thrift store find: too good to be true?

I'm pretty sure any smooth surface that has sufficient reflective property will show your mirror image holding the camera. That's the definition of luster. Freshwater pearls generally have a softer glowy luster, with poor quality pearls unable to show your mirror image. Those are true pearls as well. I'm sorry but they look faux though they are pretty.
 
Sorry pwray,

They are getting faux-er by the minute. The stringing, size, roundness, graduation, and drill hole---all is suspect. The drill hole, in particular, clinches the faux verdict for me. Looks like the 'faux" was sprayed and dried on the bead while it(the bead) was threaded on something.

Slraep
 
Any genuine pearl when drilled doesn't flare up around the drill hole like that, even if they drilled through a blemish.
 
It keeps coming around to the issue of the tooth test, for me. Do faux pearls pass the tooth test? Are there any fakes that good? And if they do pass the tooth test, does that mean (as the proprietress of the gift shop firmly believed) that they must be real pearls--which then begs the question of, not, are they real, but what kind of real are they...

I know that you are the experts, and I'm the novice, and I don't mean to badger you, but how do faux pearls pass the famous tooth test? I'm mildly bewildered here (to put it mildly).

A question that occurs to me is this: supposing, just for the sake of argument, that they were real. What kind of real would they have to be, in order to account for their flawlessness, they uniformity and also the way that they are all the same size? Is it possible that they are old, and were drilled before modern neat tiny holes were possible?
 
Interesting observation, Slraep. I knew they weren't Swarovski. They wouldn't leave a drill hole like that although that crinkle at the drill hole is indicative of Swarovski's that have been restrung after about a year of wear. (Gee! How would I know that!) I should get some shots of my Swarovskis. Goodness knows I have a ton of them.
 
The nacre around the drill hole in the first photo of post 19 reminds me of latex paint that hasn't quite dried and gets pulled away (I did a LOT of painting last summer).

My vote is that they are imitation.
 
Try to borrow a 10 x loupe (magnifier) and take a look at the surface. If real nacre, should be very, very smooth. Imitation looks rougher, even the really good imitation ones like Majorica.
 
The tooth test is subjective and any surface that would flake off when scratched by a slightly harder tooth would give a feel. Pearls are nacre, which by definition some form of calcium carbonate (let's put aside the conch/elephant/other rare exotic for the moment), be it conchiolin or aragonite. If it is not formed by the deposition of calcium carbonate by bivalve molluscs, I don't see how it can be called a real pearl. That's separate to the natural vs cultured issue.

Faux pearls like any kind of imitation will only get better as technology improves. So, they rough up the surface a bit or coat it with a polymer that flakes off like real nacre. That doesn't make it any more real than chalk.
 
Pwray,

The tooth test, however you do it, cannot replace genuine magnified direct examination of the pearls in their entirety as a test of whether they are "real". This needs to be done by an expert! I doubt your gift shop expert used a loupe and closely looked at the pearls, including the drill holes, before passing judgment.

The manmade nacre used on the best faux pearls can be made up of crushed pearls, fish scales, etc, the top faux pearls are "dipped" multiple times in the "nacre" to give a depth and realistic finish to the beads. They are very, very pretty, and fun to wear because they do look quite real, Jackie Kennedy and other famous women of the past wore their faux pearls as proudly as if they were authentic SS or Tahitians.

If they were real, they would be top quality white South Sea, having been sorted out from tens of thousands of pearls over several years to match size, color, quality.

It would be wonderful if they were genuine and valuable! I wish there were more indicators than the tooth test that they were so!
 
Why not take them to a jewelry store and ask the jeweler not the sales person. A gift store lady is suspect as to an authority. If you can come up with a way to measure the pearls as fast as you did, and see a gift shop lady and such since this thread was started, you definately have time to find a real live person to answer the question. I've followed this thread all evening. Seems you are determined no matter what that you have really old extremely exspensive real pearls. So no amount of the people here giving you their opinion will sway you. It will take a real live JEWELER not a gift shop sales clerk claiming to be an expert out of the blue.
 
It will indeed, thank you! You've all been very helpful. What I was trying to determine was, is it worth going the extra mile to find out what these are? And I'm hearing, perhaps not. I would have gone to a jeweller already, but I don't happen to live near one and truthfully, I'm not so sure I want my balloon punctured ;-). I think I'll live with my fantasy awhile longer, it's much more fun.

I appreciate the time and attention you've all given this process. Bye now.
 
Well, it's $4.50. Even for faux it's a great deal. I wouldn't waste time and effort when you pretty much know it's faux. Trust me, you wouldn't find a half a million dollar strand in a thrift store where most things are Made in China. I'm not one for optimisim.
 
There's always a chance someones rich granny died and whoever cleared her things didn't realise they were real.
I took a photo of my Madre Perla earrings in case its any help. They didn't feel gritty to my teeth but I know the feel of real pearls
These measure 13.9mm and are absolutely gorgeous!
 

Attachments

  • DSCF7539.jpg
    DSCF7539.jpg
    14.3 KB · Views: 51
Next time you happen to go to a mall or anywhere there is a jeweler, take the strand along.

Ask to look at a strand of cultured pearls, and request the use of their loupe to look at the surface of the store's strand. Then pull out your pearls and use the loupe to compare. This costs nothing but a few moments of time, and the salesperson will not object. Just this test alone will probably settle the question if they aren't real. If after doing that, they still look like real to you, you may want to have them looked at professionally.

I am personally of the opinion that a nice set of imitation pearls still can be fun to wear. I was married in Majorica imitation pearls -- they are very pretty, for all they are fake. For only $4.50 you got a strand which are fashionably large. Wear them! :)
 
Last edited:
I am a little late to your earlier question about akoya pearls and their size. The size of the strand means they cannot be akoya pearls. Akoya pearls as large as 10 mm are the extreme of the size, and they sometimes grow as large as 11 mm (one in a million), but never larger. A strand like that does not exist and never has (in akoya).

This is really not opinion. The strand is imitation. It is not worth sending to a lab or a pearl dealer. The photos are conclusive. I'm sorry.
 
Last edited:
It keeps coming around to the issue of the tooth test, for me. Do faux pearls pass the tooth test? Are there any fakes that good? And if they do pass the tooth test, does that mean (as the proprietress of the gift shop firmly believed) that they must be real pearls--which then begs the question of, not, are they real, but what kind of real are they...
Faux pearls may pass the tooth test without a comparative strand. In order for the test to really be worthwhile, one needs to be able to compare known-real with faux.


A question that occurs to me is this: supposing, just for the sake of argument, that they were real. What kind of real would they have to be, in order to account for their flawlessness, they uniformity and also the way that they are all the same size? Is it possible that they are old, and were drilled before modern neat tiny holes were possible?

They would have to be recent, not old. Real volume is necessary to create an un-graduated, perfectly matched strand. South Sea pearls are some of the youngest cultured pearls.

Drill holes do not matter. Modern-style drilling only means a drilling machine is used. In India, the old-style is still used (with a bow) to drill keshi. The holes are the same. The modern drills have simpy automated the old style.
 
If those drill holes are as big as they look from those photos I am going to have to say good imitations, not real. A real pearl always has a very small drill hole, only just big enough to allow the silk through. This is because they are/historically were sold by weight so narrowest possible drill hole = more ??? (0r $$$$)
 
They look like Swarovski pearls to me. Anyway - if using a loupe the surface of real pearls under extreme magnification shows a surface that looks like the craters on the moon - the surface is NOT smooth on real pearls, unfortunately. Besides the prearls are so round and shiny so I am quite certain they are faux pearls.
There are faux pearls that can pass the tooth test and large drill holes indicate faux pearls as well as real pearls always have small drill holes, not to lose value! They look also very much like the photo of Cathybear?s post.

As for the Akoyas: the oyster is very small (up to 10 cm) so it is not possible for it to produce larger pearls than 10-11 mm and that would be very hard to get and the price would be enormous with the perfectly clean surfaces!

If they indeed were valuable I can?t imagine that a former owner would have them lying around between cheap things - such pearls would no one forget about..... still they will look very nice once around your neck!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top