Featured Intresting gold locket

Evening everyone, another metal detecting find. The locket is marked 15 karat and the stone has been tested to be a older ground dug diamond.

My one point of concern is that the metal color is off in some areas which leads me to think it might not be solid gold. Would anyone know anything about this and weither or not it would be solid gold.

Cheers

 

I think the pinkish color that you see is the base metal showing through the plating. A solid gold item shouldn't look like this.
Generally, pieces like this would've been marked if they were gold. You could have it acid tested to be sure, since the mark on the back is hard to read.
The little diamond is an old European cut stone. This item is probably 1900-1930.
Just my opinion.

 

I’m going to disagree here. Older gold is very often totally unmarked. Even in the thirties here, let alone nineteenth century. And in any event, you’ve a 15 mark. What may well have happened is that having been buried, the other metals in the alloy have tarnished.I suspect the pinkish colour is the true hue and that it’s rose gold.

 

I agree with Stracci on the probable age, based on similarities this one has with one that belonged to my grandmother, who was teen/young adult in the nineteen tens & one that was my mother's, probably late 1930s - early 1940s. Grandma's round one had a moon & star decoration; mom's was heart shaped.

 

15k was all but completely abandoned for the 14k standard around the 1930’s or so. That slight difference in gold % meant a difference in the alloy composition, resulting in slightly different oxidation over some 80-90 years. Add to that, being buried for how long, as mentioned. The style fits a presumed pre-1930’s piece

I’d presume the odd coloration is just due to the copper content oxidizing slightly differently than we have been so accustomed to seeing with standard percentages at 10k, 14k & 18k

your post says the stone tested for real diamond. That’s usually a good sign that the metal is solid.

It doesn’t ALWAYS prove true, but a good rule of thumb is:
(Generally speaking) Fake diamonds are often set in real gold, but real diamonds are never set in fake gold.

the assumption is that a real diamond has a greater value than the gold that holds it.

Tiny diamond chips changes that dynamic though

 

I really like this piece - it's a sweet shape and I like the colour change too, speaks of its age and storied history.

Pardon my ignorance (I'm not knowledgeable about jewelry) but I have to wonder, does it matter a lot value wise if it's plated or solid gold? It's so pretty, and you're not melting it down (I hope!) so just sell it as a lovely piece with an authentic patina...like the way Old Sheffield plate shows its base colours, it's really attractive IMO.

And to me it looks a little older than 1930s, just a feeling fashion-wise.

 

from a strictly monetary point of reference, yes there is a huge difference in value between gold plated and solid gold. It’s hard to see in the photo, but assuming that scale is measuring in grams…

the gold weight is $345
gold plated has a value of $0

the old cut diamond is much more difficult to value without close inspection.

from a subjective value standpoint, the gold plated has value derived from age, style, scarcity, attractiveness etc, but it’s value will never surpass the value of the same item in solid gold, because all of those subjective factors increase the solid gold piece’s value as well…and sometimes exponentially

 

Of course you are so right! I was thinking after I posted about how I feel as a buyer about gold vs plated...there is always a cachet with gold, no matter how pretty the plated item. Of course people will pay more.

Looks likely this baby is gold anyways!

 

It seems 15ct gold which has been bloomed (fashionable in end of Victorian era, used on Etruscan revival jewellery).
This consist of exposing the piece to acid to get pure gold finish in a soft satin aspect.
I think here this thin finish was worn on places exposing the pink gold underneath.

 

So interesting @kyratango ! The rose colour does appear to be coming through in places where the piece would have had more rubbing / wear, seems to make sense. It's a pretty effect with this wear IMO.

 

It's not a matter of cachet, it is the value of gold vs. gold filled. Solid gold is worth more than base metal coated with gold.

 

I don't want to argue but isn't this value largely hypothetical when not planning on melting it down? I was talking about my thoughts as a buyer - I expect to pay more for solid gold because of the fact that gold is more valuable material, but since I have no intention of freeing the gold by scrapping the item, I am actually paying for the cachet of an item made of solid gold, rather than valuing the dead weight of the gold. So this cachet is part of what the client is actually buying when they decide to hand over the money.

If you're scrapping it, obviously completely irrelevant though!

 

You pay at least the price of gold, whatever your intentions are and whatever status you think it may have.
The gold price doesn't take personal feelings or considerations into account. Whether you want to pay that price and why, is entirely up to you, it has nothing to do with the actual value of gold.

 

Think of the scrap value of the gold as the baseline price.

As a seller, you don’t sell it for less than you can scrap it for.

As a buyer, you hope to buy it for less than scrap value

the objective traits can only increase it’s worth, in the eyes of the buyer and seller alike.

But even if it’s terribly ugly or smashed with a hammer, it still is literally worth it’s weight in gold.

Gold plated items simply do not carry that baseline value. A plated item’s value is derived 100% from objective traits.

 

Aside from gold value if not planning to melt-and as a buyer. I usually would assume a solid gold piece to be better made, have better craft than a plated piece. Having a well made item has extra value to me, on top of calculating the gold value. Good question!

Back to the item, it looks like it could be gold to me. The way the diamond is set with that open back seems a bit fancier than some. I know there were a zillion of these gold and gold plated lockets made in the 40s on up, but this feels a bit earlier to me as well, esp with that maker's mark and stamp.

I like Jewelrypicker's comment:

It doesn’t ALWAYS prove true, but a good rule of thumb is:
(Generally speaking) Fake diamonds are often set in real gold, but real diamonds are never set in fake gold.

 

I don't want to argue but isn't this value largely hypothetical when not planning on melting it down?

No !