Need a picture of an Akoya pearl with bead showing

[MMtwo]

Hi PG folks. Does anyone have a high-quality picture of an Akoya pearl showing the interior bead? I would like to use the picture on the Facebook page.

I do not have a stray akoya at my house, or I would perform a hammer test.
Thanks in advance.

 

[jshepherd]

Hi PG folks. Does anyone have a high-quality picture of an Akoya pearl showing the interior bead? I would like to use the picture on the Facebook page.

I do not have a stray akoya at my house, or I would perform a hammer test.
Thanks in advance.

Like one sliced in half or smashed with a hammer? What are you using it for?

 

[MMtwo]

This is for https://www.facebook.com/PearlPartyEducation on Facebook. I am trying to help folks understand that their "Akoya" are freshwater. Started smashing freshwater pearls the other day and it has been an effective attention getter.

A few still need to see a broken Akoya (hammer smashed is fine) that clearly shows the nucleus for identification of a typical Akoya pearl.
Here is a sample I made of a Tahitian.

 

[jshepherd]

Sure thing. This is an akoya crushed with vice grips. Btw, freshwater are extremely difficult to crush this way. Akoya are fairly easy.

 

[BWeaves]

I know this is for a good cause, but AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!

 

[jshepherd]

I know this is for a good cause, but AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!

That's what the oyster said

 

[MMtwo]

That's what the oyster said

Thanks so much Jeremy! It is for a good cause.

 

[Katbran]

Wow ..I've never seen an Akoya pearl broken like that ..I knew the nacre was thin..but when you see it the photo it's actually shocking. It's like a layer of paint.

 

[MMtwo]

Jeremy, I posted your picture with a thank you and credit to you at PP. I appreciate the picture and am SURE so many others will too. It will help stop so much fraud.

A lady was talking with me the other day and told me she spent several hundred dollars on "Akoya" pearls to resell. It was obvious the money came at great personal sacrifice and she was devastated to learn she had misrepresented her pearl oysters to consumers. She is going back and forth with the seller who told her they were Akoya. The dirty vendor even sent a picture of the "center bead" to the girl to prove her pearls were Akoya. I suggested the girl file a complaint with PayPal.

 

[MMtwo]

Wow ..I've never seen an Akoya pearl broken like that ..I knew the nacre was thin..but when you see it the photo it's actually shocking. It's like a layer of paint.

Really brings home WHY it's important to know and trust your vendor. I thought it was very interesting too.

 

[Cees]

Shocking to see that people pay a lot for a strand of high luster Akoya and then see that within a very short time their money has gone down the drain

 

[Naan]

That's why I prefer freshwater pearls I'm afraid of akoya nacre

 

[Naan]

Thanks Jeremy! Very informative!

 

[mrsadm]

Sure thing. This is an akoya crushed with vice grips. Btw, freshwater are extremely difficult to crush this way. Akoya are fairly easy.

A question for Jeremy, is this the typical nacre amount that there is on today's akoya pearls? What is the typical thickness today? Was it thicker say, 20-30 years ago? ... (Sorry this is 3questions) ... THANK YOU
Linda

 

[BWeaves]

Shocking to see that people pay a lot for a strand of high luster Akoya and then see that within a very short time their money has gone down the drain

My akoyas last for decades. I've only had one strand wear out after 60 years. I know that there was a period of time where the akoyas were shockingly thin skinned, but most of mine are lasting quite nicely.

 

[Lugana]

Another question. Why they don't grow thicker nacre in akoyas? I mean if keeping some part of the harvest, say, 3 times longer - will it reach 1mm nacre thickness or will it be destroyed/ deformed/ spoilt etc with "overripe"?..

 

[jshepherd]

I measured a fragment and it is 0.52 mm thick. Anything thicker than 0.4 mm is considered thick and should last a lifetime of normal wear.

Most Tahitian pearls are just slightly thicker at 0.8 mm with the only exception I've consistently seen coming from Rikitea.

Akoya could be left in the water longer to grow 2-3 times thicker nacre but it wouldn't make sense for the farmer. Every month the shells are in the water there is some level of natural attrition, and a pearl with 1.5 mm of nacre will not sell for more than a pearl with 0.5 mm if similar quality.

 

[Lugana]

Thanks Jeremy.. then I don't understand (but still worried with ) the statement about the money going into the drain if spent on akoyas.. Was it an expressive exaggeration, Cees?.. I was going to get a strand of "aurora effect" certified akoyas.. But I don't want to think it would be a waste of money or that the pearls won't last..

 

[JerseyPearl]

Lugana, I think if you buy a quality strand, it should last a lifetime. But like anything, know your source before you buy.

Jeremy, on your comment about Tahitians from Rikitea, you are consistently seeing much THICKER nacre, correct?

 

[Pareltje]

I measured a fragment and it is 0.52 mm thick. Anything thicker than 0.4 mm is considered thick and should last a lifetime of normal wear.

Most Tahitian pearls are just slightly thicker at 0.8 mm with the only exception I've consistently seen coming from Rikitea.

Akoya could be left in the water longer to grow 2-3 times thicker nacre but it wouldn't make sense for the farmer. Every month the shells are in the water there is some level of natural attrition, and a pearl with 1.5 mm of nacre will not sell for more than a pearl with 0.5 mm if similar quality.

Jeremy, how thick is the nacre of Vietnamese akoya pearls? They look really beautiful and the overtones are stunning but I'm also afraid the nacre will wear out quickly when they're worn in a hot and humid climate often.
And how do you measure the thickness of the nacre? as far as I can remember from reading the info on PG, the nacre is measured like this: for instance a thickness of 0.8mm is the total nacre which coats the nucleus diametrically. It measures like 0.4mm nacre, then the nucleus, then 0.4mm nacre again. Is this correct?