Search results

And they are still at it: http://www.ssef.ch/en/news/news_pdf/Bahrain2010May_tomographyl.pdf At least for some keshi there are clues to look for already [LINK] and one might imagine that this kind of work has not been pushed to the last consequence yet - its limitations are yet to be...

Thank you! :)

Talk about perfect timing! :)

Arrgh! [too late...]

Agreed - these are different problems and the addendum is picking the low hanging fruit; I put the link here because this smaller issue also came up way up on the thread (quoted).

Somehow, it has been done. See down the link below the latest SEEF Addendum on unusual 'beads' found in cultured pearls: http://www.ssef.ch/en/news/newsletter.html

Is any of them backing this openly?

Wait a minute, it seems that the same source produces similar reports for a handful of industries. Hard to believe these things may have been honest work...

If you are saying that it is worth knowing exactly of which kind a pearl is because it is easier to tell what is being cultured and what isn't at any given time... then, I am with you on this one. Methinks, still a gamble, just a much narrower one. I find it easy to imagine how one might...

Two reports also mention non-nacreous structures in pearls' centers: SSEF's presentation to the IGC conference last year [page 8] and their latest newsletter [LINK]. Any idea whether protein pearls are a fact of life pretty much accross the board, or are simply a special talent of some types...

Now I have. The moratorium seems is quite the heroic move on their part!

Is there SSEF report somewhere about pinna pearls? Changing subject: I remember there was quite a bit of talk about pearl-nucleated-pearls around here - some documented fact [Kasumiga, in an old AIGS report - remained a curiosity], some rumors [LINK]. And GIA (?) took up the task to quench the...

I see... [& thanks again!] I was trying to find a good way to say that pearls obtained from restocked beds correspond to the criteria for 'natural' advanced by the SSEF letter, although the fit with the lab's intent of defending the reputation of historic pearls is at best an interesting point...

Thank you for the kind words, Caitlin, but... which email are you talking about?

Reading GIA's report on using that method, it doesn't sound like it might be ripe for a blind test, by the authors candid admission. Particularly not on this - they reported such discontinuities in pearls before, if not in SS pearls... It may be that the SSEF hasn't touched such pearls either...

Yes, Sir! By all means...

You mean, this sort of thing? http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Keshi-Nucleated-South-Sea-Baroque-Pearl-15-28-mm-/180504367350?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a06e610f6

That, and the conclusion: "much of the information has little or no practical application" ... Often I wonder whether this is regarded as a merit of comparable texts more often then not! [well, and whether it is one too]

Uncle! .................

Indeed, the UNESCO listing suggests this might be the case: they say harvesting the oyster beds is part of he culture that makes them a worthy cultural landscape, by definition. And even some pearl productivity figures appear in the description: http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5370/...