Tom Stern's natural pearls

[Pearlgully]

I do not believe that there is any intentional misidentification with in the Laboratories but I know that it sometimes happens. Does anyone else believe this might be the case with the Nautilus pearls.

It certainly is possible. My experience with gem labs leads me to believe that the interpretation of pearl x-rays can be quite subjective. But what I find so astounding, given the rarity of such a pearl or even the question of whether Nautiius pompilius pearls exist at all, is whether the auction house required a second certification from another lab prior to listing the pearl for sale. I can't imagine a buyer, willing to spend that kind of money, not insisting on a second, or possibly a third opinion.


Gail

 

[Caitlin]

Hi Gail,
Thanks for finding that article, but the mystery grows. The G&G article was unable to determine where they were grown or they would have mentioned it. According to Jeremy, they did not.
***
t-n saltwater pearls are not even hinted at anywhere in Strack and she has several sections which describe tissue nucleation and I read them all today.

to all:
Tom says

since it is my men bringing them to me with parcels of naturals, I just cannot stop wondering if they indeed might be naturals, and that the lab criteria are inaccurate.

If Tom's men brought them in, they must be poached, because t-n cultured SS pearls would be grown on a farm. Somehow, I doubt that scenario. I doubt there is a farm doing T-N and I doubt big, big pearls are being poached. Why has that article not been repeated all over the place?

I don't trust that article; they published it as fact.

Remember how natural pearls are formed. They develop inside a pearl sac grown from epithelial tissue that somehow broke through the mantle and formed a pearl sack. The pearl then grows inside the pearl sack. So the coating of an object like a grain of sand is a myth.

Hypothetically, natural pearls with empty centers are formed around an organic intruder that carried epithelial cells from the outside edge of the mantle, into the mantle itself and then usually dissolved as the pearl started forming around it.

In cultured t-n pearls, the tiny piece of epithelial tissue is pushed into the mantle to form the pearl sack. The pearl sac then grows the pearls.

Well, this is fascinating and I hope it is tracked down.

Someone be sure to correct any mistakes in my description. ..........even though I get the story right, I often get the details wrong.

Tom
Chatoyance is exactly the sheeting phenomena I saw in those pearls. Sheets of chatoyance alternating with translucency. In a rounder pearl, there would be no doubt it deserves its own name- it is definitely not like any other iridescence or overtones it is inside the pearl in a sheet you can see clearly Through the pearl.

Often the "water" can look kind of like a translucent horny material, but feels hard, like a mineral. Not all pearls with water are gem grade, like that huge one I photoed back in your early pages of this thread. The perfect pearl with water is round with high luster, good color and good surface and has coated the outside evenly

 

[Slraep]

I must disagree with the Calcareous lump comment. Certainly all pearls can not be defined by the properties of an Oyster pearl.

I must admit to finding conch and melo concretions with pronounced colour and flame quite attractive, even very attractive, even ver, very attractive. Yes, what you write is true, flame should be judged on its own merit and not compared to orient/iridescence. But I maintain my view on clam lumps! I can't imagine anyone saying anything besides "Oh my God, what is that lump?!?", when viewing pictures of the "Pearl of Allah" or its lesser relatives. The "cold piece of lard" description was originally coined by the very observant and eagle-eyed, Josh of Kamoka pearls.

Slraep

 

[DrTKStern]

What??? Ultra-thick nacred pearls have a profound chatoyance?? I thought the optical effect described as "chatoyance" was found on non-nacreous pearls exhibiting a flame pattern.(??????)---like a conch or melo. Doesn't ultra-thick nacre gives extraordinary iridescence and orient??? I've never seen an ultra-thick nacre exhibit any type of "cat's eye" effect.

Slraep

Looks as if I misunderstood what Caitlin taught me last year..."water" and "chatoyancy" are not synonymous, as I had thought, or are they?

Tom

 

[Caitlin]

Hi Tom
I just checked out a few dictionary sites on chatoyance. The chatoyance is the luminous streak that runs perpendicular to the fibers in certain cuts. Wikipedia LINK to Object has to photos of tiger's eye that show it clearly.

The aforementioned pearl showed fibers very similar to the fibers in the tiger eye. Parallel fibers can be seen in the parts of the pearl that exhibit water when the pearl is moved in the light. So the pearl is translucent in one view , and has a glowing opaque streak of the fibers in another view. The fibers as I recall were pinks and blues maybe some yellows and silvers and visible under the surface, not on it.

It reminds me of the religious plaques that show, say the Last Supper and as you walk by it, it flips to a picture of Guadalupe.

The chatoyancy on gemstones is brought out by the cut. Perhaps if we could cut and shape pearls, one like that would then exhibit the phenomenon of the perpendicular streak.

 

[Caitlin]

How do your guys explain the cultured ones to you? Cultured means a farm. Big farms like Jewelmer have tough security, so your guys would have to be consciously deciding to breach the security and grab the pearls. Small farms may have less security. Maybe from the size of the pearls, they were from a "lost line" or something. I am totally guessing. It would be great to know.

Just another pearl mystery. Par for the course.

 

[boo]

I'm slathering drool for some! I am breathing fire for some! The fire dries up the drool.

Oh, Caitlin - you are so funny!

 

[DrTKStern]

Fire and Drool

Fire and Drool

Oh, Caitlin - you are so funny!

Yes, I was really laughing, too.

 

[DrTKStern]

How do your guys explain the cultured ones to you? Cultured means a farm. Big farms like Jewelmer have tough security, so your guys would have to be consciously deciding to breach the security and grab the pearls. Small farms may have less security. Maybe from the size of the pearls, they were from a "lost line" or something. I am totally guessing. It would be great to know.

Just another pearl mystery. Par for the course.

They say they came out of a wild oyster.

 

[Caitlin]

The nautilus pearl thread had this quote from Ashley #10 HERE

Did you notice any sort of chatoyancy or flame within the pearl while you were looking at it? The "porcelain" attribute used to describe the surface reminds me very much of the conch pearls- rather glassy, non-lustrous, non-iridescent.

So it was Ashley who used the term that way.

I just found this photo. Look at how the red is visible through the bottom of the pearl.

 

[pattye]

Caitlin is a mild mannered gentle spirit until she is on the trail of natural pearls, then her wilder side takes over--------

Originally Posted by Caitlin
I'm slathering drool for some! I am breathing fire for some! The fire dries up the drool.

I am totally laughing too!

 

[Caitlin]

Thanks guys. I like the days when I can find my sense of humor

Here are different views of the pearl posted above. When the surface looks lumpy, that is stuff going on deep inside reflected to the surface. Some views, you can see the red through the pearl, some you can't. I wish I could get a shot of the threads in the horny part that go to the edge and make the pearl opaque in that view. It isn't a gem quality pearl, but it is definitely a teaching pearl. Actually I am very fond of it.

 

[J Marcus]

I thought it might be helpful to mention that the term "Chatoyance" refers specifically to the linear optical phenomena known otherwise as "cat's eye." The etymology of the word finds it's root in the french word for "cat" which is "chat." I think it possible that the term being searched for in this discussion might be something closer to "adularescence" or "shiller." These two words are nearly equivalent and refer to a more general luster or glow, normally rather milky, from within the gem in question. These three terms are probably most closely and/or accurately associated with optical phenomena seen in varieties of feldspar such as moonstone and sunstone.

 

[DrTKStern]

Pearl Phenomena

Pearl Phenomena

I thought it might be helpful to mention that the term "Chatoyance" refers specifically to the linear optical phenomena known otherwise as "cat's eye." The etymology of the word finds it's root in the french word for "cat" which is "chat." I think it possible that the term being searched for in this discussion might be something closer to "adularescence" or "shiller." These two words are nearly equivalent and refer to a more general luster or glow, normally rather milky, from within the gem in question. These three terms are probably most closely and/or accurately associated with optical phenomena seen in varieties of feldspar such as moonstone and sunstone.

Thanks for that. I used Google and found that the term chatoyance is not confined to gemology, but can also be seen in wood. Describing the pearl phenomena that...oh, yes, now I recall a couple of world renowned pearl experts using the term also...when viewed from one angle it appears as if there is no nacre on the pearl, but when rotated maybe 60-90 degrees, it becomes obvious there is very thick nacre. Thus, if one rotates the pearl or the light source, there is an opening and closing phenomenon, kind of a light/dark cycle.

This is best seen in large natural pearls, but can be seen at the edge of cultured pearls where the bead is at one end and much of the pearl developed away from the bead, so there is very thick nacre. For a while I included this phenomenon as one field method to distinguish cultured and natural, but the advent of these tissue nucleated South Sea has diminished the utility of that test.

Hold the pearl in sunlight, study the nacre , slowly rotate the pearl to see if the nacre in the scrutinized area seems to disappear, so that the appearance becomes like milky water of great depth, continue to rotate the pearl and the irridescent nacre reappears, just like with cabochon inner lights.

As Caitlin captured, some natural pearls even allow light through them if positioned properly, for example the red showing through the pearl above.

I'll read more about the terms Marcus suggested.

Regards,
Tom

 

[Caitlin]

I think we are getter closer.

In that row of pix I posted yesterday, the transparent part may be like moonstone when it is transparent, but when you move it, brilliant fibers can be seen in the depths of the translucency and the block the transparency in that view. I don't see the fibers in moonstone and I am making a moonstone charm bracelet at the moment. Does top of the line moonstone have the fiber phenomenon? Is there such a thing as a top grade moonstone.?


BTW. UNTIL SOMEONE GIVES ME A FARM AND/OR AN OUTLET FOR TISSUE-NUKED SS PEARLS, I WILL BE EXTREMELY SKEPTICAL THAT THERE IS ANY SUCH PEARL! WHY HASN'T IT BEEN REPORTED EXCEPT IN ONE G&G ISSUE? AND THAT DID NOT REPORT WHERE THE PEARLS WERE FROM. WHY IS THIS A MYSTERY AND NOT A HIGHLY SUBSTANTIATED PROMOTED ITEM. T-N PEARLS ARE A NEW MILESTONE AND YET THERE ARE NO HEADLINES OR ARTICLES BY OTHER PEARL EXPERTS,INTERVIEWS WITH THE OWNER, ETC.

Sorry for shouting, but I am getting tired of unsubstantiated claims such as that. This is a huge development in perliculture. And yet, the GIA is degrading the pearls because they are cultured! Well bead nuked SS pearls are cultured too, yet they are about the equal in price to natural pearls. Why the devaluation?

 

[barbie biggs]

Per Dr. Stern:
"Thanks for that. I used Google and found that the term chatoyance is not confined to gemology, but can also be seen in wood. "

Thanks Dr. Stern. I have been wondering for some time about mentioning this. The best example I can think of is called bird's eye maple and is known for it's beautiful changing patterns of light. Also, lacewood has chatoyance though it is more rare than maple. Before reading the umptyleven pages of this thread a few times I had never heard of pearls having chatoyance. I am a woodworker and was startled to find a characteristic I look for in wood to be present in pearls. I could talk about wood all day. Now I know that pearls also have this amazing visual delight.
barbie

 

[DrTKStern]

Comparative values

Comparative values

Well bead nuked SS pearls are cultured too, yet they are about the equal in price to natural pearls. Why the devaluation?

Good Evening, Caitlin,

I can tell you for certain that SS cultureds are no where near equal in price to natural pearls of equal size, etc. The ratio would fall between $10/1 and $100/1. Single natural pearls have recently sold for $40,000, with some asking $200,000 for an enormous round single natural. The finest SS necklaces would hardly reach $500,000; while a fabulous natural multi-strand would perhaps get $4,000,000 to $5,000,000 on the private market.

In my North Dakota notions of economics, now is the ideal time to be holding hard assets, such as diamonds, pearls, and gold...because world governments will have to monetize their rising debts, which means print more money. I argue we should hedge against hyper-inflation by holding gems, and that this class of investment will outperform the markets.

So, hold on to the best of the best of your cultureds, and hoard your naturals in a vault with good moisture levels. But then I once bought a stock at 50 and rode it all the way down to its bankruptcy; so I'm no financial guru; and I do not wish to have any of Caitlin's famous flame scorching my behind for bad advice.

Best regards,
Tom

 

[GemGeek]

and I do not wish to have any of Caitlin's famous flame scorching my behind for bad advice.

Nor would I!

 

[pattye]

LOL! A mattress stuffed full of my big pearls could be pretty lumpy!

 

[GemGeek]

LOL! A mattress stuffed full of my big pearls could be pretty lumpy!

The Princess and the Pea-rl...