HPHT-Processed Natural and Laboratory-Grown Diamonds with Counterfeit Inscriptions

Recently, the Dubai laboratory encountered four stones submitted for update services inscribed with fraudulent GIA report numbers. Inconsistent font styles and placement indicated the numbers were not authentic GIA inscriptions.

Table 1. Comparison of characteristics of submissions with counterfeit inscriptions and their accompanying GIA grading reports.
A careful comparison of their quality characteristics confirmed that these were not the same diamonds as described in their accompanying reports. Although the diamonds were carefully selected to closely match the features listed on the original reports, several subtle differences in their color grades, measurements, and other characteristics were identified (table 1). Even more obvious were the spectral differences between the fraudulent and original stones. The difference in the one-phonon region of the Fourier-transform infrared absorption spectroscopy clearly revealed a discrepancy in the diamond types. The diamonds from the original reports were type Ia with aggregated nitrogen impurities, while these submitted stones were all type IIa, confirming they were, in fact, different stones.

On fraudulent diamonds 1 and 2, photoluminescence (PL) spectra produced by 514 nm laser excitation at liquid-nitrogen temperature showed that 637 nm peaks were greater than 575 nm peaks. The 575 and 637 nm peaks are emissions from the nitrogen vacancy center in its neutral [NV]0 and negative [NV]− charge states, respectively. The 575:637 nm emission ratio of intensities of less than 1 (D. Fisher and R.A. Spits, “Spectroscopic evidence of GE POL HPHT-treated natural type IIa diamonds,” Spring 2000 G&G, pp. 42–49), along with other PL features, indicated that fraudulent diamonds 1 and 2 with the counterfeit inscriptions were natural diamonds that had undergone high-pressure, high-temperature (HPHT) treatment for color improvements.

The visible/near-infrared (Vis-NIR) absorption spectrum for fraudulent diamond 3, on the other hand, showed a 737 nm peak, which corresponds to the unresolved silicon vacancy [SiV]– defect at 736.6/736.9 nm commonly seen in laboratory-grown diamonds using the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) growth method (P. Martineau et al., “Identification of synthetic diamond grown using chemical vapor deposition (CVD),” Spring 2004 G&G, pp. 2–25). The observation of such features led to the determination that this stone was CVD-grown and subjected to post-grown HPHT processing.

Further PL spectroscopy analysis on fraudulent diamonds 3 and 4 using 633 nm excitation confirmed the presence of the SiV– doublet feature on both diamonds. In alignment with the Vis-NIR and PL spectra, DiamondView images of these two fraudulent stones displayed clear striations with interruption layers indicative of CVD growth (figure 1). These patterns are consistent with the step-flow growth structure of CVD-grown diamond, which was also visible under the microscope using crossed polarizers and further supported their laboratory-grown origins. The other two fraudulent diamonds (1 and 2), however, showed a lack of such patterns and demonstrated natural-looking features, which confirmed them as HPHT-processed natural diamonds.

Figure 2. GIA’s standard procedure is to cross out the counterfeit inscription. Image by GIA staff.
Figure 2. GIA’s standard procedure is to cross out the counterfeit inscription. Image by GIA staff.
Considering all evidence, we concluded that two of the four stones were laboratory-grown diamonds, and the other two were HPHT-processed natural diamonds. All four diamonds were not the same natural diamonds as described in their accompanying GIA grading reports. In accordance with GIA procedures, the counterfeit inscriptions were crossed out (figure 2) and new report numbers were assigned. In addition, GIA inscribes “TREATED COLOR” on natural diamonds with post-treatment history and “LABORATORY-GROWN” along with a GIA report number and distinct GIA LG logo on laboratory-grown diamonds.

Deceptive practices have occurred previously in the trade; similar instances of diamonds with fraudulent inscriptions have been reported by GIA (e.g., Summer 2021 Lab Notes, pp. 150–152; Fall 2021 Lab Notes, pp. 258–259). Additionally, non-diamond materials, such as synthetic moissanite, with fraudulent GIA inscriptions have been submitted as diamonds to GIA (Fall 2020 Lab Notes, pp. 424–425; Fall 2022 Lab Notes, pp. 360–361). These cases highlight the importance of verifying inscription authenticity because a fraudulent inscription could be overlooked by simple visual examination. One possible solution is GIA’s Match iD, a device that compares a diamond’s inscription with its grading report in the GIA database.

Source: DCLA

GIA to Ditch 4Cs Lab Grown Grading from October

GIA says the switch to grading lab grown diamonds simply as “premium” or “standard” will take on 1 October.

The lab announced an end to full 4Cs color and clarity reports in June, but did not say at the time when the change would take effect.

In a statement yesterday (26 August) it also laid out the criteria it will use to distinguish Premium lab growns from Standard. Diamond that don’t meet all the minimum criteria for Standard will not receive a GIA assessment.

Premium diamonds must meet all these criteria:

• Clarity – Very, Very Slightly included and higher
• Color – D
• Polish, symmetry – Excellent
• Cut grade – Excellent (round brilliant cut diamonds only)

Standard diamonds must meet all these criteria:

• Clarity – Very Slightly included
• Color – E-to-J
• Polish – Very Good
• Symmetry – Very Good (or Good for fancy shapes)
• Cut grade – Very Good (round brilliant cut diamonds only)

GIA will charge $15 per carat, with a minimum fee of $15. Evaluation fee for diamonds below the minimum criteria is $15.

“Using descriptive terms for the quality of laboratory-grown diamonds is appropriate as most fall into a very narrow range of color and clarity,” said Pritesh Patel, GIA president and CEO.

“Because of that, GIA will no longer use the nomenclature created for natural diamonds to describe what is a manufactured product.”

Meanwhile rival lab IGI (International Gemological Institute) insists it will carry on with 4Cs grading for lab growns “to prevent industry and consumer confusion”.

Source: IDEX

The Industry’s “False Sense of Security” – Why Laser Inscriptions Alone Are Not Enough

In the diamond trade, we often speak of a laser inscription as if it is an unbreakable bond between a diamond and its grading certificate. However, anyone with real-world experience whether on the manufacturing floor or in the secondary market knows the truth: inscriptions can be removed, altered, or forged.

Polish the girdle and the inscription disappears. Re-cut the stone and it’s gone entirely. Worse still, an inscription can be duplicated onto a different diamond to mimic an existing report number. This is not speculation; it has happened, and more often than many in the trade care to admit.

Another serious vulnerability occurs after grading. Once a diamond is set into jewellery, nothing prevents a switch from taking place during setting, repair, or even in transit. This risk is not confined to smaller stones high-value diamonds have been switched in exactly this way.

Verification presents its own challenges. Even if the diamond is the original stone graded by the laboratory, the inscription is frequently obscured by the jewellery setting. Accessing it often requires removing the stone a delicate procedure that carries risk to both the stone and the setting. Most grading laboratories, including DCLA, will not remove diamonds from their mountings, and many jewellers are reluctant to attempt it due to the potential for irreversible damage.

Digital records, blockchain entries, and grading reports track the details, but they do not track the actual physical stone. If the diamond is switched but the paperwork remains unchanged, the system still appears to validate it as authentic. This is precisely how sophisticated fraud can go undetected.

Until the industry bridges the gap between the physical diamond and its digital record, laser inscriptions will remain a weak link in the chain of security.

At DCLA, we believe the next step in true physical traceability lies in combining advanced identification technology with secure, tamper-proof verification processes ensuring that a diamond’s identity is as enduring as the stone itself.

Source: DCLA

DCLA to Continue Full Grading of All Diamonds, Including Laboratory-Grown

The Diamond Certification Laboratory of Australia (DCLA) reaffirms its commitment to providing precise and comprehensive grading for all diamonds, including laboratory-grown stones. This approach ensures consistency, transparency, and informed decision-making across the industry.

While the GIA has announced it will introduce a simplified classification system for lab-grown diamonds — using the categories “Premium” and “Standard” — the DCLA will maintain its tradition of detailed grading across the full range of quality characteristics. This includes reporting actual colour, clarity, cut, and carat weight for every diamond submitted, regardless of its origin.

The GIA’s new system, expected later this year, will group lab-grown diamonds based on overall appearance and finish, with certificates including carat and cut details but without specific colour and clarity grades.

DCLA recognises that both natural and laboratory-grown diamonds hold unique value and significance. By continuing to offer full grading reports, the DCLA supports both the trade and consumers in understanding and appreciating the distinct qualities of each stone.

At DCLA, we believe that consumers and the trade deserve full and detailed grading information, regardless of the diamond’s origin. Misrepresentation and confusion are more likely to arise when simplified or vague grading systems are used — especially as laboratory-grown diamonds become more prevalent in the market.

As Australia’s official CIBJO laboratory, DCLA remains dedicated to upholding the highest international standards in diamond certification and grading.

 GIA Moves to Redefine Lab-Grown Diamond Grading, Signaling Clearer Divide from Natural Diamonds

In a landmark decision that will reverberate through the global diamond industry, the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) the world’s foremost authority in gemology—has announced it will no longer use its internationally recognized 4Cs grading system for laboratory-grown diamonds. Instead, beginning later this year, lab-grown diamonds submitted to GIA will receive simplified descriptors—categorized broadly as either “premium” or “standard”—or no grade at all if the quality is subpar.

While GIA’s move to redefine lab grown diamond grading might sound like a simple nomenclature change, it’s much more than that. This move marks a definitive moment in the ongoing separation of natural diamonds from lab-grown diamonds. It confirms what many in the industry have long known: lab-grown diamonds are not the same as natural diamonds and should not be treated as such.

Why the 4Cs Is Essential for Natural Diamonds

GIA created the 4Cs—cut, color, clarity, and carat weight—as a rigorous system to help consumers understand the unique and complex qualities of natural diamonds. No two natural diamonds are exactly alike. They are rare geological miracles forged deep within the Earth over billions of years, each carrying a singular fingerprint from Mother Nature. A grading report for a natural diamond is essential because these stones exist along an immense spectrum of characteristics. 

Meet the Expert

• Grant Mobley is the Jewelry & Watch Editor of Only Natural Diamonds.
• He is a GIA Diamonds Graduate.
• He has over 17 years of jewelry industry experience, starting with growing up in his family’s retail jewelry stores.

An uncut lab grown diamond

Why GIA Is Changing the Way Lab Grown Diamonds Are Graded

Lab-grown diamonds, on the other hand, are man-made and mass-produced using high-pressure high-temperature (HPHT) or Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) processes. According to Tom Moses, GIA executive vice president and chief laboratory and research officer, “More than 95% of laboratory-grown diamonds entering the market fall into a very narrow range of color and clarity. Because of that, it is no longer relevant for GIA to describe man-made diamonds using the nomenclature created for the continuum of color and clarity of natural diamonds.”Why Lab Grown Diamond Grading Needs a Different System

By replacing detailed grading reports with broader descriptors, such as “premium” and “standard,” GIA is drawing a clear line in the sand. They are telling consumers that these are not the same products and they should not be evaluated in the same way. And coming from GIA—the trusted nonprofit organization that established global diamond grading standards in 1953—this statement couldn’t be more authoritative.

Natural Diamonds: Rarity, Value, and Geological Identity

To understand why this change to lab grown diamond grading matters, it’s essential to examine what drives the value of natural diamonds: rarity and identity. Each natural diamond is finite, with unique growth patterns, internal inclusions, and color subtleties shaped by millions or even billions of years underground. These one-of-a-kind gems are the original luxury product—not just beautiful but rare and no longer forming in nature. Lab-grown diamonds, conversely, can be created in virtually unlimited quantities and replicated in appearance with astonishing ease. There is no rarity. There is no geological story. There is no true investment potential.

Ring Courtesy of The Clear Cut

Why Clarity in Lab Grown Diamond Grading Matters for Consumers

This distinction has become increasingly blurred by confusing marketing language and unclear labeling practices. Some in the lab-grown diamond space have leaned on the unsubstantiated language of “sustainability” and “equality” in comparison to natural diamonds, despite offering a fundamentally different product. But consumers deserve transparency. They deserve to understand what they’re buying, what it’s worth, and what makes one stone different from another. That’s precisely why this change from GIA is so important.

It’s also a return to the Institute’s founding principles. GIA exists to protect the public trust in gems and jewelry. With this shift, the Institute is ensuring that consumers can make informed choices without being misled by false equivalencies. By stepping away from the 4Cs for lab-grown diamonds, GIA is reaffirming its commitment to scientific integrity and public transparency.

GIA Diamond Grading Report

Let me be clear: This is not about pitting one product against another. Lab-grown diamonds have their place in the market. But we must stop pretending they are interchangeable with natural diamonds. They are not heirlooms, they are not investments, and they are not rare.

GIA’s decision demonstrates that natural diamonds continue to be the benchmark of authenticity, value, and irreplaceability. They are not merely carbon crystals—they are ancient, unrepeatable creations of nature, each with a backstory written in geologic time.

As this policy rolls out in late 2025, expect other gem labs to follow suit. The line separating lab-created simulacra and natural geological masterpieces is being redrawn with bold ink—and GIA is holding the pen.

Source: DCLA

Why Diamond Grades Can Differ Between Laboratories: Understanding Colour and Clarity Variations

The difference in diamond grading between laboratories like GIA (Gemological Institute of America) and DCLA (Diamond Certification Laboratory of Australia) can occur due to the subjective nature of diamond grading and variations in grading standards, tools, and methodology.

Here’s a detailed explanation of why this happens:

Example of a diamond graded GIA E VS2 vs DCLA F SI1:

---

1. Grading is Subjective to Some Extent

Even though labs follow international grading systems like those defined by CIBJO or GIA, colour and clarity grading involves human judgment under magnification and controlled lighting conditions. Two experienced graders may interpret borderline characteristics differently.

• Colour: E and F are adjacent grades, and the difference is extremely subtle—often imperceptible to the untrained eye.
• Clarity: The distinction between VS2 (Very Slightly Included 2) and SI1 (Slightly Included 1) can also hinge on size, position, nature, and number of inclusions, which may be judged differently by separate labs.

---

2. Different Lab Philosophies

• GIA is widely considered the global benchmark for consistency and tends to be more conservative in some grading aspects, especially in colour.
• DCLA, while highly respected and CIBJO-accredited (and Australia’s official diamond authority), might interpret certain characteristics differently based on their internal grading protocols.

---

3. Grading Conditions and Equipment

Minor differences in:

• Lighting
• Magnification tools
• Grading environments
  can affect the appearance of a diamond, especially in borderline cases.

---

4. Grading Date and Re-evaluation

Grading can differ if:

• The diamond was graded at different times.
• The diamond was repolished or slightly recut between submissions.
• The grader has different levels of training or experience (even within the same lab over time).

---

5. Lab-to-Lab Variance Is a Known Industry Factor

Even among top labs (GIA, IGI, HRD, AGS, DCLA), 1-grade differences in colour or clarity are common and not considered errors. This is why many dealers and appraisers say a difference of one colour or clarity grade is within acceptable tolerance.

---

In Your Example:

• GIA E VS2 vs DCLA F SI1:
  • The colour difference (E vs F): within acceptable tolerance; both are considered colourless.
  • The clarity difference (VS2 vs SI1): SI1 is a full grade lower, but this could be due to:
    • An inclusion judged more impactful by DCLA
    • A stricter application of clarity grading by DCLA
    • GIA possibly being more lenient on that particular clarity characteristic

---

Differences like GIA E VS2 and DCLA F SI1 can result from:

• Subjective human interpretation
• Slightly different grading standards
• Borderline characteristics
• Environmental and technical grading factors

For buyers or sellers, it’s important to:

• Always compare certificates from top-tier labs.
• Understand that 1-grade discrepancies are common.
• Consider getting a professional review if there’s a significant value implication.

Downturn Forces GIA to Close Israel Lab

GIA is to close its lab in Ramat Gan, Israel, saying it is no longer “financially sustainable”.

The facility, which opened in August 2012, will close by the end of this year. Submissions will be sent to GIA labs elsewhere, with no additional shipping costs, the lab said in a press statement.

GIA was not able to say at this stage which other labs it would use (Dubai is the closest), or how much extra time that would take.

“Despite reductions in operating costs and reduced staffing through attrition, the laboratory is not financially sustainable,” said GIA, which grades the majority of the world’s polished diamonds.

“The GIA laboratory in Ramat Gan, Israel, will end operations by the end of 2024 due to changes in the global diamond industry that resulted in significant declines in submissions from local clients over the last several years.”

GIA closed its Antwerp lab in July 2022, citing “limited demand for services and financial performance that did not support continued operations”.

It also has labs in Bangkok, Hong Kong, Mumbai, Surat, Tokyo, Carlsbad, New York, Dubai, Gaborone and Johannesburg, according to its website.

From 17 November submissions to the Ramat Gan laboratory will be sent elsewhere. “GIA is working to establish a third-party process to accept submissions from walk-in clients in Ramat Gan for service in other GIA laboratories,” the lab said.

Source: DCLA

GIA Expands Fraud Checks to All Labs

GIA says it has expanded its new verification service – aimed at combating “cloned diamond” fraud – to all its labs.

The Report Confirmation Service was launched last month in New York to identify lab growns being submitted for regrading as natural diamonds.

GIA says the service is now available at all locations. It will accept walk-in and courier submissions, will turn around loose diamonds in as little as 15 minutes, and will, initially, make no charge.

The service is available for GIA-graded diamonds with and without inscriptions. An original GIA cert is helpful but not essential.

An increasing number of lab growns are being fraudulently submitted for re-grading. They are cut to match the specifications of natural diamonds that have already been graded and inscribed with either with a GIA number (genuine or fake).

“Combatting this fraud is vital to protecting the public and ensuring their confidence in gems and jewelry – this is GIA’s mission,” said GIA president and CEO Susan Jacques.

Source: DCLA

GIA Opens New Lab in Dubai

The Gemological Institute of America (GIA) has launched a new laboratory in the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre (DMCC).

The location opened on February 19, the GIA said Tuesday. The lab will provide services only for clients operating in Dubai’s free trade zones and will be unable to accept submissions from other areas in the emirate, the GIA explained. However, in the near future the location will be able to accept intake from additional countries.

“The establishment of the GIA DMCC laboratory…adds significant value not only for our free-zone members but also for the wider industry, particularly when it comes to speeding up cycle times,” said Ahmed bin Sulayem, executive chairman and CEO of the DMCC.

The new Dubai lab will grade diamonds ranging in color from D to Z and weighing up to 3.99 carats, the GIA added.

Source: DCLA

GIA Helps in Recovery of Stolen Diamonds Worth Nearly $475K

The Gemological Institute of America (GIA) identified two diamonds, each over 4 carats, that had been stolen from a home in Colorado.

The stones were taken together with four other pieces of jewelry in June 2023, the GIA said Monday. The combined total of all six pieces is over $475,000.

A wholesale diamond dealer, who was uninvolved in the crime, sent the diamonds to the GIA for grading. When the GIA matched the stones to their reports, it found they had been reported stolen, and alerted detectives from the Boulder County Sherriff’s Office (BCSO), who were then able to use that information to make an arrest in the case, the institute explained.

“GIA often receives requests from law enforcement to help them recover GIA-graded diamonds that are reported lost or stolen,” said Christina Yates, associate general counsel responsible for this aspect of GIA’s work with law enforcement.

The GIA has trained agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Customs Service and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), in multiple countries, including the US, Canada, the UK, Belgium, Dubai, Israel and Hong Kong.

Source: DCLA

IGI Detects 6-Carat Lab-Grown Diamond With Fake Inscription

The International Gemological Institute’s laboratory in Tel Aviv recently detected a 6-carat lab-grown diamond that someone apparently was hoping to pass off as a natural stone.

The 6.01-carat, pear-shaped synthetic diamond was fraudulently inscribed with the Gemological Institute of America report number for a G-color natural diamond of the same size and shape, but with a few key differences, IGI said in a news release issued Tuesday.

First, the lab said, photoluminescence (PL) spectroscopy, which is now widely used by grading labs to separate natural diamonds from lab-grown stones and to identify diamond treatments, shows a wavelength peak of 737 nanometers in the diamond (see chart below).

This is an indicator that the diamond was grown in a factory using the chemical vapor deposition process.

IGI photoluminescence spectra
The photoluminescence spectra for the 6.01-carat lab-grown diamond recently examined by the International Gemological Institute

Second, when examined under a microscope, IGI graders saw a carbon inclusion where the feather was indicated on the clarity plotting diagram in the GIA report.

They also noticed a cloud inclusion, resulting in IGI giving the lab-grown diamond a lower clarity grade than VVS1, the clarity grade of the natural diamond.

Lastly, there was a discrepancy between the depth of the diamond IGI examined and the depth noted on the GIA report.

“Everyone in our industry must be vigilant,” said IGI CEO Tehmasp Printer, who took over as head of the lab in October after Roland Lorie retired.

“As attempted fraud increases, the need for ongoing verification is a necessary step to protect consumers from purchasing misrepresented gems and jewelry.”

Source: DCLA

Italian Grading Lab Warns of Synthetic-Diamond Scam

Italian gemological lab Gem-Tech has warned the trade that a number of lab-grown diamonds circulating in the country are being sold as natural.

Three stones were submitted to the lab accompanied by certificates from the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) stating they were natural, Gem-Tech said last week. Gem-Tech weighed the stones and found them to be nearly identical to those recorded on the GIA certificates. The stones also had laser inscriptions with a visible GIA logo that matched those the lab had seen before from other GIA-graded stones, Gem-Tech explained.

However, further investigations indicated the stones had been fraudulently paired with the grading reports, while the inscriptions appeared to be forgeries.

When the Italian lab exposed the diamonds to ultraviolet light to detect fluorescence, it discovered that the stones were inert, whereas the reports described the level of fluorescence as “faint.” The diamonds were then checked using spectrophotometric analysis and displayed a distinct greenish coloration and other characteristics commonly found in synthetics created using chemical vapor deposition (CVD).

Once the lab checked the report numbers against the GIA website, it realized they were issued for other, natural, stones that were just slightly different than those submitted to Gem-Tech.

“Gem-Tech has seen this happen before,” the lab said. “It would not be the first time that malicious individuals obtained reprints of authentic reports and paired them with stones other than those described.”

Although there were only three stones submitted, Gem-Tech believes there might be more, it told Rapaport News.

“The client who submitted them for identification reported that these stones were not the only ones being offered,” the lab added. “Other dealers have mentioned that these three synthetic diamonds, identifiable by their report data, have been presented in other parts of the country.”

Source: Rapaport

GIA Lays Off 151 Employees at Carlsbad Headquarters

 

The Gemological Institute of America (GIA) has cut some 20% of the workforce at its Carlsbad, California, headquarters amid a prolonged slowdown in the industry.

In late July, the lab let 151 employees go, primarily in its laboratory, as well as some in corporate positions, Stephen Morisseau, the GIA’s director of communications, told Rapaport News Sunday. The lab made the layoffs as a result of a drop in the number of diamonds submitted for grading.

“Many organizations in the global gem and jewelry sector are experiencing a downturn due to economic conditions affecting the global gem trade,” Morisseau explained. “Due to those economic conditions, there has been a decline in demand for GIA’s gem identification and grading services, which led to the difficult decision to reduce staffing.”

The layoffs will bring the GIA’s total workforce in Carlsbad to 600, according to The San Diego Union-Tribune, which was the first to report the story. Globally, the lab has approximately 3,500 employees.

“The reductions will not affect our ability to advance our important consumer-protection mission, nor to meet the needs of our clients,” Morisseau added.

Source: DCLA

GIA Reintroduces Paper Certs after Backlash

GIA has bowed to pressure and says it will re-introduce paper certificates, at no extra cost, as of Sunday (9 April).

The move to digital-only Diamond Dossiers, for stones up to 1.99-cts, provoked widespread criticism from retailers, who said some customers were refusing to buy a diamond without one.

In a message to clients, GIA (Gemological Institute of America) said it “did not adequately anticipate the potential difficulties of adopting the digital-only GIA Diamond Dossier report.

“We appreciate your candid and constructive feedback. After much consideration, we have decided to return to printed GIA Diamond Dossier reports beginning April 9.”

All diamonds currently at GIA labs, or submitted from Sunday, will be returned with a printed GIA Diamond Dossier report just like those issued before the introduction of the digital-only report in January.

It will also issue, at no cost, a printed certificate for diamonds that were graded without one from January until now.

GIA introduced digital-only certificates as the first step towards phasing out all printed reports within three years, saving tons of paper and plastic.

Diamond Trade Pressures GIA to Rethink Digital Dossiers

Gemological Institute of America

Diamond dealers and manufacturers have complained to the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) about its new paperless dossier reports, claiming they reduce security and are less popular among retailers.

The reports — available for 0.15- to 1.99-carat, D- to Z-color diamonds — have caused consternation in the industry since the GIA switched to digital-only versions at the beginning of this year.

GIA customers who submit a diamond receive the stone back in a small envelope that shows the key specifications and a unique QR code that links to an online report. Although the girdle gets inscribed, other people can easily copy the code and associate it with a different diamond, according to traders who spoke with Rapaport News in recent weeks.

Suppliers are also seeing pushback from retailers that are accustomed to selling diamonds and jewelry with physical certificates. Using the digital documents is especially difficult with mounted jewelry, an official in the Indian diamond industry noted, as reading the girdle is difficult or impossible.

“In January, they started doing this digital certification,” he told Rapaport News last week on condition of anonymity. “By now, some of the retailers are getting the stones and they’re having concerns, and customers are returning stones that don’t have a [paper] certificate.”

India’s Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council (GJEPC) and the Bharat Diamond Bourse (BDB) in Mumbai have raised the issue with the GIA. A representative of the GIA fielded questions from members at the Diamond Dealers Club in New York in a recent address, while delegates discussed the matter at the World Diamond Congress, the triennial meeting of the World Federation of Diamond Bourses (WFDB), which took place in Israel last week.

“Concerns were expressed as to the security of the digital certificates as well as the desire of retailers and consumers to receive a printed certificate,” a WFDB spokesperson told Rapaport News on Sunday. “It was discussed that for a certain period of time, the GIA might provide both digital and printed certificates to those who request them. The presidents of the bourses who participated in the congress asked the WFDB to present their concerns to the GIA.”

A GIA spokesperson said the organization had “heard from clients — manufacturers, brokers, dealers and retailers — about their concerns regarding the digital GIA diamond dossier reports and how integrating the digital reports into their processes could disrupt their businesses.”

“We appreciate the constructive feedback and are considering how we can best address their concerns within the context of our mission to protect consumers and ensure their trust in gems and jewelry.”

The switch to digital dossiers is part of a plan to make all GIA reports paperless by 2025.

Update, April 4, 2023: Information about a GIA visit to the Diamond Dealers Club in New York has been added to this story.

Source: Diamonds.net

GIA Launches The Digital Diamond Dossier

                 Digital GIA Diamond Dossier

The start of 2023 marks a significant milestone in the digital transformation of the global diamond industry – the launch of the fully digital GIA Diamond Dossier, the most widely available diamond grading report in the world. The GIA Diamond Dossier is available for D-to-Z diamonds from 0.15 to 1.99 carats without colour treatments. Printed GIA Diamond Dossier reports issued before January 2023 remain valid.

Tom Moses, GIA Executive Vice President and Chief Laboratory and Research Officer, said, “The launch of the digital GIA Diamond Dossier report starts the conversion of all GIA’s laboratory reports to a modern digital format. This important change improves data security, offers efficiencies across the supply chain and reduces our reliance on paper.”

The first digital GIA Diamond Dossier report was issued at the GIA laboratory in Ramat Gan, Israel, on Monday, 2nd January 2023. More than 33 million printed GIA Diamond Dossier reports were issued since the introduction of the service in 1998.

Pritesh Patel, GIA’s Chief Operating Officer, added, “In 2025, when all GIA reports are digital, retailers and consumers will find greater convenience and a more immersive experience. Eliminating printed reports is an important advancement, reducing the impact of using, shipping and storing the nearly 40 tons of paper and plastic that go into printed GIA reports each year.”

The secure digital GIA Diamond Dossier is available in the reimagined GIA App or on computers, tablets and phones through the robust and secure online GIA Report Check Service and the GIA advanced application programming interface (API) for commercial users. The digital report service includes a Report Access Card with the report number, a QR code linking to the digital report and 4Cs information to embed into receipts, invoices and e-commerce sites.

The new GIA App is widely available for Apple and Android devices. The Android app for China is in development and will be available at a later date. The GIA Match iDTM inscription matching service is expected to be available in the first half of 2023, accessible exclusively through the reimagined GIA App.

Printed GIA Diamond Dossier reports issued before January 2023 remain valid.

Source: DCLA

AGS Laboratories to Integrate with GIA

The American Gem Society (AGS) will close its laboratory operations at the end of this year, with the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) taking on elements of the organization.

AGS Laboratories’ intellectual property (IP), technology, research staff and Las Vegas facility will become part of the GIA, the two organizations announced Wednesday. AGS Laboratories will continue to provide services until the end of 2022 and will contact clients with details of the transition, it said.

The nonprofits, both founded by Robert M. and Beatrice Shipley in the 1930s, will combine their gemological research efforts. The amalgamated team will “develop innovative products” to help consumers and the trade, encompassing light-performance research and a “science-based” fancy-cut grade standard, they said.

“This consequential agreement brings AGS and GIA even closer, driving our future with 90 years of shared history and elevating our founders’ vision,” commented AGS CEO Katherine Bodoh in a joint statement.

The GIA will create an endowment to support AGS and its membership. They did not provide further financial details. The collaboration will also help advance AGS’s retailer programs and support more member education, for example at the annual AGS Conclave, the statement continued.

The AGS Ideal grading report will be available from GIA as a digital-only supplement to GIA reports for eligible D to Z natural and laboratory-grown round and fancy-shape diamonds, incurring an additional cost of $25. GIA clients will be able to request these extra reports from January 2023.

In an information sheet for customers, AGS noted that GIA was responsible for inventing the 4Cs of diamond grading while AGS “created light performance and ignited a discussion on sparkle.” For instance, the AGS is one of the few major labs to offer a cut grade for fancy-shape diamonds.

“By harnessing each other’s strengths to move forward boldly, consumers will be better protected, and we will ensure the longevity of the Shipleys’ vision,” said GIA president and CEO Susan Jacques.

Correction, October 20, 2022: An earlier headline incorrectly stated that the GIA was taking over AGS’s grading division. In fact, the AGS Laboratories grading operations will close, with the GIA taking over certain other elements of the organization, including research.

Source: DCLA