January 24 Through February 4—TUCSON, ARIZONA: Annual show
Welcome to the GemologyOnline.com Forum
A non-profit Forum for the exchange of gemological ideas
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:07 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:32 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 11:24 am
Posts: 7523
Location: Rome, Italy
OMG, :shock: iìm speechless!! :D
ciao
alberto

_________________
GemmoRaman-532 - GemmoFTIR - GemmoSphere - EXA


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:00 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Übergod
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:24 am
Posts: 4997
Location: McDonough GA
I"m with Albe...Don't give a rip about it being synthetic, it's beyond words. I'm totally gripped!

_________________
http://www.selectgem.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:57 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Übergoddess
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:13 pm
Posts: 5077
Location: Australia
Brilliant colour, brilliant cutting complimented by brilliant photography. =D>

Oh and of course, brilliant design. Where can one get this design from?

_________________
Keep em comin!!! :)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:24 am 
Jason wrote:
I"m with Albe...Don't give a rip about it being synthetic, it's beyond words. I'm totally gripped!


Like what Jason said.

The longer I hang around here and the more stones I see, the more I lean to the view that the frequently extreme price differential between naturally formed and good man-made stones is not warranted. Rather price differential should result from the skill and artistry of the lapidarist. The best of these should be respected by name and come to dominate the top-end of the jewellery trade. When did one last see paintings by a top-grade artist priced his work according to the cost of his canvas and paints?

An extension of this line of thought follows.

Over a dinner I enjoyed last night, the inter-course entertainment was the examination of two pieces of natural and untreated rough. The first was an untreated blue spinel of about 35 cts. This was a dark and dull crystal in the hand or when laid on white linen - but with a light shone through the stone it came to life......And what a life! Not showing a cobalt blue but an ethereal light blue, dancing with light and closer to - but somehow richer than - a best aquamarine than anything I had seen before. Here was a stone with two possible futures. The one intended for it - to keep it as a wonderful natural and rare curiosity - or to put into into the hands of a genius cutter who would bring it to life.

Only something like the stone produced after the main course could put that spinel in the shade. A 131 ct piece of untreated Tanzanite rough! Again, viewed with a white light behind it, the transmitted light showed deep red on one axis, a wonderful blue on the second and the richest purple-violet on the third. Internally, this very large stone was eye-clean - but sadly fractured by the explosives that had been used to break up the matrix, damaging the gem in the process and thus ensuring that this wonderful stone could never be cut as a single gem.

So where does that lead us (or me at least)? Two most beautiful and rare stones, best kept in their present state and enjoyed for the wondrous things they are. In the case of the spinel, it was sufficiently included again to ensure that it would never be cut as a single gem. In this case, could fashioning two or three jewels out of it improve its natural beauty? Not in my view. But a lovely synthetic stone of the same colouration and size could be wonderfully brought to a new life as an adornment. Am I alone in seeing nothing wrong with this? Look again ar the wonderful pictures above of a synthetic stone. How could they be improved by a geological formation of the raw material?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 10:37 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran

Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 9:00 am
Posts: 545
Location: new york
This is very impressive and unbeleivable.
What a light return and color!
I love it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:40 pm 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:04 pm
Posts: 623
Location: Southern OK/North TX
What a beautiful cut on a beautiful 'stone'. I don't CARE if it's synthetic - it's the CUT that's being judged. Talk about a WOW factor!

_________________
LyresaD
Lifetime Gemology Student

Avatar is 'Pepper'


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:47 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:42 pm
Posts: 4091
Location: the Netherlands
Awesome shot Jeff! Nice stone too :wink:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:32 pm 
Offline
Gemology Online Veteran

Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:48 pm
Posts: 834
Location: florida
Hi

That is a beautiful gemstone =D>

Also our own : Lisa Elser
Afghanistan Tourmaline 11.30 ct
Long Star Design by Tom Schlegel
Faceted by Lisa Elser

http://www.oneworldgemstone.com/artists ... rmaline-3/

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:42 pm 
Offline
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 10:22 pm
Posts: 1117
Location: Virginia
Whoa!

_________________
Soil is not dirt.
http://hmmdesign.net


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:40 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:20 pm
Posts: 139
Location: Australia
Incredible shots and Incredible facetting skills.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:37 am 
Offline
Valued Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:37 pm
Posts: 237
Location: Warsaw, IN
Both of the stones here are simply breath-taking. Inspiring. I've got a long way to go to get close to this sort of thing.
Also Kerensky, I'm so with you. As a "traditional" artist as well as a lapidarist, it's these sorts of things that make me wonder why the synthetics get such a bad name. Yes, they can be reproduced, at least the rough can, for cheap. But what really makes both of these stones so brilliant is the amazing skill both faceters used to create these finished pieces. All synthetics allow is for a clearer starting point. Essentially they are like having the pre-manufactured/ pre-stretched canvas that I've painted on. Because of these I'm actually freer to create because I no longer have so many skills to master in painting. Like wise the synthetic ruby I've got setting on my faceting bench is a way that I can show off how much I understand about faceting without having to worry quite so much about how to extract the beautiful stone from the parts of the crystal that were damaged in its unearthing. Yes it's cheap, but just as my paints may be cheap it's what happens to them in my hands, or the stones in the hands of these two very clear masters of their art.

_________________
- Jonathan R. Enck

The glass is completely full, however the ratio of liquid to air may not be to your personal preference.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:19 am 
Offline
Gemology Online Übergoddess

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:16 am
Posts: 3170
:smt007 beautiful!!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:02 am 
Offline
Valued Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:20 pm
Posts: 139
Location: Australia
JREFaceting wrote:
Also Kerensky, I'm so with you. As a "traditional" artist as well as a lapidarist, it's these sorts of things that make me wonder why the synthetics get such a bad name. Yes, they can be reproduced, at least the rough can, for cheap. But what really makes both of these stones so brilliant is the amazing skill both faceters used to create these finished pieces. All synthetics allow is for a clearer starting point. Essentially they are like having the pre-manufactured/ pre-stretched canvas that I've painted on. Because of these I'm actually freer to create because I no longer have so many skills to master in painting. Like wise the synthetic ruby I've got setting on my faceting bench is a way that I can show off how much I understand about faceting without having to worry quite so much about how to extract the beautiful stone from the parts of the crystal that were damaged in its unearthing. Yes it's cheap, but just as my paints may be cheap it's what happens to them in my hands, or the stones in the hands of these two very clear masters of their art.


Maybe I'm thinking about this the wrong way.. but comparing synthetics to natural material is like comparing fossils to the chicken bones you have from your bbq chicken.

Although the same thing in essence. They are completely different in many aspects and exist in the market in their own rights.

The artisan who facets the stone is rarely given credit at the point of sale, its all about the jewellery it was set in. If that happens to be your own design and creation then kudos! How far back up the supply chain should credit be due?

I'm sure if you were buying Argyle Diamonds you would know about it. Its an Argyle diamond, thats a Joe Blow Designed Jewellery Piece/Custom Piece by Joe the Jeweller. Not too many gem traders brand their stones. Natural Sapphire Company I believe does.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:42 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:53 pm
Posts: 2049
Location: Sweden
I usually do not drool when looking at gemstone images but the tourmaline cut by Lisa did.
Truly awesome stone Lisa!!

_________________
_____________
Conny Forsberg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: James R. Clark Australian 2010 Competition Stone Photos
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:29 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:37 pm
Posts: 237
Location: Warsaw, IN
esjayp wrote:
Maybe I'm thinking about this the wrong way.. but comparing synthetics to natural material is like comparing fossils to the chicken bones you have from your bbq chicken.

Although the same thing in essence. They are completely different in many aspects and exist in the market in their own rights.

The artisan who facets the stone is rarely given credit at the point of sale, its all about the jewellery it was set in. If that happens to be your own design and creation then kudos! How far back up the supply chain should credit be due?

I'm sure if you were buying Argyle Diamonds you would know about it. Its an Argyle diamond, thats a Joe Blow Designed Jewellery Piece/Custom Piece by Joe the Jeweller. Not too many gem traders brand their stones. Natural Sapphire Company I believe does.
I think that perhaps you've missed the point I was trying to make. Not to worry this is likely my failing to use a good analogy. I'm saying when someone like either two of the lapidarists cuts a stone the price should not be lower for being in CZ as opposed to say a decent natural garnet. There is something to be said for those exceptional stone grown in the earth, but even these can be ruined if placed in the hands of a poor lapidarist. It's like this, there are those who've made their names being able to facet/shape stones into beautiful works of art, I think that the market should be finding a way to equalize the pricing between lapidarist and jeweler at least in regards to the quality of work. For instance because of the execution of the cut of the CZ in the OP, I would pay more for it that I would for a natural amethyst cut from similarly colored material from say Rio Grande. I'm not advocating a universal leveling of the playing field for synthetics to their natural cousins. However I'd buy an exceptionally cut synthetic emerald to a typical natural one because for me I'm concerned far more with it's optical quality than whether it was dug out of the ground. That said I do think that then does place a premium on stones that can exhibit both qualities. That is to say if I had the choice (weight, cut, and color being equal) between some of those very very rare clean natural emeralds or a synthetic then yes the natural because of its uniqueness would be able to command a better price. I'm not trying to devalue the truly excellent value of the highest quality natural stones, I think they will ever be able to command the best prices, but for the stones that can be afforded without being obnoxiously rich the barrier needs to erode a bit based on quality of the cuts. Truly bring that part of the 4 C's to bear in the price. It is frustratingly absent in most transactions I've encountered in the industry (though those are limited so...). With a bad cut a natural stone can be ruined, and with a good cut I think synthetic can shed the stigma of it's creation. If I can take another crack at an analogy, would you devalue Starry Night by Van Gogh if he had painted it on a pre-fabricated canvas, or is his unique vision enough to increase it's value so that it is repeated on merchandise of many types ad nauseaum, regardless of whether he stretched the canvas by hand or not? If a lapidarist cuts a stone that you find as beautiful as the CZ is in its execution, does it make sense then to value it at $5 because it was cut from synthetic material?

_________________
- Jonathan R. Enck

The glass is completely full, however the ratio of liquid to air may not be to your personal preference.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Gemology Style ported to phpBB3 by Christian Bullock