The jeweler switched pearls and removed pearls from my miki strand

[Valeria101]

I would think that you could measure the density of the pearls w/o using those nasty liquids A gemology source at U-Texas lists the respective densities for various types of pearls in one place:

http://www.geo.utexas.edu/courses/347k/redesign/gem_notes/pearl/pearl_main.htm

Got to say, I do not now o anyone who does this sort of testing routinely. And it isn't hard to guess why: the cases of ambiguous pearls (very high quality naturals with identity forgotten despite their value, or natural freshwater pearls come to mind) are not exactly common, and with the value involved, expert ID - be it from a top lab or independent expert (or both! lab reports do not usually write down interesting provenance stories...) is the one way.

However, the differences are small, ranges overlap and ... there's no replacement to sending them out for proper, widely recognized testing.

Must admit that the larger holes added to the hint that there is something interesting going on with these pearls.

 

[Slraep]

...The pearls should not be kept in this mixture longer than necessary , and they should be rinsed in benzine or toluene after testing to avoid injury. This liquid should be handled with care as it is toxic.

I hope nobody tries this! Forget about the pearls being injured, as benzene and toluene are organic solvents of a highly toxic nature--towards humans. Nobody should use these chemicals who values their own health as well as the health of others.

PearlPoor, why not just demand the jeweller return the pearls he did not use? And sending your strand to a lab for proper identification is a must if you suspect your pearls are unusually valuable and you have been the victim of pearl theft. Otherwise, all is just conjecture.

Slraep

 

[jas932]

I've read all posts on this thread, and although hesitant to reply, feel it necessary to give an alternative position.

First, I agree wholeheartedly with Slraep's conjecture statement above.

I own a strand of pearls very similar to PearlPoor's. I aquired them from my ex-mom inlaw, she purchased them while living in Okinawa in the 60's. The color seems the same from the pictures, as does the clasp.

To my eye, my pearls are obviously dyed/enhanced. There are patches of color in the conchiolin just as you would see in dyed/enhanced golden pearls. There is also concentration of color visible in some of the (large) drill holes.

My pearls have the same pretty clasp, complete with an "M" on the back. However, when I removed the 'hook' and looked with my loupe inside the clasp, I found the "silver" stamp.

It is very difficult, even for someone with a trained eye, to discern akoya pearls from Mikimoto pearls - M. pearls just being a brand name like Tiffany. Your jeweler, even a GIA grad, may not be able to tell what type of pearls these are.

Your jeweler pointed out to you a large damaged pearl, and said that he would remove it and move other pearls around to balance the design. Removing a large pearl, in addition to the restring which will shorten a necklace, can account for the loss of 3" in length.

Just because you get a 'bad vibe' off the jeweler's son, is not enough reason to accuse someone of theft. Given that there are reasonable answers for why your necklace is 3 inches shorter, why do you continue to suggest theft?

The jeweler did make two glaring mistakes. #1, he should have counted the pearls in front of you - not just measure the necklace. #2, he should have returned the damaged and removed pearl.

But did he rip you off? It really doesn't sound like it to me.

julie.

 

[Caitlin]

Hi Pearl Poor

I am not going to argue for or against the jeweler, I just think you need to rule out that it is a fake miki.

Could you please cite the page number in the Kunz book about the large holes?

I think it is great you are doing all that research, however, I can tell you one thing for certain, yours are not natural pearls, nor are they early Mikimotos which around the time of Kunz' 1908 book being published were being produced, but they were all button shaped.

(Interesting side bar) It wasn't until Mikimoto altered his patent and made arrangements with Nishikawa and Mise who were independently applying for the same patent, that Mikimoto was able to use their method (actually stolen from William Saville-Kent by Mise and Nishikawa) to make round pearls. It is actually a more complex story than that last statement and we have an excellent article by C. Denis George, abstracted by Anna Kerrig about how Mise and Nishikawa did it HERE.

If I read it right, Jas932's clasp has Silver stamped on it- a dead giveaway that it was a miki knockoff. You need to rule that out before you spend money on an appraisal.

And I'd like to see a close up of that broken pearl in one of your pictures. It should reveal a cross section of some type.

 

[Caitlin]

I have spent a little time researching and found a post on a thread here, written by Lyra a huge mikimoto buff. she says "Around 1958-60 Mikimoto used silver clasps.The were marked SI or 925.

Also a thorough rereading of this thread bought up the following quotes from posts by PearlPoor. I have some q's/comments


"He put the two pieces of the necklace and the few loose ones all in a line against the measuring stick."

It was broken? and the jeweler measured it by lining up the pearls on a yard strick? I think that pretty much invalidates the "before" measurement. Since you do not have a before picture, everything in these pages about the loss of length is speculation.

"Now it has 48 pearls on one side of center and 46 on the other side + the one in the middle (95 pearls total + the little one on the clasp)."

Then he didn't take one off one side and put it on the other as he said he would? That kind of string job would drive me nuts!


If the drill hole is unusually large it could also mean that this pearl is natural, particularly if on inspection the interior of the pearl looks increasingly dark.

As I said before, if they are Mikis, they are not natural pearls. So that path of inquiry is way off base. BTW that GIA xay set is a real education in natural pearls. Look at all the different shapes --those are typical of natural pearls.

You put up a picture with the pearl with a slice off it. If that photo was taken after the restringing, how did the damaged one stay on there?

"These pearls look a lot like mine: Vintage 1959 Mikimoto 16 inch tapered silver pearl necklace - 5 to 8.9 mm"


Pcture on post # 44
Pre 1960 - This is a lovely strand of vintage Mikimoto pearls with silver clasp. The necklace measures 20 1/2" and has recently been professionally restrung. The pearls graduate from 3 1/2 mm near the clasp to 7 1/2 mm at the center and have good luster, nice round shape and few, if any, blemishes. The clasp is fully signed with the Mikimoto mark and S for silver

Your 19+" necklace has 4 less pearls than the 20.5 inch necklace. It could have been a 19" necklace to begin with. Without paperwork from the seller, or photo documentation from before the necklace was restrung and the fact your necklace was broken before it was measured on the yardstick- please give some thought that nothing may be missing.

So, you need to reign in your speculations and really get down to business.

Show us some photos of the sliced pearl and some nacre thickness from some of those large holes. Take some photos of the blemishes on the pearls. I saw one with wrinkled nacre. Almost all of the others should have dimples and little marks. If there are no more blemishes, than it would be of such value that your aunt could have prevented foreclosure on one of her mansions. In that case the clasp would be high grade metal like 18ct gold.


So get your homework done and then report back..

 

[PearlPoor]

Good comments . . . a few corrections though

Good comments . . . a few corrections though

You guys are great! I thought my pearl problem was abandoned by all of you because I haven't had an official appraisal done yet. I have learned a great deal (but not enough yet) about pearls during all my research. Actually, it's driving my husband crazy. ha ha

Anyway, I very much appreciate your comments and information. . . . and finding someone who has a very similar strand of pearls.

A few corrections: There was no damaged pearl. It was a missing pearl; one of the larger ones; a pearl that was lost by me when the necklace broke.

The jeweler pointed out that a pearl was missing and said he could make it less noticeable by moving a pearl from the other side of the necklace. He said I could not replace these colors anymore. DOES ANYONE KNOW WHY?

With regard to accusing the jewelry of theft, I still want to believe there is a mistake somewhere, but it's difficult when I think about how the following reflects upon his integrity:

1. He did not tell me the pearls were Mikimoto; didn't mentioned a thing about their origin or possible value; and he knew that I KNEW NOTHING ABOUT PEARLS.

2. He offered to change the clasp for me ??? WHY WOULD HE OFFER TO DO THAT?

3. He did not count the pearls or note on my receipt their sizes or color, or hallmark on the clasp. WOULD A PROFESSIONAL, LONG TIME EXPERIENCED, GIA CERTIFIED GEMOLOGIST DO THAT?

4. He says all the pearls were restrung on my necklace and it is 2 or 3 inches shorter due to tightening that happens with restringing. IS THAT REALLY POSSIBLE?

5. When he mentioned that one pearl was missing, he didn't point out that the necklace should have 49 pearls on each side of the center, making a total of 100 pearls plus the little one on the clasp. My research shows me that is a Mikimoto standard.

6. When I asked the son (who is also GIA certified gemologist) why his father didn't tell me they were Mikimoto, his answer was that father probably didn't know about Mikimoto pearls. IS THAT POSSIBLE?

I am confused about the silver issue and clasp markings. THIS IS A SCANNED IMAGE OF MY CLASP:

AND this is a high resolution image from my scanner:

This similar high resolution scan of entire necklace:

The picture below was taken under very bright, closeup lighting, with my digital camera:

Will post again regarding comments from Caitlin and others.
PearlPoor

PS These photos and more are posted in my webshots albums here:



and here:



<a href="http://good-times.webshots.com/album/563998453YaCEie">Pearls- Learning to Appreciate</a>

and photos of my pearls under various lights (UV, Florescent, Incandescent, and combinations):



<a href="http://good-times.webshots.com/album/564140043rSLLMa">Pearls light reflection</a>

 

[PearlPoor]

about early (1910) Mikimoto pearls

about early (1910) Mikimoto pearls

I can't find any photos of Mikimoto's earliest pearls, except the ones below in jewelry auctioned as Mikimoto 1910 Edwardian jewelry. I bid on it, and then "chickened out" when the bids got to $550.

I have no idea what the quality of Mikimoto's first pearls were and what the nacre was like . . . and if he even sold pearls in 1910.

It sold for $580, and I have a sinking feeling in my stomach that I passed up a Mikimoto set probably worth more like $5,000. What are your opinions?

Should I be crying now?

I am also looking at bidding on these Mikimoto items, a ring and pin:

and this BIWA pearl ring

YOUR COMMENTS / ADVICE WOULD BE MOST APPRECIATED - - especially in helping me explain to my husband that I already purchased these:

 

[Raisondetre]

I'm just not quite sure where all this is going. These are the exact same questions that have been asked in the original post, and you are looking up pictures of old Mikimotos for comparison, which apart from interest are barely relevant to whether your pearls were actually Mikimotos. Getting an appraisal done will help you ascertain whether your current pearls are actually worth anything, but it will probably not show whether your pearls were Mikimotos. As for whether you have lost anything, without pre-restringing pictures, pearl counts or measurements, it's possible that you will never answer this question even with the appraisal. If you have it appraised and it's worth a pittance, you will then question whether it was the original strand you sent for restringing or merely a similar one that had been swapped entirely. If it is indeed worth alot, there is no legal action you can take against the owner. I do agree that it is rather unusual for an experienced jeweller to not even do a pearl count, but asking if you would want an old or damaged clasp changed is not out of the ordinary, even if he does not disclose that it is a Mikimoto clasp.

I'm just not sure we can help you further here regarding this particular necklace.. We are always up for a pearl aficionado to share our passion and knowledge, but this is just going around in circles.

 

[pearlescence]

I agree. Until there is an appraisal by an expert (a Mikimoto expert for preference - rather than GIA perhaps Sotherbys or similar?) then there is little point in continuing this
We aren't even sure these are real pearls

 

[Kaywal]

1. He did not tell me the pearls were Mikimoto; didn't mentioned a thing about their origin or possible value; and he knew that I KNEW NOTHING ABOUT PEARLS.

3. He did not count the pearls or note on my receipt their sizes or color, or hallmark on the clasp. WOULD A PROFESSIONAL, LONG TIME EXPERIENCED, GIA CERTIFIED GEMOLOGIST DO THAT?

PearlPoor,
I stated in a previous post that the vendor was not doing an appraisal, just restringing the pearls. Many(most) vendors will not notate a brand on the repair ticket--even if they are 100% sure of what they are. It is perfectly reasonable for him not to state on the form--or to you-that they are Mikimoto.
First, if he doesn't know for sure what they are--why would he assume that liability?

He should have counted the pearls, notated color and hallmark(basic description of it without brand name), but know that a hallmark does not guarantee provenance.

Only a qualified appraiser/lab etc. can tell you the absolute provenance for these pearls.

If you want to know what they are, take them to an appraiser.

 

[Valeria101]

The similar strand of known died Japanese pearls solves solves the mystery for me.

 

[PearlPoor]

Kuntz book page about large drill holes

Kuntz book page about large drill holes

Hi Caitlin,

Here is the reference you asked for - it's page 580. I have no idea about history of pearl drilling, especially in India.



http://www.farlang.com/gemstones/kunz_book_of_the_pearl/page_580

PearlPoor

 

[Caitlin]

Hi PearlPoor

I think that clasp is most likely authentic.

Here is a quote from Strack

"Starting in 1952.......the harvest amounted to nearly 10 tons and almost all exports went to the United States......The necklaces were almost all still graded and the diameter ranged from 3mm to 5mm, and the centre pearl was 7mm. The trade called these necklaces "3.5 momme graduates" as they usually had a weight of 3.5 momme"

p326, bottom of first column, in 2006 English edition.

 

[Ashley]

Additionally, I would be very careful about bidding on "Authentic Mikimoto Jewelry" that pre-dates 1921, which was the year that his first harvest of fully round Akoya debuted on the world market. he did not even begin culturing whole, round Akoya pearls using the Mise-Nishekawa method until 1916, when he acquired the patent rights. If the items you are interested in are featuring Mabe pearls then you could be okay, but round cultured pearls in commercial jewelry cannot predate the 1920's.

 

[knotty panda]

I'm going to respectfully disagree with Caitlin. I don't think it's a Miki. That is the sorriest looking "M" I've ever seen. A straight up and down font and Miki uses hats. The hallmark is too large, taking up the center of the clasp, and I've never seen them mark their metal on the side, it's always beneath the hallmark. They mark silver "sil", not "s". Having said all that, why would someone forge a silver Miki clasp? Makes no sense and just because I've never seen the metal marked that way doesn't mean they didn't used to do it that way. The bead tips are consistent with a silver Miki clasp, though. I can't tell a thing from the front of the clasp. What reason is there to not have Miki look at it?

I just saw the representative clasp you showed in post #44. That clasp hallmark clearly displays hats. I don't see hats in yours. But just because I don't see them ... have it checked out by an expert.

 

[PearlPoor]

Thanks for the really helpful and historical info . . .

Thanks for the really helpful and historical info . . .

Thank you, Caitlin, for the research reference. I am making a collection of them, including photos of Mikimoto hallmarks with reference to Edwardian, art deco, antique, vintage, pre and post war . . using fairly reliable sources as I find them . . which I hope to share soon here at Pearl-Guide for those pearl lovers who are interested in various historical details regarding pearls.

Also, Caitlin and all, I agree with you that my pearls are no more likely to be natural than you or I holding a winning lottery ticket. What I was thinking is that if they were cultured for 3 years (or 5 years. . see below) the nacre would be unusual and very different compared to most pearls we know from 1960 forward and the antique genuine natural SW pearls.

And, Ashley, I very much appreciate your advice about supposed 1910 Mikimoto jewelry. I was sort of thinking the same thing in a cautionary mode, rather than pearl educated thoughts as yours, simply because I was unable to find 1910 Mikimoto Edwardian pearl jewelry advertised or referenced anywhere on the WWW (in my very time-limited experience).

However, when I emailed the seller about the MM 1910 Edw jewelry, he did tell me that he really meant to say, 1910 to 1920 Edwardian; that he was just guessing. I checked out his other seller items and, basically, I sensed a total lack of knowledge, and other items were not numerous and basic $5 or less garage sale items.

So, I don't know, but for a lousy $580

(I know it's not pocket change, but don't think it's enough to bankrupt the house, right?),

I feel enormous regret and totally whimpiness (as well as: unadventurous, overly conservative, much like a very old, fragile, and vulnerable person . . . Yikes . . don't want to go there)

because I did not have the guts and believe in my own intuition to increase my bid to double the $580 amount during the last 10 minutes . . . which I could have handled even if using a little credit card help for 30 days.

Everywhere on Ebay and other antique jewelry websites (including . . . very well respected, long-time, and top end jewelry stores),

I see far less quality, unsigned Edwardian pearl jewelry guaranteed to be 1910 or before, priced in the range of $5K to $15K. Dammit, dammit, dammit.

Hey, on a lighter note, where are the posted comments about the photos I posted of my pearl purchases and contemplated purchases.

Well, if any of you are not bored to death by now with this thread or so aggravated by my continued quest for knowledge, I am pasting in some quotes from a little booklet I purchased, just for the sake of pearl education, resources to look up if you haven't seen them before, etc.

- - NOT intended to go anywhere in terms of my personal pearl problem (PPP . . . huh? that sounds kinda funny) - - just sharing for those who are interested.

Mikimoto Cultivated Pearls - The Gem of the Ocean
Copyrighted 1934

How Pearls Are Cultivated
. . . Even more wonderful than the Mt. Vernon replica itself is the modern art of pearl cultivation by Mikimoto. Imagine, if you can, a giant Japanese colony of 41,000 sea acres where oysters are helped by man to create pearls. This Kingdom of Gems comprises eight pearl cultivating farms between the Bay of Gokasho and the Isle of Palao.

The Scientific Secret
. . . The covetable value of Mikimoto Cultivated Pearls has been described by the late authority Dr. David Starr Jordan of Stanford University in these words: "As they (Mikimoto Pearls) are of exactly the same substance and color as the natural or 'uncultured' pearl, there is no real reason why they should not have the same value . . . Each sort has the same lustre and sheen, in quality which cannot be imitated by any form of 'Paste' or 'Artificial' pearls. The best method . . . has been carefully studied and patents of this process have been taken by Mikimoto."

Milton F. Gravender celebrated gemologist, in his book, "Fascinating Facts about Gems," published by the Gemological Institute of America, says: "Pearl culture has become an important science today, due to the vision, patience, and perseverance of K. Mikimoto, who has execute and perfected pearl cultivation. "

Importance of the Irritant
. . . After about five years of cultivation, necessitating almost daily surveillance of the oyster cages, the oysters are raised for the last time and opened.

Man's Conquest
. . . Among eminent scientists who have acclaimed Mikimoto Cultivated Pearls are: Dr. Charles A. Kofoid , University of California; the late Dr. Lyster Jameson; Dr. Herdman, Professor Sir Arthur Shipley of England; Professors Boutan, Joubin, and Dollfus of France; and countless Japanese biologists.

Well, I'm off to the WWW to use some of bolded text for a Google search. Love you guys, and thanks for your support.

PearlPoor

 

[pattye]

Hi PearlPoor,

I didn't know what all I wanted to say at first about your Miki collection. I can see you are enjoying doing the research very much, that is great, and knowledge that can't be taken away from you.

IMO, it is difficult to comment on the purchases you have made from the small photos, also the same about the ones you are contemplating. It is impossible to tell the quality of the pearls also from the photos. The designs appear very pleasant.

I hope you will post some very detailed and large photos of the items when you receive them. Even if you are not spending large sums of money, I would hope you are receiving authentic items. Do you have at least a 10x loupe so you can examine the items when you get them?

Not at all sure what you want to explain to your husband??????

 

[Ashley]

Lol Pattye- I agree!


Importance of the Irritant
. . . After about five years of cultivation, necessitating almost daily surveillance of the oyster cages, the oysters are raised for the last time and opened.

This info is incredibly out of date (but good to know when hunting for vintage Akoya)- modern farmers very rarely leave their pearls in the oyster for longer than 18 to 24 months these days (and often, less than that ), and the reduced growth times have been trending short for decades...

 

[Caitlin]

I am making a collection of them, including photos of Mikimoto hallmarks with reference to Edwardian, art deco, antique, vintage, pre and post war . . using fairly reliable sources as I find them . . which I hope to share soon here at Pearl-Guide for those pearl lovers who are interested in various historical details regarding pearls.

We are very interested in your journey and your findings. We have no one who covers hallmarks. Any hallmark is good to see here, even phony ones.

This is your niche-Run with it.


The first three-four items on the list should be about natural pearls and so anything you turn up in those areas will be great.

All together, your are a natural with the eBay item description language and type

 

[PearlPoor]

Yes, Pattye, enjoying very much the research; developing a much more intense love for pearls . . . not just because of my mother's love for them (and the Breck girls - nicker nicker - - she always said, Don't forget when have grown into a young lady, even through your whole life, use the Breck girls for your model in the way you style your hair, do makeup, dress, and wear jewelry . . . simple PEARL STRAND).

Speaking of simple . . . but not boring, I went to Pattye's website and looked at her creations. Wow ! I am in love with the KOI piece . . . hot, lipstick red, tons of passion and HUGE POTENTIAL to cause the wearer to be center of attention . . . yet somehow combined in harmony with "simple purity and ladylike elegance."I am impressed. I'll bet if those Breck girls were still around these days, they would wear that necklace.

Re Ashley's comment . . . I read that nowadays types of oysters with certain colors specifically bred into them are fed special nutrients (??? God only knows ... maybe steroids) and are allowed only 6 to 9 months before the pearl is taken. Yipes.

And, Caitlin, I am happy to hear about interest in the research I am doing. Will post some info this weekend.

Best to Pearl Friends,
Laura
Darn, I can't help it . . . I'm sending another post with Pattye's stunning and very sensuous Do Da Koi (did I remember the Koi's name right?)



http://ny-image1.etsy.com/il_430xN.32258437.jpg