During the past year, we've observed a very common occurrence here from different visitors at the laboratory- public over confidence and a misinterpreted understanding of the results produced by some inexpensive, DIY diamond home testers. What we specifically mean, are those pen-hold type testers from unknown brands that for one reason or another, keep giving our visitors the initial idea that what they have is immediately a natural diamond.

This article is only based on the opinions of our gemologist, as he has been steadily observing the habits and results of Filipino visitors who make heavy use of these instruments, and then bring their items to the laboratory due to their own uncertainty. You are free to conclude your own opinions regarding these testers, but the record below constitutes our experience of these portable machines.

It should be said that these types of pen-hold testers are also often called thermal testers as they are created to measure the thermal conductivity of a gemstone. In our own experience, we have had some consistent performance when using certain brands of testers that were manufactured by well-established companies, to separate regular cubic zirconia from diamond- however even these products (which may cost upwards of 14,000 Php) still made mistakes on certain stones like diamond-coated CZ or some other species of non-diamond gemstones.



In the past, we have also conducted experiments using diamond thermal testers that cost about 2,000-4,000 Php that were being sold here in the country, and also being imported from China-based manufacturers- a number of these testers occasionally failed on items like quartz, glass and cubic zirconia, passing them off as diamond. In terms of consistency, they were not dependable for our laboratory purposes. We purchased them strictly for the experiment only, and never put them into daily operational use here at the laboratory. (No specific brands or names will be mentioned to preserve objectivity and neutrality)

No standard diamond tester based on thermal conductivity (or even electric conductivity / multi-test pen-hold tools) has been known to be capable of separating synthetic or man-made diamond from natural diamond. These grown diamonds are also made up of carbon, with the same structure as natural diamond- but are grown by people in a factory. Advanced photoluminescence spectrometric testing like the technology we use here at our laboratory, is routinely utilized by industry professionals abroad for positively identifying the vast majority of natural diamonds by their trace elements and absorption spectra. Some natural diamonds may show inclusion-evidence of their unearthed-origin, and many older versions of synthetic diamonds may also show visual evidence of their man-made origin, however technology is getting better at a rapid rate, which causes alarm for many in the jewelry trade.



We hope that the general public here in the Philippines will use whatever personal tester they have with care, and a cautious, skeptical mind. The lab has seen too many obvious imitations brought in, mentioned as diamond by their owners, all because something beeped or a light flashed on their personal gadget.

In the end, if you would like to use these instruments on your own, spend the extra money to buy the more (or most) expensive ones. Those aren't perfect by any means- and have also been known to provide some mixed / wrong results if used by inexperienced checkers, but if used properly in the right conditions, they can help you at least with separating some kinds of lower-tier / cheaper imitations from diamond. This is still much better than buying the cheaper DIY testers that seem to cause a lot of unnecessary confusion.

Have you all watched the latest sequel to the Ocean's trilogy? Sandra Bullock's all-star team of female thieves concoct an ingenious plan to steal a 150 million dollar necklace from the renowned design house; Cartier.



The plan, involving Anne Hathaway's character Daphne Kruger, involved switching the original 6 pound diamond necklace with a fake, 3D printed or digitally machined from zirconium crystal- which many may link to the popular diamond imitation; cubic zirconia.



Now what most people don't know, but have probably speculated, is that even the real necklace depicted in the movie was actually a fake. Cartier took about 56 days to create the stunning piece of faux jewelry using several giant pieces of cubic zirconia and white gold.



The illustrious "Jeanne Toussaint" necklace was named after the brand's creative director (1930's), and was directly inspired by a former piece of jewelry created for the Maharaja of Nawanagar by Jacques Cartier, which shows that the movie's maestros wanted to incorporate a deeply historical and true-to-life feel for the masterpiece's aesthetics.



The movie budget would have skyrocketed by over 30 million dollars (more) had actual diamonds been used in-place of zirconia. Although despite the main piece being fake, several authentic diamond pieces actually make cameos throughout the film, especially during the scenes at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Cartier had a lot of participation in the development of the movie, loaning several of their fine works on-site to create more realistic exhibition display scenes.

Over the past few months our gemologists have had several people come up to us with a great diversity of materials, from moissanite to diamond-coated cubic zirconia, to synthetic lab-grown diamond. Many of them would say that a certain electronic diamond tester registered their item "within the diamond level", and therefore that indication supposedly led them to self-prove their item's natural authenticity.

The very first thing we would ask them (politely and respectfully) is, "If you're indeed certain about your item, and the credibility of your "automatic" tester, then why would you opt to come to our laboratory in search of further answers?". By this time, many of them would often reply something along the lines of 'taking a second opinion', or 'just having to be 100% sure of things'.



Here is a collective commentary from our gemologists who have been working in the jewelry trade for many years, even before Gemcamp's establishment as a gemological laboratory. Having been a part of jewelry companies in the Philippines, and in different parts of America, exposure to different brands and types of diamond testers was quite inevitable, and so logically tests, experiments and conclusions were drawn based on our concrete observations. These are not meant to be product reviews, so we will not be mentioning any specific brand or item, just our informed opinion of an widely marketed instrument that we have tested ourselves in many situations.

Let me begin by saying that we do have a diamond pen-type tester at the laboratory, patented and manufactured by one of the best instrument makers in the United States. It's a great tool that can help us separate some certain imitations from diamond, but even this tester is only ever used with extreme caution. Pen-type testers like these are divided into three types: Thermal conductivity testers, electric conductivity testers, and multi-type testers (both heat and electrical conductivity).

Thermal conductivity testers were the earliest ones invented, supposedly allowing people to separate their diamonds from the most prominent imitation at the time, cubic zirconia. When used properly in ideal situations, the testers would register a visual and audio signal denoting a pass or fail result for diamond authenticity.

Now, to put it plain and simple- moissanite, newer types of proprietary synthetic crystals, certain rough rocks and mineral compounds, and ALL synthetic (lab-grown) diamonds are capable of fooling thermal testers very easily, even if these are warranted to be in proper working condition. Thermal-conductivity based diamond testers can indeed designate some other materials as "diamond", even if these materials are composed of something else. This is because there are other gem-like materials that exhibit similar thermal conductivity properties comparable to diamond.

Next up, we have electric conductivity testers and multi-testers. These testers are slightly more advanced, normally being made to distinguish moissanite from diamond. A majority of diamonds have lower electrical conductivity compared to moissanite, however do note that there are both natural and lab-grown diamonds that can still fall within the same range as moissanite on some certain testers or units due to specific trace elements / impurities or from other reasons. Calibration and sensitivity on many of these testers can also often change over time (common). Despite this technology's marketing, we ourselves have seen many moissanite samples 'beep' or pass as diamond and vice versa on several electrical conductivity testers.

At our laboratory moissanite will never accidentally pass as diamond, as its anisotropic structure easily gives it away under microscopy observation by our graduate gemologists who have over a decade of experience participating in the jewelry trade. We also make use of photoluminescence spectrometry on every 'potential diamond' candidate to check if a stone's spectral absorption patterns. Moissanite will never pass this highly advanced method of testing.

We have also seen how many thermal and multi-tester readings can fluctuate in response to minor changes in the surrounding conditions, accidental contact with foreign surfaces, and even how hard you press the probe agains the material being tested. There are way too many influencing factors that could disrupt a test's performance. Likewise miscalibration is definitely something to be wary of when using such kinds of testers.

Man-made synthetic diamonds, which are also made from pure carbon, will automatically register as "diamond" when tested with any electro-thermal conductivity tester. It is important to note that this test will not differentiate natural diamonds from synthetic ones.



While we do acknowledge the thermo-electric conductivity tester or "diamond tester" to be a supportive and helpful secondary test in gemology (when used in proper calibration), no gemologist from our institution would rely on the results of this test alone, even if he or she used a calibrated and quality-assured instrument from our laboratory suite. It has never given us the confidence in consistency of results to do so. At best, instruments like these are simply used as a screener-test or secondary test for eliminating a few known diamond imitations.

Such kinds of testers are alright as supportive tests, when performed honestly and correctly, but aside from not being fool-proof for certain case situations, fraudulent sellers and individuals can make use of tricks to purposely change a tester's result. The sensitive internal wiring of many pen-type diamond testers can sometimes change over time. They can also be dismantled and altered by external parties to reflect a higher sensitivity than recommended. Many have manual calibrators that can also be manipulated in the wrong way.

Some vendors have even discovered faults in certain diamond tester units that have allowed them to exploit the pressure differences of those machines to their advantage. Applying more pressure or less pressure can sometimes affect the resulting verdict ever so slightly, giving question to their consistent accuracy relative to the motive of whoever is performing the test.

From our combined experiences in the jewelry trade, working with many of these machines, our conclusion and warning to the public is simple:

If you have no other means of testing a stone, using an electronic diamond tester (properly and in the right calibrated condition) is better than simple guessing outright. However, we do not believe that these machines are 100% consistent in any way, all of the time. We have personally observed many misreadings with a varying range of causes when utilizing such machines, most of the time from unintentional circumstances. 

We will not name any brands or models, as this post is not meant to demean the value of these instruments. They are still useful supportive tools in certain processes. These are strictly just the observations we've accumulated over the years in our industry. For melee sized stones already mounted onto jewelry, a pen-type tester may be your only applicable test in specific scenarios. Like every type of test, whether it be for refractive index, pleochroism, optic character or thermal conductivity, there are always stones that can break the mould. We cannot stress this enough:
Multiple tests must always be considered without exception, so that you can avoid very costly mistakes.

There is no 'one-size' fits all 'DIY' test, each type of test has its own important limitations that if overlooked can lead to very costly mistakes by buyers and sellers, and so it's always professional SOP to counter-check each stone with multiple applicable tests for different identifying properties whenever possible. If you are in doubt regarding the findings of your tester, do not be alarmed, simply bring your stone to a gemological laboratory (one that employs a graduate gemologist and a lab-grade spectrometer, and preferably does not engage in the buying and selling of gemstones for non-bias / objectivity).



Be sure about your stones. There is a reason that gemological laboratories caution the usage of these instruments. Always take care that you apply the right amount of pressure in an environment that is conducive to proper testing.

Thermal conductivity and electric conductivity testers are objectively unable to separate natural diamond from synthetic diamond due to their same atomic structure and composition. More advanced spectrometric instrumentation is required to determine whether a diamond is natural or man-made.

Diamonds are being faked everyday, so Gemcamp wants the public to gain awareness on a few easy-to-read flags that could raise your alert on the topic of whether or not a diamond should be tested for being fake.

Even if you aren't a gemologist, it's still possible to employ some smart tips and buying tactics when looking to purchase a new diamond. You can also use these bits of information to check your own personal collection for any doubtful signs that your stone might actually be an imitation and needs to be evaluated and authenticated by a gemologist. Be aware that these signs are only indicators or observations that are not often seen in natural diamonds. While their presence is still possible in a very small population of genuine stones, it is very unlikely.

If Your Diamond Shows Too Much Fire or Dispersion During Rocking and Tilting

While diamond is known for having strong "fire", which is basically the spectral color flashes you see when you rock and tilt the stone, two very famous imitations actually possess a higher dispersion rate. Cubic Zirconia and Moissanite both disperse white light into beautiful spectral colors as well, and they do it to a higher degree when compared to diamonds. Moissanite displays 2.4 times more "fire" than diamond, which can become visually evident, but might also be overlooked by the inexperienced buyer.

A Rough or Polished Diamond that Possesses Multiple "Scalloped" or "Curving" Fractures in Several Different Directions

Most gemstones when fractured, will show a scalloped, shell-like texture that gemologists refer to as a "conchoidal fracture", now while this can still also appear in diamonds, it really depends on the direction of the breakage. Diamond is one of the few gemstones that possesses several planes of cleavage, or atomic weakness. This makes them slightly more prone to breaking in a "step-like" fashion. Stones that do show a signs of fracturing or breakage should depict cleavage signs, at least in certain directions, instead of having several conchoidal fractures like glass, or CZ.

There Seems to Be Significant Signs of Abrasion and Scraching on the Surface Diamond (Especially During Post-Purchase Years)

As the hardest natural mineral in the world, cut diamonds should be very resistant to abrasions and surface blemishes caused by wear-and-tear. It is still possible for them to be scratched, chipped or bruised, but much less likely compared to fakes. Keep an eye out for high amounts of abrasion near the facet junctions, which can look like multitudes of sugary or grainy scratches that populate the edges of an already-polished stone.

The Stone Appears Slightly "Watered Down", Or Too See-Through When You Look at It With the Naked Eye

Diamond's high refractive index, combined with its hardness factor should allow for an optimum amount of light reflection when properly cut. Light should enter the stone, bounce around within its interior facets, and return to your eye. Many imitations, like colorless quartz, glass and even some cubic zirconia, will have brilliance that appears to muddled or watered down. This is because they possess different properties, which affect the way light travels through their material. When cut with the ideal proportions of diamond, these imitations may not present the same grade of brilliance (light reflection) that a diamond would show, and therefore look too see-through. Be careful though, some diamonds that are cut too shallow, will also appear this way, because of an effect called "windowing", where angles are proportioned inadequately and light leakage occurs.

These signs are not certainties, they are only indicators that you may want to have your diamond checked with a gemologist to make sure that it's actually a diamond. With all the rampant fraudulent business in the jewelry trade these days, many sellers too quickly give in to the temptation of vending a 10 dollar cubic zirconia as a 10,000 dollar diamond to novice buyers who don't yet know how to tell the difference. It is our mission here at Gemcamp to help Filipino diamond buyers make the best use of their funds and prevent themselves from being tricked into buying fakes and imitations.