Featured CAMEOS: Show & Tell or Ask & Answer

No links work for me... Maybe we can give moderators @daveydempsey @i need help or others a shout to help you out with the permissions/email issue.

Definitely read this whole thread AND the Cameo Signatures thread after. It is absolutely worth it. I left a tab up and would read through a little bit at a time over a couple weeks and learned more than any book (and I've now read several on the subject lol). It will vastly improve your collecting and understanding. It's also just an exciting read with lots of stunning cameos.

 

The ones who sell without knowing always say plastic. The ones who know what they've got say "carved natural material" and set the price in the 4 figure range. Occasionally i see the "oh its plastic" AND the 4 figures and i wonder who would buy from a seller who's just boldly lying.

Also amusing are the fancy antique dealers touting their expertise in their listings, but funny they don't know what their 6k-asking-price no-metals brooch is made of hmmmmmm.

 

Thank You. I did pay more than I usually do. It looked special in the photos. It didn't disappoint in person.

I never thought about that. There was something a friend wanted to sell and couldn't for this reason. I understand government trying to cut down on killing animals for a profit in today's world. But, if something was made last century, there should be an exception.

 

In some places there is with documentation. Right here it's a no-go unless it's going to a museum.

 

There are some US dealers who will list authentic antique pieces on their sites. I've seen one who blogged about only selling pieces they had solid documentation for (ie British Hallmark with date letter). So I have to imagine tort is same as Ivory with the 100+ year rule for legal domestic sale. That said I've done everything short of calling to try and find the answer to what they consider proper documentation and there's no official answer. I would assume lacking hallmark or original bill of sale, one would have to pay an expert to appraise the piece as 100+ years. But it's not like the govt says what they consider an "expert" to be (ie what certifications or experience, if any). So if i get a curator of jewelry at a museum, or a jeweler or antique dealer on the corner, or a certified appraiser....do all those count??

The federal and CITES documentation I can find seems more focused on export and import rules through customs than inter-state sales.

That said, I have zero intention of selling anything, and only have legitimately antique items. I was just intrigued as to what the actual rules were.

 

Are there tips to be able to tell a difference between a real and fake when just looking at a pic? Say it's a decent plastic/resin type, made not with ponytail lady. Or to spot them when they are agate or sardonyx vs resin/plastic, from behind a locked glass?
We have a few around town here, one I REALLY don't wanna spend 250 for, when I'm pretty sure that it's plastic. But,a different vendor at the same place has 4 different ones, that don't even look real.

Man, now I hope to have time tomorrow to run and take pics of them. I wanna show off so badly! Haha! I tried to code the picture in, tried to link, tried to RTFM, so Mr Pete needs to get back to me soon so I can show!!!

 

I've been buying them for almost 40 years, I can just tell. One definitive way is to see the back. If it's see through, it's real. Usually if it's not real, it will be set in something that you can't see the back. Plastic that looks like shell, if you look closely even in photos, looks like plastic/resin.

This is one I bought, and thought it might be real, and it's not. It was extremely cheap. It's still beautiful. It's just not carved. It's a mold.

There are many here who can answer better than myself. I just buy what I think my wife will like. I'm usually spot on.

 

Yes, in this thread plus time spent observing as many as you can. Honestly, best advice is read the thread... @Bronwen has conducted numerous teaching examples and quizzes in here so everyone can be informed when they buy.

Even then, a photo can still fool if its a bad photo or a material (like fine glass) that is good at mimicking other things.

If you have doubts on a piece, you should speak with the seller on their return policy, especially if they misrepresent something. Then you can inspect the item yourself up close, and/or take it to a jeweler for testing (precious metals usually mean carved cameos, testing stones, etc.)

A closed back can be a good start, but definitely not definitive. These pieces are mine, and the first 4 out of 5 are all plastic and every one of them have open backs (the beaded pendant has a felt back):



The 3 on the left i got knowing they were plastic but liking their uniqueness (I've not seen another of the swag or middle Bacchante yet and the blue Erato I've only seen one other in black). The other 2 were included in lots and i kept as examples of type.

I've also seen many closed back pieces that were carved. Some because of how the mount was constructed to be a locket or similar (and in that case, precious metal content may help) and others that i think were remounted on available replacement findings.

I would say a definitive way, when only viewing photos is A. Having seen the mold before or B. Seeing popped bubbles in the surface (could also be a type of glass or lava paste, but molded nonetheless). There are other things to look for like a closed back or base metals, or unlikely colors like blue as above in mine, but they can have exceptions imo.

Again, I learned a LOT about this from the members here in these threads, and on Bronwen's site CameoTimes.

 

Can't even got your profile to message you. Nope. It hates me that's fine haha we'll find a way!

 

no it doesn't........ no one talks on the profile....we use the INBOX , upper right...to send private messages...

 

https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/192422625_two-piece-victorian-gold-shell-cameo-brooches

Thought some of y'all might be interested. One of the two is Victorian, but the other has me wondering. The clasp seems original but it's all wrong. The carving doesn't look right either, but it's signed front and back. I figured someone might want the name at least. Even if it looked older, no Victorian lady would wear that in public ; pearl-clutching would ensue!

 

First one is really lovely and Victorian. I wouldn't mind owning it. Second one is squarely 20th c. I'd say going towards mid century or further but I'm not as good with pin pointing the more modern ones.

 

Agree with mirana.

 

Tallies with what I thought. It's a nice piece of work, but I just couldn't see a Victorian lady wearing half-nekkid people, and the lower half at that!

 

Well, strictly speaking the original image is Victorian. It is The Abduction of Psyche by Bouguereau in 1895. He loved the subject, and of course did many nudes. Love was a very popular subject to wear so if it was in the context of classical mythology I think it got more of a pass.



Canova did his version in 1787 (and copies thereafter). That one on a wearer's bosom would be even more the sight!



Closest I've got in my collection is a bunch of nude putti and Queen V herself. This one is 2.5" so hard to miss, but I'm guessing nude mythological "children" are a bit more tame.

 

Talk about being able to do hands and feet..... never mind the faces and total body postures...
looks like a photo....

 

Bouguereau was definitely an undisputed master at the very top of society. An actual "rock star" artist in his time. The Impressionists were directly opposed to his dominating academic style and the salon favoritism and knocked him out of popularity after his death. Doesn't change the fact that he knew how to paint! Following that wiki link will show extensive examples of his love of nudes and mythology.

 

My only problem with that image is Cupid is wearing too many clothes.