[jerin]

Hi PearlPoor,

I couldn´t make out the colour correctly so when you mentioned the clasp from Mikimoto I just assumed that they would have to be Akoyas. And the thicker nacre depended on the fact that in the early years the mollusks were allowed to "keep" the pearl inside for a longer time than now and so naturally the nacre would be thicker.

As I saw the colour, the pearls looked silvergrey on my screen, which could of course be either natural coloured Akoyas, dyed Akoyas or even a quite different pearl altogether (like Tahitians or any other kind). The best thing you can do is like our other members suggested, taking photos, let us see the area around the drillhole if possible, if you have any loose pearls left from the restringing so it is easier for an expert to determe just what type of pearl we are seeing here. Have you spoken to the jeweller yet? Tell him of the Pearl-Guide community, perhaps he will "find" any of the missing pearls, because even if the strand can be 1 inch shorter after restringing, it should not be 3 inches difference (22 to 19").

[pearlescence]

The necklace has shrunk from a shy 22inches to over 19..it has lost one and half, maybe two...a very stretched necklace could do that. It would also feel different to wear with that hawser like thick silk which has been used, prob v stiff
Why would any jeweller nick a couple of pearls..hardly seems worth it
Turquoise coloured Mikis?

[Valeria101]

Very odd. Looks like you need to question the jeweler.

Chances are they simply removed pearls that appeared damaged. Or some accident happened (pearls destroyed, new employee loose...). I cannot imagine why a jeweler would want to pilfer a strand of vintage Mikimoto. Cultured Akoya pearls are way more common today then they were when your strand was made.

A new clasp may be used to build a bootleg Mikimoto strand, but that doesn't sound likely for an established shop at all. Let alone a jeweller who already had you as a customer for a long time.

Methinks: ask them directly, by all means.

If the answer is not satisfactory, then there's a problem... Come back, write about it and send them the link It helps sometimes.


The color of the pearls is intriguing. But there have been (and still are) Mikimoto strands in intense natural colors. Among the top range too. I'd get that old clasp back...

[Ashley]

I agree with you 100% Valeria- it really just doesn't seem worth it for the jeweler to get tangled up with missing pearls and put his reputation and business at stake. Good luck PearlPoor!

[Pearl_dreams]

As I read your posts, you kept the original clasp rather than changing it--is that right?

When you talk to the jeweler, don't be the one to offer the idea about the necklace having gotten shorter because the old silk had stretched. Let him be the one to say that is what happened.

If he does say that, you may choose to accept that explanation, since others with experience here seem to think that it is a reasonable explanation.

[PearlPoor]

I think they are chameleon. I always thought of them as silver-grey, even though my husband (of 9 yrs) calls them black. Good call, Jerin and others. All that I read about Mikimoto made me think his pearls were not dyed, at least not in the 1930's and 40's. True?

Picture below is probably the best representation, so far, of how these pearls look when they're "sleeping.





Since this "pearl ****" incident 3 mos ago, I have tried to capture in a photo what my pearl necklace looks. At first, it seemed to be a simple, quick task - like taking a photo of my car or something. LOL at myself. Hey?

After taking many black or blinded-out photos, and only a few accidental nice photos, I found that none actually represents the ""true color of the necklace."

And, maybe, that these pearls do not have a constant color that I could accurately match with a crayon.

I realized that each pearl is different and each pearl comes on stage for the photo in its own little pearly world. They all respond differently and seem to be able to "change clothes" at any given moment.

Geeze . . . it used to be so simple pre-PR (pearl ****).

I just put them on early in the morning or in the evening (in a dimly lit closet) before going to work or going out. So, I think I only viewed them in my bedroom closet - - not in sunlight or other lights.

Basically, pre-PR, once my pearls were on, I never looked down.

Yes, Caitlin, photos are post-PR. Still looking for pre-PR photos. And, yes, the pearls still have their original Miki clasp.

The jeweler owns the store (very small, rural town store), and he told me he does not send out pearl work; that he does all the pearls himself.

Thanks, you guys, for your support.

Pearl Poor

[PearlPoor]

These are some some photos I took with too much light (I guess that's the problem - not a photographer) that I used to investigate Photo Shop, and the results that somehow came about.

Strange pix. I wonder if the very bright, intense lighting, and Photo Shops 'high tech perception of light and color pixels captures "reality"images ???

Could these dark blobs in the pearls represent the nucleus??

The strand on the left is my MM strand.



And . . . after using Contrast, Sharpen . . .

[Pearl_dreams]

Cool psychedelic photo! Blow it up and make a poster!

[PearlPoor]

Another Photo-Pseudo-Xray of Mikimoto UPO*

* UPO = Unidentified Pearl Object

Here is another photo shop morph of an over-exposed pix of my Miki necklace - the bottom strand in each picture (after re-stringing):



same photo with light contrasted in photoshop


Below is my Miki looped around a basket handle - up close - under florescent light. The first photo is äs is"with no modifications in Photo Shop. Don't you think it's strange that the center pearl looks different from the rest






PearlPoor

[PearlPoor]

I don't think all the photos went through . . so, try again.







The original, unmodified photo taken under close florescent light.


Any ideas about what is inside these pearls that causes these images?

PearlPoor

[Ashley]

Those are some interesting photos- I can't quite seem to get a handle on what color your pearls are exactly- the red background is no good for photos. Via reflected red color on the surface of the pearls, you are distorting the true color, and the pearls look pinkish-grey, not the multi-color greys that your original pictures indicate.

Do you have an automatic focus function on your camera? If so, please try to take pictures of the strand under artificial light and daylight on a plain white background- like a piece of paper or a paper towel. Again, a penny or a dime placed next to the pearls throughout various points in the strand will help us establish a visual reference for size.

I am going to venture a guess that these are Japanese Akoya that have been color-treated with irradiation. Irradiation treatment was popular in the 50's and 60's in Japan as a good alternative to Silver Nitrate. It is a popular treatment for many types of gemstones. In pearls, the radiation darkens the freshwater mother of pearl bead nucleus inside the pearl, and does not affect the outer layers of nacre surrounding the bead nuclei, which will flouresce blue. Hence, when you place your pearls under the flourescent light and take infrared pictures, the nucleus appears dark with a blue/white outer ring. They are indeed thick-nacred pearls and will definitely stand the test of time as long as they are taken care of properly.

As for the pearl that flouresces solidly blue- an untreated pearl? What color is the pearl in normal light? Creamy / White-ish / Green tinges? Looking forward to hearing from you- wish I had the strand in my hands to examine myself!

[pattye]

Preliminary research I have been doing indicates that in the 40's and 50's there were some color "treatments" going on, most likely the size of these pearls indicates akoyas, not any other kind, but not a natural color. The photos are truly fascinating.

Pattye
so many pearls, so little time

[Ashley]

I think that analine dye would translate into a coloration that would be too intense to match the soft greys and minks that I see in her pearls- dye is usually pretty saturated, although not out of the question. The Japanese dyed pearls as early as the 1920's.

Additionally, there is Silver Nitrate, but again, I think that the resultant coloration would not match with what she has: soft and pastel.

Irradiation darkens the nucleus, but cannot affect the outer nacre layers, leaving them white, influenced darker by the internal nucleus. Basically, you're looking at a black nucleus through layers of semi-transparent white nacre- it will appear grey-ish, mink, and other variations depending upon the amount of time the pearls spent exposed to cobalt-60.

[waimeamomi]

Wow. Are there any photoshop experts that can explain this? If this is a way to "see" inside of pearls, this would be a really great tool, donʻt you think?

[Heidi]

Photoshop isn't capable of showing you anything beyond what the sensor or film has captured. So, unless something was actually taken with an x-ray sensor or, possibly, unless the nacre is thin/translucent enough that the nucleus would show through, what we are seeing is the optical effect that Ashley describes above.