the easy and simple stuff to make is an almost opaque dark green color, pretty useless as a gem. What C3 corp people did was to work out a way to grow it nearly colorless, and thus useful as a gem. Apparently, at least according to their own descriptions, this was no small feat, and they at least initially felt that simply keeping their method secret would prove a better impediment to copying than legal patent protections. At least that's what I recall. I could be wrong, and it could have changed by now. So far, at least, I've not seen any moissonite available that's made by anyone else. That doesn't mean it might not be out there, but I've not seen it yet... Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"created diamond" | Lawrence | Jewelry | 5 | December 26th 04 09:38 PM |
diamond buying | Lawrence | Jewelry | 5 | August 28th 04 03:34 AM |
Fake pink diamond | Yoshiyuki Mochizuki | Jewelry | 4 | July 22nd 04 07:38 AM |
My Antwerp diamond experience and advice on price please! | simon3000 | Jewelry | 9 | May 27th 04 04:56 AM |
Diamond Pricing Mystery | t0rk-- | Jewelry | 1 | February 11th 04 06:21 AM |