The pearl salad was accompanied by a list of the different mollusk species from whence the pearls were obtained. I tried naming them myself prior to checking the answers and my results were not exactly admirable. I was able to recognize only five of the pearls, one of which was a lucky guess.
Would any readers care to speculate on the origin of each? It would be certainly be an opportunity to shine. There is no doubt a prize would be necessary.Included with this marvelous picture was another I found especially alluring. The two pearls showing brilliant flame pattern are nautilus pearls that come with strong evidence of true provenance. These, my friends, might just be the rarest pearls in the world.
Posts
52 comments:
Very tough one!
4 - Attrina vex.
6 - Either P. mazatlanica or P. sterna
7 - Melo melo
9 - Conch
11 & 13 - Either tridacna or nautilus (if a nautilus is included in this photo)
16 - Saltwater, possibly radiata or P. maxima
17 - Abalone
That's all I've got!
Dude...good job! You did better than I did. Everything is correct.
6: mazalanica
11: Tridacna
13: Nautilus
16: maxima
2. quahog
19-20 conch
The last two pearls could be a queen conch from the carribean. They have that characteristic flame though most commonly known to be pink in color.
When it comes to natural pearls I still prefer those coming from pinctada oysters. I'm waiting for the hands of Mother Nature to create an exception- A rainbow colored pearl.
Does anyone know what happend by the pearl auctions in march.
Those nautilus pearls look different than other kinds of pearls with flame patterns. I am to unsure to guess most of the other pearls
Hi Anonymous, and Perfectly, The 2 last pearls are really Nautilus pearls. They are the type for these rarities. Part of the treasures belonging Qatar Museums Authority.I talked to K. Scarrat who described them and will publish them. The nautilus pearl on sale in Dubai could not find a buyer. It is AS WELL a nautilus pearl. Today, there are only 4 pearls proven from Nautilus. the number 4 is in a private collection as well. N°2, a Quahog ? I do not think so... to big... I guess it is probably 2 cm in diameter, from the photo. 19-20, Quahog ? Mmmmmmmmmm.... no pinkish hue. I would not say conch. H
"2. quahog
19-20 conch"
I don't think two looks like a quahog. If any were a quahog it would be 20.
Just look how nice and round those Nautilus concretions are! Very nice and round! A little Photoshop maybe or a trick photo angle...
They remind me of something too. Oh yeah. A glass eyeball. (the better to see with)
We really need the input of a pearl scholar here.
pearl no.2 could also be a melo?
anyway it's hard to judge pearls just in pictures.
there are thousands of mollusks on the face of Planet Earth and I suppose pearls does exists on nautilus too! And Those perfectly round nautilus are intriguing and fascinating!
pearl varieties is a subject in gemology not well understood as there are fewer natural pearls to study and fewer to source. everytime i see a mollusks all i can think off is can i find a pearl here? i did a long time ago in a clam which is about 1mm and i drop it in a sink but it was a blister and i removed it! too small to have monetary value and laughable if i dismantle the sink to find a crack 1mm marble.
seeing those pearls varieties open my eyes to the many possibilities a pearl could exist.
Is #2 a scallop pearl?
Hi U Suk, I was there when the photos has been taken, the nautilus pearls are absolutely perfectly round, and the photos have not been "photoshoped". I have here the Nikon raw format file! The pearls are real, incredible. A monography by K. Scarrat, the scholar you are looking for, will be soon published on them and the 2 others (as well perfectly round). He had them for study several months. As a scholar myself, I can tell you, like Pearl Professor says, that they are truly the rarest of all pearls. And stunning in addition, with this ring of light.
He he... I found an archive photo in a gem lab with N°2 : it is a fantastic pearl 28,73 mm (this gives a scale for the photo) and 111,5 carats from a Cassis madagascariensis shell found in Florida. I will look for the others...
Good job anonymous! Number two is from Cassis madagascariensis, or the Helmet Shell gastropod.
That was not one I was able to recognize.
What is the strong evidence to true provenance? They look eerily like clam pearls to me and such flame is not present in the nautilus shell. It seems odd that these would be deemed nautilus without some sort of proof.
I am not at liberty to discuss the provenance issue but the method disclosed to me appeared quite sound.
"Does anyone know what happend by the pearl auctions in march."
The auctions did not go well and that includes the auctions in HK and the hamaage auctions in Japan.
Paspaley reported results were 20-30% down but refused to release prices and buyer identities. This result must be taken with a grain of salt.
The other South Sea auctions, especially those with yellow to cream lots, were down by about 1/3.
Robert Wan kept floor prices high as expected. This resulted in only 30% of the lots selling.
The hamaage results were equally poor. Farmer auction prices started approximately 30% lower than 2008 and few buyers were in attendance.
The HK show was also poorly attended. Most buyers were Asian. Very few Westerners attended. The typically bustling freshwater booths were quiet, and producers are talking about leaving future harvests in the shell to grow larger pearls and wait out the storm.
# 3
Horse Conch
#8
Might be a horse conch
#10
Natural radiata or imbricata of sorts
# 14
Horse Conch
#18
Large Horse Conch
#19
Scallop
1 nautilus
5 horse conch - Pleuropoca trapezium
8 Melo
12 Lambis truncata
15 Queen conch - Strombus gigas
19 & 20 Quahog
21 P. mazatlanica or P. sterna?
I hope I have at least one correct answer!
Anonymous said...
...... As a scholar myself, I can tell you, like Pearl Professor says, that they are truly the rarest of all pearls. And stunning in addition, with this ring of light.
First off, I do not care what the Pearl Professor thinks about the concretion in question(although I do care what he thinks about other stuff). Second, what kind of pearl scholar are you? Not the kind that they have on P-G where someone can join up and a year later brand themselves as a natural pearl connoisseur, I hope. Or the type that had a short stint on P-G a while ago and now has infamy enough for a lifetime, I hope.
Dear U Suk, A scholar... yes, one can say so with a phd in mineralogy. I did a big work on diamonds, but I have to confess that I started to study pearls only in 2002. But quite intensively. 6 years. more than 1. Hope it is enough for you. The result will be published, I guess next year. Regarding the nautilus pearls : for me they are more than "concretions". They are pearls. I looked at them carefully in Bangkok at the GIA lab. I checked my notes, just a point, the big one is a pear shape, sorry.
Mr. Pearl Scholar,
How do you do?
Yes, that is enough to make you "real". Ahhh...pear shaped. So the Nautilus is capable of making a concretion which is not a super perfect sphere as shown in the pic. Still, you cannot blame me for being very skeptical where rarity and big money are involved. I am looking forward to a more technical explanation of its identification. More than just a GIA paper stating it is a Nautilus concretion with fine flame.
A PhD in Mineralogy---that is cool.
Regards,
U Suk
The answers have been commendable. A lot of pearl scholars surf the WWW.
Look for a post soon with a complete receipe of the salad.
A paranthesis here:
Ouch!
U Suk wrote;
".. Not the kind [of expert] that they have on P-G where someone can join up and a year later brand themselves as a natural pearl connoisseur, I hope."
That hurts... because I am obviously guilty: there's the 'expert' word under my avatar thre, assigned by an automated routine counting posts on the Pearl-Guide forum. I have complained.
Still, the cmplain does not change the sad fact that the number of posts (also public) may be taken for 'expertize' by some readers. I dislie that caveat intensely. I cannot and do nt claim expertise and see myself as an interested and (hopefully) dilligent READER.
So far, my answer to the problem is to disclose sources and my reasning behind whatever statement. It feels silly to keep writing 'I'm no expert folks!'. Eh...
What to do?
Back to the subject of the thread... (gladly! with permission)
U Suk wrote: "I am looking forward to a more technical explanation of its [natilus pearl] identification. More than just a GIA paper stating it is a Nautilus concretion with fine flame."
Cannot agree that 'GIA paper' is not enough, inasmuch as the lab itself does back up its identification claims with its own published research.
If they fail to peer-review and publish their findings supporting Nautilus pearl ID, I'd be abslutely in agreement that the 'paper' (report) is not worth its ink.
However, GIA Thailand has exposed their research on exotic species of natural pearls already [see website for slides] and a book on nautilus pearls is undergoing review. Admitedly, all research in any field has potentially limited validity and som more then others, but for mere mortals on their trinkets, this is about as good as it gets, methinks.
By this reasoning, I would have preferred that the lab reports be issued after said research made its way in its final form of publication (Scarrat's book in print, the rest in some appropritae journal ...).
Still, the time lapse under question is short: much as I undertand - in line with typical publication delays. [yes, I can also sniff conspiracy theories, but usually choose to turn my nose off the lead - cui bono applies indefinitely & life's limited; so far, so good]
As said, I'm no expert. I would dare say though that no one here is on this precise topic, since nautilus pearls have been an object of resarch for so little time that expertise is easily assigned...
Get Ken Scarrat to post here and I'd be over the moon!
Ana,
Your depth of knowledge and research leads me to disagree with your assertion of non-expert status. I have had the pleasure of meeting a large number of "pearl experts" in my life, few of whom I believe are true experts.
You are certainly an expert, Ana.
U Suk wrote;
".. Not the kind [of expert] that they have on P-G where someone can join up and a year later brand themselves as a natural pearl connoisseur, I hope."
Ana, just a thought...... it is possible that U Suk is not referring to the P-G pearl experts but to the one specific person at P-G that thinks of himself as, and thus has titled himself, Natural Pearl Connoisseur. Just a thought??????
KeshiLady, your thought is correct!
I do not choose to let that last ad hominem foolishness by U Suk go unchallenged. As I've said before, Caitlin chose that name for me as Natural Pearl Connoisseur and put it on there, for her own reasons. Such boorish and petty writing by U Suk lowers the level of discourse too far for most normal people, and usually is symptomatic of psychological disturbances. Had I invented the title myself, I would be as guilty of putting other people down in order to make myself look good as U Suk seems to have as a strong trait, or unwarranted sense of superiority. Such people rarely contribute positively to the world.
I think I know who U Suk is referring to on P-G. That's very ironically funny, especially the inventing titles and unwarranted sense of superiority part he is talking about...like he is talking about himself. Weird.
Anonymous said...
I do not choose to let that last ad hominem foolishness by U Suk go unchallenged. As I've said before, Caitlin chose that name for me as Natural Pearl Connoisseur and put it on there, for her own reasons.
caitlin is playing a joke on you
Got it!
Now, about those nautilus pearls and their flame pattern - from what the owner of some writes, the tell-tale 'look' is something different then what shows in the beautiful picture here... The discussion is here:
http://www.pearl-guide.com/forum/natural-pearls/2032-nautilus-pearl-7.html
It is the only relevant thread, I think. (still no faster way to make use of any forum then read the thing. Darn! And I used to think that paper books were a time-dump...)
Anonymous said...
I do not choose to let that last ad hominem foolishness by U Suk go unchallenged. As I've said before, Caitlin chose that name for me as Natural Pearl Connoisseur and put it on there, for her own reasons. Such boorish and petty writing by U Suk lowers the level of discourse too far for most normal people, and usually is symptomatic of psychological disturbances. Had I invented the title myself, I would be as guilty of putting other people down in order to make myself look good as U Suk seems to have as a strong trait, or unwarranted sense of superiority. Such people rarely contribute positively to the world
Doctor Stern, is that you. Why are you posting anonymously.
"Anonymous said...
Hi U Suk, I was there when the photos has been taken, the nautilus pearls are absolutely perfectly round, and the photos have not been "photoshoped".
AND, the same scholar later writes........
"Anonymous said...
I looked at them carefully in Bangkok at the GIA lab. I checked my notes, just a point, the big one is a pear shape, sorry.
DUH! One would think that having seen something so rare an incredible with one's own eyes, one would not need to refer to notes later in order to remember the shape, especially after having said they were "absolutely" "perfectly" "round". Or does a micro-millimeter here or there make that much of a difference.(probably answered my own question)
hoo hoo--I think the nautilus pearl promoters should clam-up until definite proof is shown. Who wants to pay $60,000dollars for a micro-concretion. Who wants to pay $200 dollars for micro-concretion. I bet the microscope needed to see the "swirl" is worth more. Gah.
Have you guys read the bad luck thing associated with the nautilus pearl on Pearl-Guide. Does that only apply to a real and proven Nautilus pompilius pearl or equally to a Tridacna squamosa pearl masquerading as one? Meh, I think I'll stay away from both just to be doubly sure. I'm such a wimpy klutz I think the pearl need not wait for me to be in a fight in order to get me killed. I wouldn't last half a day under such malevolent influence.
Aaron said...
Have you guys read the bad luck thing associated with the nautilus pearl on Pearl-Guide. Does that only apply to a real and proven Nautilus pompilius pearl or equally to a Tridacna squamosa pearl masquerading as one? Meh, I think I'll stay away from both just to be doubly sure. I'm such a wimpy klutz I think the pearl need not wait for me to be in a fight in order to get me killed. I wouldn't last half a day under such malevolent influence.
Actually, this superstition appears in the Frederick Kunz book, "The Book Of the Pearl", published in 1908 and only addresses the Nautilus pompilus. As legend has it though, I don't think the doc is old enough to have been around to poach in those days.
I think that besides the bad luck factor, owning a nautilus pearl also lowers one's I.Q.
Excuse me for just jumping right in here unintroduced, but it seems to me that the Pearl Professor has put up a very interesting and educational post, on his own time, for our benefit, and then what happens -- a discussion of things of great interest and beauty devolves into childishness.
Grow up and appreciate things more!
Childishness??? Your comment shows plain dumbness instead. Why don't you look at all the facts before raining on our "childish" Nautilus bashing fest. What the hell is so educational about a touted "Nautilus" pearl that looks EXACTLY like a T. squamosa pearl? I don't just want to read a monograph about why it is a Nautilus pearl, I want to also read a monograph about why it is not a T. squamosa pearl.
Really, I think you've completely missed the boat in regards to our sarcastic incredulence of the matter. Read up and understand things more!
Lady... this is the comment section of a blog run by a crusty old balding professor who's many joys in life clearly include poking at neat piles of pearl industry shit (in case you haven't read any of his other articles)to see what lives in there. If you want run of the mill "educational" you should mosey on down to Pearl-Guide where it is politically incorrect to imagine Guantanamo staying open for guys like Madoff and where his victims are vilified instead.
I trust the professor will let this comment through as I am just as crusty as he is, if not more so. (I got a full head of hair though)
First there was Crusty The Clown, now there is Crusty The Pearl Professor. Cool.
Crusty, eh? I've been called a lot worse. Damn hair has been going for a long time!
Crusty...old...balding...wears cheap underwear and socks from Walmart......works for me.
I fucking hate my stupid uncle giving me advice on going bald. "You'll save a lot of money on shampoo." Not as much as I'll save by never having another girlfriend, Baldo.
Sorry for the mini rant, Prof. Crusty. Argh. I had to tell someone.
Since baldness is directly linked to testosterone, and the testes are the primary producers of the hormone, the only treatment that works every time is castration.
Bald dudes are way up there on the evolutionary scale. The bald dude is no longer an "animal". Sure, we may still exhibit some residual chimp behaviour as well as retaining the hairy caveman's barbecuing skills, but we’re bald dudes. We’re our own unique species of animal that is a million times better than all of God’s other crappy creatures — including women. Being bald is like sticking it to the whole lot of them. The bald dude says, "Fuck opposable thumbs, I don’t even need hair."
It is no longer politically correct to call a bald guy "bald". The proper way to refer to a bald guy is now "follicularly challenged".
Hey, I resemble that remark!
Yeah, I knew the professor was somehow "challenged".
Shave it, Professor!! As long as you don't have any swastika tattoos you'll be fine.
Heh heh heh! He can then stand in front of a mirror and ask, "You talkin' to me? YOU talking to ME??!"
I used to be rather self-conscious about my stringy long napolitane blonde hair of which much has fallen away in the past couple years until my unexplainable weight gain took much of the focus off it. Actually, I do not go out much during the day for fear I may miss some fabulous pearl deal on eBay so no one really sees much of me anymore. Solves that problem. I also save a lot of money on shampoo since I have cut my hair washing down to once every two weeks.
Professor, I would get a bit of a suntan if I were you, after you shave it all off.
What's up with the monograph? To be more specific--where's the bloody monograph? Why are Smetzler and K. Scarret grinning in that pic on Pearl guide? I can't get those grins out of my head.
To put the nautilus pearl controversy to rest once and for all, the nautilus is nacreous with very strong iridescence. Think ammonites. The pearl should look like that.
Post a Comment