[Bodecia]

Hi All,

Came across these 11 to 14 mm SS pearls and thought it would be worth posting a photo of them for opinions. I think the photo was taken with a scanner rather than camera. Length of necklace is 18 inches including the clasp which is supposed to be aquamarine and diamonds. Looks more like topaz to me though. I really dont' like the clasp, find it glaring. But as always it is about the pearls. Estate piece.

Any thoughts on these. Are they quality pearls or do they have too many faults and time dings in them? Opinions on the lustre and orient. I find the scan photos hard to see into.

They are not mine and not likely to be

Bo

[Valeria101]

No comment on pearls - I can't see much detail other than a couple of livable blemishes and know little about SSP, definitely not nearly enough to approximate quality from given data.

The clasp though... looks pretty good. Despite the difference of 'visible' properties (RI, color etc.), topaz and aquamarine are not that easy to tell apart off hand especially when the colors overlap as it is in this case. In person, something gives aquamarine away most of the time - inclusions, a bit of greenish tint or subtle zoning... things that topaz wouldn't have. Some of the time, it is a pretty good 'personality test' to give someone particularly tricky topaz and aqua and ask 'what is it' - it is supposed to be no brainer easy on paper, but it isn't Now, the emerald cut is way more common for aquamarine, as is a fairly fancy platinum setting. Would rather believe the seller. besides, the stone is not huge and not very deeply colored, so its contribution to the overall cost shouldn't be anything to write home about whichever way.

Just an opinion, and some detail about what it is based on. Hope it helps


The pearls are quite intriguing for starters. I hope this thread will continue with something more useful about the main subject - the pearls, that is.

[Bodecia]

Hi Valeria101,

Thanks for the info on the Aquamarine. I suppose I just don't like the bright blue colour and associate a pale more delicate blue with aquamarine. Just my predjudice showing It is actually set in 14K white gold but does look like Platinum now that you mention it.

I too hope some SS experts come in on it. I just love learning more about all types of pearls and if I find an interesting looking photo find it hard not to list it. I do think that it is a scan photo and that limits our view of "looking into the pearls". Just love pearls that one can really see deeply into. Some can pull you deeper and deeper.

Bo

[jshepherd]

Is this a picture of your own pearls or a picture a seller has sent you? From the picture I would not say South Sea at all. The look like freshwater pearls to me, and the graduation is only 2mm, not 3. Do you have a higher res photo of the piece?

[Bodecia]

Is this a picture of your own pearls or a picture a seller has sent you? From the picture I would not say South Sea at all. The look like freshwater pearls to me, and the graduation is only 2mm, not 3. Do you have a higher res photo of the piece?

Hi Jeremy,

It is not my necklace. On eBay. I didn't think they looked like FW. I am glad I posted it because obviously I can't even tell if big pearls like these are FW or SW. The only other photo is of the clasp. Don't have any better photos. Just not listed, which is a little strange when the seller obviously wants a lot for it. I did think that they had the satiny look of SS pearls though.

This is the link for it on eBay but you don't get much more info from it other that that it is SS vintage pearls etc. I checked on the bids and to me it looks like the seller has been bidding it up.

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/aw-cgi/eBayIS...m=330092432269

Bodecia

[jshepherd]

The strand is definitely freshwater, and there is no chance that it is vintage. You can see by this auction as well, anything that is large is an 11-14mm South Sea. The graduation is certainly not 11-14mm on either.

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....m=330083868941

I do not know enough about the other stones things the seller is auctioning off, but I know enough about pearl to know that these two strands are less than 10 years old, certainly not the antiques advertised.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....m=330082124090

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....m=330085243068

The art deco stuff may be fine (I defer to our collectors here), but stay away from the pearls.

[Bodecia]

Thanks Jeremy,

Maybe the seller is having modern pearls strung up on old clasps to get the price she wants. I was just watching the auction's progress but all the information is great if not what I expected to hear

Thanks, BO

[ghperiwinkle]

Hi Jeremy and other pearl experts,

So along the same line, are they FW or SW pearls in this pair of earrings offered by the same seller? Supposedly they are 16 mm for the drop pearls... Kind of like the Vermeer-esque drops that was on the discussions boards last year, right? 16 mm is so -big- and tempting...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...5371&rd=1&rd=1

[Valeria101]

Why does it matter? For the price, it could be some palatable freshwaters, lacklustre SS or fakes... of all the options, the freshwater one sounds the best to me. The rest, what you see is what you get... at best.

The 1930-40 timing would not warrant calling them 'antique' by the book to begin with (that should be a century or more). However, these guys look 1970-ish or younger, common Indian jewelry. Worth the cash? Why not, if you like them... Wanna make a kill? Don't think so, or at least not with this seller.

All with the usual disclaimer- this is just another uninformed opinion, I don't know any more about those than you do.


On the side, isn't it a shame that no bone-fide 'appraisals' can be made for online jewelry auctions? Knowing what each thing is would kill the flea market spirit, but cure lots of wishful thinking and fraud too

Clearly, no appraiser could stand by his evaluation of a picture (neither do I), but if that is unfair to ask from a professional, how much less fair is to expect any casual shopper to do even better and vote with their cash FRUSTRATING!

[jshepherd]

If the earrings do catch your fancy, they may be worth it. But they are a far stretch from what they are advertised.

The pearls are described as 16mm. First, I would not trust the sellers ability to use a caliper as the previously mentioned auctions showed pearls that were certainly exaggerated in size (11-14mm strands). Second, pearls are to be measured perpendicular to the drill hole, and the seller is clearly referring to the length. 16mm is not a big deal if measured that way. If the pearls were really 16mm, they would be about 24mm long... from that picture.

The pearls are described as ocean saltwater pearls from the 30's or 40'. Well, that would them naturals. And although they are not of 'Hope Pearl' size, a matching pair of natural drops in such condition would be worthy of mention in any pearl book, and should be on display in a museum. From the shape of the smaller pearls as well, if they are indeed saltwater, they are natural as well.

Of course the entire last paragraph is tongue in cheek. The pearls are neither antique, natural, nor saltwater. The earrings are likely just a few years old. Well, at least the pearls are.

[Valeria101]

Originally Posted by ghperiwinkle

Kind of like the Vermeer-esque drops ...

I tend to agree with the mainstream view that the over-sized pearl drops in Vermeer's paintings are portraits of a locally desirable look and the fake pearls of the day. To match the shape and size of the one in the Girl with Pearl Earring portrait would mean wearing something the size of a small light bulb hung upside down (near round, nearly 4cm; the pearl imitation of the day would have been a glass boulle coated with a pearly lacquer on the inside = something like a small light bulb). Great use of artistic license, awful jewelry design...

On the other hand, wouldn't mind some large pearls of whatever kind. Freshwater drops get to 30mm and even the ones with naturalistic keshi-like shapes are not bad [Scroll down here for one at Barbara Smigel's AcStones]. Frankly, I have yet to find a well-formed, symmetrical one near that size, but they must be somewhere judging from the sheer quantity of crooked ones that are out there. Any idea?

[ghperiwinkle]

Thanks for the comments. Yes, I thought that they are most likely design from the 70's through maybe the early 90's too, certaining not earlier. Maybe at $200 it would be okay for fun jewelry, if the pearls were real and not faux. I was certainly not expecting SW naturals.

I read the 16 mm reference as the length and not the width. The purpose of the post is really to better understand what kind of pearl cultivation would yield pearls of that shape and size, though. Even 16 mm lenthwise is large for a fairly unblemished pearl, right? As Bo says, all this is good education for pearl newbies like me - though I have purchased both freshadamas from Jeremy and Elite FWs from Amanda.

[flustered]

I do not post often but feel I must regarding this seller. This seller combines old and new parts to create their own 'vintage' pieces. I previously researched their auctions and feedback left for and from sellers, not buyers, and discovered many issues. Looking closely at the junctions of their necklaces and earrings, there are different metals, fibers, parts missing, crooked or poorly-sized mounts, etc. Unfortunately, they are not the only ones on eBay who have profitted from these lowly tactics. Their drop shaped pearls have shown up twice in earring auctions from different eras but had the same gold findings holding the pearls. Part of a recently sold double strand coral necklace was purchased by them several weeks ago and obviously combined with another. IMHO, good feedback does not guarantee a good seller.