Pearl on Pearl - China has done it

[jshepherd]

I was just in China again last week (third trip this year) visiting the producer of the souffle' pearls. He had some new pearls to show me and claimed that they were nucleated, but with pearls instead of beads.

I had him break a few of them to show me, only because I had heard this so many times before, but every time I've opened the pearl, there was no second pearl inside.

Well, he did it. Maybe this can eventually put an end to the clam shell beads that are being used now in the fireballs.

Enjoy!

[Caitlin]

Great idea for using those surplus pearls. Can they tumble them rounder?

Now get him to grow some Siberian transgrafts on those pearls. Or insert them in saltwater SS as nuclei......heh heh. jokes, folks...

[jshepherd]

You can't really tumble pearls round. They are only used baroque in this right now and they are almost certainly third graft.

[CortezPearls]

Excellent Jeremy!!! This is what many in the industry were saying since the year 2000 (maybe even before) and there had been little evidence. You've done it again! Proof!!!
Thank you for sharing

[jshepherd]

Thanks Douglas! I am going to be sending a strand over to Elisabeth Strack with permission to dissect as many pearls as she likes.

[Lagoon Island Pearls]

... and they are almost certainly third graft.

The second graft pearl is removed for grading? Same or smaller pearl is repacked? Cells, no cells?

[jshepherd]

Second graft removed in coin bead, spherical bead (CBSB) fashion. No cells, so "graft" isn't technically correct, but it's used, especially in South Sea production-speak.

The existing pearl sac is nucleated with a baroque freshwater pearl to grow a new baroque pearl. The size doesn't really seem to be much considered as every pearl we cut has a random-shaped baroque freshwater inside of it.

[GemGeek]

These souffle' farmers are really pushing the boundaries of the freshwater mussel. It makes you wonder what their failures were.

[Lagoon Island Pearls]

They seem to get excellent growth in what appears to be three years first graft and two years repacked.

What might seem like a five year process, is actually an 18 month process from an otherwise marginal pearl. Clever value add.

[Pearlgully]

Any idea when these producers started using pearls as nuclei?

[CortezPearls]

Any idea when these producers started using pearls as nuclei?

If you talk about these farmers in particular it is hard to say...Jeremy may have more information because he knows them firsthand. But when did "Kasumigaura" (Kasumis) pearls begin to appear??? It was the first time I heard about a pearl-in-a-pearl: I believe it was in "Pearl World" Oct-Dec 2000 issue when I first knew of Kasumis. Of course, kasumis were nucleated with low-quality (even drilled) Akoya pearls, and these "new" Fresh-water pearls have FWPs inside but the idea remains the same.

What is the "industry" saying about these pearls?!?!?!? What would the industry say if SSP/Black/Cortez pearl producers started to use Chinese pearls instead of mussel beads??? An uproar???

Quite an interesting thread!

[Ramona]

Why would it necessarily be important what the industry says? I am probably naive about the power of industry involvement. But from a consumer standpoint, I can honestly say, that I mainly care about the looks and quality of the pearl, i.e. luster, surface quality, shape, color, etc. As long as it is declared how a pearl was raised. I certainly value the innovation that comes out of China and their trying to push boundaries. I think the quality of a product in the end sells and there is an opportunity specifically for small producers to market that, as well as highlight the uniqueness of their product. I certainly would not care whether Cortez pearls had a bead, a pearl, or plain dirt in it. What counts for me is the overall beauty of what's on the outside (with a specified nacre thickness). And the creation of beauty in large parts IMO depends on the craftmanship and passion of the producer, which eventually will be recognized by an equally passionate seller and consumer. So, maybe no mass market, but repeat buyers. But then, I don't have to run a pearl farm.

[Caitlin]

Very thought provoking, Ramona- as so many of you great posts, are. I tend to agree. The uproar would come from the labs trying to certify the pearls? But controlling how pearls are made just so they can ID them more easily sounds like the tail wagging the dog.
We seem to be in a period of experimentation in culturing pearls. It is a creative time for that reason. I say, "Let her rip!"

I would agree with Ramona about Cortez pearls. Douglas, I don't care what you decide to nucleate with- I know you and Manuel and Enrique would based any nucleation changes on a series of interesting experiments. If any of the results were salable, they would be written up and thoroughly explained. Maybe you could try some mud.....or well-shaped FWs for nuclei. There is no reason a boutique farm with the world's fanciest pearls would need to use exactly uniform clam shell nuclei, if you found something better.

[pattye]

If I recall correctly, there was some concern about "possible" fading of the intense metallic colors if the nacre on the souffle pearls was "thin." They haven't been around long enough for anyone to know how they hold up over time, and if this is likely to occur. It sounds like some are cleaning out the "mud" centers, others are using the pearls with the mud nucleus inside.

What goes inside the pearl can potentially affect the life of the pearl, and that is of concern to me.

However, I am certainly 110% for experimentation and pushing the boundaries!

Ramona, am not sure what you mean when you say, "As long as it is declared how a pearl was raised. "

[Caitlin]

I took that as "full disclosure".