The GIA grading report is the prime credential of the authenticity of a diamond. The GIA diamond grading report comprises an assessment of the color, cut, clarity, and carat weight of the stone. These are the four main characteristics of a diamond, hence called the 4 C’s of a diamond. The grading report certifies it as one.
Recently, one of Gemological Institute of America’s clients submitted a diamond for synthetic diamond grading report under the impression that it was a lab made diamond. Specifically, it is the GIA laboratory in Carlsbad that received the 2.23 carat diamond featuring a round brilliant cut and D color.
The diamonds made in laboratory conditions, which replicate the environments in which those form naturally, are also called man-made diamonds or artificial diamonds. They have the exact physical, chemical, and optical characteristics as that of a natural diamond. Yet at the same time, a naturally occurring diamond is more expensive than a lab made counterpart.
The one received by the GIA laboratory was a natural diamond. The customer had actually sent it for an artificial diamond grading report. GIA’s Senior Research Scientist, Sally Eaton-Magaña, and their Analytics Technician, Garrett McElhenny, said in the last year’s edition of GIA’s quarterly scientific journal, Gems & Gemology, that, “When a declared synthetic diamond is submitted to a GIA laboratory, it is not often that the diamond turns out to be natural.”
The diamond received by the agency had no clearly noticeable “strain” pattern under a detailed optical inspection. It is typically absent in diamonds made with High Pressure-High Temperature, so it was rather easy to mistake it for one such artificial diamond. The organization said it only spotted this feature in some of its scattered areas following extensive efforts.
Further tests confirmed that it was mined, but also revealed more downsides – the diamond contained dark and natural imperfections inside that other people might have mistakenly taken for metallic flux, which is HPHT diamonds’ common feature, explained the institute.
“Subsequently, the client indicated that this stone was believed to be synthetic after examination by another party in the trade,” Eaton-Magaña and McElhenny reported. The authors also said to the extent that the case proves exceptions can be there to the common guidelines for differentiating natural and lab-made diamonds. They said, “In this case, the correction worked to the client’s advantage.”