[gravityalwayswins]

I did a little research. Couldn't find out why Pelosi stepped up from what one article calls the "traditional Republican double strand of choker-length eight-millimeter pearls" to her big tahitian babies, but apparently what started all the attention was when she came along with those for election night and her other large south sea babies for her swearing in ceremony. Then everyone started noticing! Perhaps she's just a true afficianado who has a budget to support such an appreciation. We should all be so lucky!

Here is an interesting article: Modern Jewelry.com article

[knotty panda]

Research the threads on this forum. I could be wrong, but as I read this thread, I'm under the impression Ms. Pelosi received her pearls from Pearl Paradise. http://pearl-guide.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=Pelosi Who knows, perhaps she's even a member of this not-so-intimate pearl-loving community.

[olmander]

Waw! This is a lot of nice information! Thank you all for references. I think I am getting close to writing an article about women in power and pearls (maybe taken historically after the WW2). With the emphasis on the last few years but not only. Pelosi's strands just gave me a food for thought. In fact along with gorgeous SS baroques of our princess Maxima ('strict' chic, white SS) and the top soprano Anna Netrebko (outspoken chic, enourmous golden SS).

I understand that personal factor was important for setting a fashion but growth of the market (say, technology plus internet) made it possible for a broad audience.

If somebody has more interesting examples or ideas - I would be terribly thankful, I am carried away by the topic...

[olmander]

Olga,
I don't know about high end Tahitians, but even the more expensive pearls can have blemishes.
See here: http://www.pearlparadise.com/detail.aspx?ID=2007

Sueki, thanks for the link, it is indeed very similar to what I got but thanks god, mine is muuuuch cheaper - long live the blemishes!!!... well, when I become an opera star or a Dutch parliament speaker, I can probably afford a better one... but so far the current one also looks nice to me, after all it is 12-17mm.. Here is a photo:

[gravityalwayswins]

Originally Posted by olmander

May I ask if your really charming necklace has blemishes on the pearls?

Olga, yes, some of them have blemishes. Not all, but enough that the strand was in my price range. :-)

[silverseajewelry]

Nice strands, ladies. I am a little partial to the baroque strand, though. The colors are phenomenal!

In terms of blemishes, I have never met a Tahitian I didn't like.
(Well, ok...someone sold me a B-C lot that had some rather sorry looking C-- pearls in it. Some of these were unusable and downright homely.) In most cases, blemishes mean character.

(When I work with tahitians, I general use B or C quality blemished pearls. That way, I don't feel like I am breaking some sort of unwritten code if I happen to design with stones or metals that some say are not befitting the stature of tahitians.

[olmander]

I wonder how would you grade this degree of blemishes? I am not an expert, to me it looks like quite a few of them, maybe grade C? or less?

But the luster is so good, it reconciles me with everything... (not speaking of the price range)

Olga

[jerin]

Originally Posted by olmander

I wonder how would you grade this degree of blemishes? I am not an expert, to me it looks like quite a few of them, maybe grade C? or less?

But the luster is so good, it reconciles me with everything... (not speaking of the price range)

Olga

Hi Olga,
I think these pinholes and markings are C, perhaps even D, depending on the seller of the pearls. Check out the grading scale on Pearl Paradise for Tahitians. The luster seems to be good but not high. I could be wrong though, the picture on the computer does perhaps not quite show just how high the luster is.

[olmander]

Inge, that's the quality of the picture. In fact the luster if very good but blemishes... well... you don't see much of them when it is on... and they are mostly on the front three big pearls, the rest is OK

Olga

[silverseajewelry]

If you are looking at the Tahitian quality scale (which is fairly well-standardized), D's are quite unusual. The pearl must be so blemished that there are flaws covering more than 60% of the pearls surface. In other words, the flaws actually take over the pearl. From your photo, I don't see anything that looks like a D pearl. I can post a picture of a true "D" when I get home for comparison purposes.

When judging between B and C grade, to be a "B," 70% of the pearl's surface must be free of flaws. And in the remaining 30% there can only be a couple truly deep flaws, though quite a few small pits in that region would be allowable.

So, your necklace is most likely a B grade necklace with a few stray C pearls. Can't really tell for sure from the photo.


In case you don't know, the AAA to A scale is not the same as the Tahitian scale and can vary quite a bit from jeweler to jeweler.

[olmander]

Thanks! This is a very precise and encouraging explanation :-)

Olga

[jerin]

Originally Posted by olmander

Inge, that's the quality of the picture. In fact the luster if very good but blemishes... well... you don't see much of them when it is on... and they are mostly on the front three big pearls, the rest is OK

Olga

They have a very nice shape and as You say, once on the neck, no one will see the small blemishes

[jshepherd]

Originally Posted by silverseajewelry

If you are looking at the Tahitian quality scale (which is fairly well-standardized), D's are quite unusual. The pearl must be so blemished that there are flaws covering more than 60% of the pearls surface. In other words, the flaws actually take over the pearl. From your photo, I don't see anything that looks like a D pearl. I can post a picture of a true "D" when I get home for comparison purposes.

When judging between B and C grade, to be a "B," 70% of the pearl's surface must be free of flaws. And in the remaining 30% there can only be a couple truly deep flaws, though quite a few small pits in that region would be allowable.

So, your necklace is most likely a B grade necklace with a few stray C pearls. Can't really tell for sure from the photo.

I would have to disagree. Blemishing is not strictly limited to the spotting and rings but also includes discoloration. Based on that, also considering the reflection I would say most of the pearls are D grade with some possible C mixed in. I dont think any of them would pass for B.

It is a big necklace, however, and it is very difficult to find fine strands in that size.

[silverseajewelry]

Oh wow...yes, the discoloration is rather obvious in the photo with the box.

Jeremy, you've seen far more tahitians than I ever will, so I defer to your expertise.

Could you say more about how discoloration factors into the net grade using the tahitian scale? What if the discoloration only covers a small amount of surface area (say <30%).

Also, if at any point there is a flaw such that a white nucleus is visible, does that also automatically constitute a "D"?

[jshepherd]

It really depends on the discoloration. It can be very slight, or in the case of this strand, quite dramatic. Most of the time pearls with dramatic discoloration, especially those with blemishes, would be D grade in my opinion. But truthfully, and I sure Josh will vouch for this, we grade much more stringently than the Ministry of Perliculture in Papeete. We downgrade on average 20% more than the grading report states on export.

If any nucleus is showing the pearl is not D grade. It is 'destroy' grade and has been illegally exported from French Polynesia.