PearlsAmerica.com ? Freshwater or Akoya

[Nerida]

Makes it even worse, doesn't it...
I should add that I had met this vendor at a fair once... The GIA certificate hanging nicely over the display case of FW pearls all labelled as "naturals". Interestingly, when I asked them why they used that term, they said that really the pearls were as good as naturals since truly natural pearls weren't commercially available or accessible any longer. And I read something similar on pearlguy's site... I am sure he will rectify that sometime.

 

[pearlescence]

You can have all the qualifications in the world and that does not necessarily make you an honest person. Just a less honest one with even fewer excuses.
I simply have too much pride in my own reputation to exaggerate etc
Indeed a customer is at present about to return a Tahitian because it is too big (!)

 

[pearlguy]

LINK to PP 3 strand freshwater 8-9mm. Around $1,000. If you really know the difference between AA and AAA, you may be charging market value with your sale price.

A double strand akoya in AAA is around $1k too.

I would say that PP is offering some very good deals here. A local outlet of a big box retailer based on the U.S. West Coast has been selling what at best appears to be a AA 8-9mm 17-18" freshwater necklace for over $1,000.

 

[pearlguy]

I went back nd looked at the closeups of the necklace. It has very poor luster in all three photos. I have seen much better luster in almost any of the photos posted here by buyers. We often look at photos to discuss someone's strand. Your photos show no real mirror or iridescence. Even in poor light, we should be able to see reflections on the pearls, not just a dull light, if they have AA+ or AAA rating?

I have seen your pearls and I do not think they have AAA luster! They are chalky?

This raises a question about how pearls are photographed. It appears to me that many posted pearl string photos, even in some online shops, are generally washed out. Possible reasons are the effect of flash photography or the general lack of detail given camera distance and a non-macro lens. Another possibility is that some want their pearls to look whiter although doing so will wash out much of the detail and luster reflections. Another reason may be poor resolution in the photos or on the net generally. I also wonder if customers new to pearls prefer whiter color rather than the darker colors that tend to show better detail and luster? Comments?

 

[Hanaleimom]

This raises a question about how pearls are photographed. It appears to me that many posted pearl string photos, even in some online shops, are generally washed out. Possible reasons are the effect of flash photography or the general lack of detail given camera distance and a non-macro lens. Another possibility is that some want their pearls to look whiter although doing so will wash out much of the detail and luster reflections. Another reason may be poor resolution in the photos or on the net generally. I also wonder if customers new to pearls prefer whiter color rather than the darker colors that tend to show better detail and luster? Comments?

This is a photo I've taken at Pearl Paradise office last year. No photoshopping done. Automatic camera. You can see the luster here.

 

[pearlguy]

This is a photo I've taken at Pearl Paradise office last year. No photoshopping done. Automatic camera. You can see the luster here.

Yes, I can see the luster, although it's harder on the white strings, particularly the upper two or three. Still see it on portions, but it starts to get washed out for me. How would you rate the luster across these pearls? Thanks for the example.

 

[Hanaleimom]

Yes, I can see the luster, although it's harder on the white strings, particularly the upper two or three. Still see it on portions, but it starts to get washed out for me. How would you rate the luster across these pearls? Thanks for the example.

Hi Pearlguy, that's because the pic was focused to the bottom strands. These are PP's Freshadama. The luster is comparable to akoyas because they are very metallic.

Here are a few close-ups of PP's June & July 2008 monthly special. I had to do some photoshopping because the background was too pink, and it still is. The pearls are white. However, I want to show you the luster. The monthly special was either gem quality (a step below Freshadama grade) or AAA. I can't remember exactly and do not want to look for the certificate.

Pictures look better on my PC in full size. I had to trim them to cut off the strands next to it. Then downloading even lowered the resolution some more.

Check out "Show Us Your Pearls" forum for members' photos.

 

[Hanaleimom]

My point is even after resizing and lower resolution, good quality pearls' luster still shows, not chalky.