Featured Jade paperweight - antique or not

I have no idea. I'd probably drop the lot after setting something else on fire.

 

Yep, that's why I think "tasting" is less dangerous (at least for me, never got sick after putting my on a piece)

 

@Lecollectionneur I haven't acquired a macro lens yet for my camera. I only have a 18-55mm zoom, so I'll have to see if I can track down a philately magnifying lens instead, so I can compare it to your examples. Thank you so much for your offer to show me some examples of what to look for. I am in no hurry, as this little dragon is now part of my household. Your work in this area is so fascinating. I love that you are pursuing how to identify the real from the fake. Such a boon to the non museum antique world and a salvation to buyers and admirers alike who are looking to buy and appreciate genuine objects. Kiko

 

I was thinking you could combine Phaik Hooi's test with yours for the best result?

 

Any Jewelry. That information is so cool. I looked for irregular crinkly structures (though being from the US, I have never had a torn jumper to compare) as well as googled close up of jade structures and it looks like jade to me. Once I started looking at it more closely, I started to see more things that you weren't apparent at first. I thought the lower portion was part of the scaled body but it appears that it is sitting on a "peanut shell" style formation and has Chinese clouds. It is also quite dirty with imbedded dirt in many of the cracks. This gave me pause, as unless it was buried, this build up of dirt seems to indicate some age.

 

I saw birefringence as a way of telling structure by the bend of the light.

 

It turns out that this paperweight is quite dirty. Not just dust but deeply embedded black and brown gunk in the cracks. It will have to wait until it gets a good bath before I put my tongue anywhere near it.

 

Licking stones can be dangerous to your health,natural turquoise is porous and the surface will act like a sponge,malachite probably will not kill you unless you grind it and inhale or ingest the dust which is deadly.There are many more where it is not advisable to lick or ingest.

 

If any of you try this. Report back please.

 

Here is an article about this test not being conclusive because quartz behaves in the same way. Also it is about testing rough not objects
Gimmick Test For Jade Is Not Conclusive
By
Arthur
-
June 24, 2010



Burning Strands Of Hair Tied To A Jade Rough
As a jade dealer for more than 20 years, I have come across many sales gimmicks by retail jade sellers or flea market sellers demonstrating to a prospective buyer on how to do some quick test to ‘prove’ that what they sell are real genuine jadeite jade.
The commonest one is to tie a few strands of hair onto a jade piece and use a cricket lighter to burn it. And if the hair can still withstand the flame of the heat for some time without being singed, then the piece is a real jade.
The rationale is that jadeite jade is a cool mineral and is a good conductor of heat. Therefore a ‘real’ jade can withstand the high temperature of a flame.
To the uninitiated or a person without any knowledge on jade or even to a seasoned jade dealer, this test seems fool-proof. In my early days when I began to learn the ropes of the jade trade, I was taken in by this quick and dirty test too. But I know that this test is not conclusive as I explore further into the subject. This test is still commonly used by many jade shops in China for the tourist market. I have witnessed it several times but I rather keep my own counsel. Let these sales girls have their day at the jade store with the tourists of whom I am not even acquaintance with. Moreover, it is none of my business to disparage them.
The top picture shows a polished baroque jadeite jade with a few strands of hair tied over it. I applied a flame from a cricket lighter for about 1 minute. (The temperature can be quite high). The hair still did not get singed.
The lower picture shows a rough quartz with a polished window. The strands of hair also did not get singed after the flame is lighted over it for 1 minute.
So beware and don’t fall for this trick anymore.
Jadeite Jade and quartz are both crystals. A crystal is a solid material or mineral, whose constituent atoms, molecules or ions are arranged in a orderly repeating pattern extending in all three spatial dimensions. Therefore, they are good conductor of heat. The test shows that the specimen is only a crystal but it is not conclusive that it is jadeite jade.
On the other hand, you might use a sort of a negation exercise to determine that a certain specimen is not jadeite jade mineral but may require additional tests to determine the real identity of the stone.
Say, you have a small jade cabochon. You rub it in between your thumb and fore-finger and if it heats up easily then the specimen is definitely NOT jade mineral. Jade cabochon is cool to the touch while plastic resins heat up easily by the friction generated with the thumb and finger.
A more effective way is to place the specimen onto your cheek, for your cheek is much more heat-sensitive than your fingers. If you can feel a bit of a heat, then the specimen is definitely not jade mineral.
Now this is not really a smart test, but it has saved me some money from buying some imitation stuff from unscrupulous dealers. There are a lot of green imitation stones in the market that resembles jade and most of these are plastics polymers.
There is still a long way to go in learning the ropes of the jade trade. But the best lesson that you ever learn was when you bought some duds and you thought you had a good deal as the seller swore that all his jade were the real thing. Sometimes you cannot fault the seller for he is only a trader. He just buy from one source and sell it at his retail store with a profit mark-up, never mind whether his retail store is a plush antique-furniture furnished or he just uses an army-issued old blanket on the road side to display his goods.

 

jade identification for layman:
1) woolly bits under loupe
2) cool on cheek
3) hair gimmick
also something about clinking sound and clarity when held up to light?

 

Refractometer when translated is another measuring tool used for liquids by cars reparators, vine makers principally, this is a tool looking like a small Maglite, refringence is the capacity to measure the refraction of a translucent item, we use it from ivory to precious stones, I've found a translation more detailed in one of my books which can explain but it seems that is the word refractive in english used too.

@Kiko, the best lens for macro is a 50mm. And it's the less expensive too if you buy a manual one depending of your camera, shorter makes problems with lightning and longer is impossible ti use in good conditions in a closed area without a lot of equipment, making this picture taken with a 200mm. Is impossible to make with a 50mm. But the hallmarks or small details are the reverse way too.
On most of my pictures used here, it's with a zoom as yours but chosen when I bought the camera what you can make only if you know well the seller…

 

This is a site which mentions refractometer with regard to gemstones, a bit down the page:
https://www.quicktest.co.uk/gemtesters.htm

 

found this re: age of jade
"An old jade professor used to work for the Forbidden City,
Beijing jade collection section once told me, you need to study the
Chinese history in order to understand the jade carving. The reason
is that each dynasty produced certain unique carving technique or
style and you have about 5,000 years of Chinese history to study. I
was told again that sometime a jade carving may looks like 12th
century style but found later to have copied during the 16th century.
Most of the modern jade carving has better polish, style could be
copied and technique of carving is quite different because the new
tools used to do the carving. Technique of carving has improved over
the years, so you need to observe the modern again ancient jade
technique. May be you can talk to museum people who handle jade in
your country?"
https://orchid.ganoksin.com/t/age-and-quality-of-jade/19176

agree

 

That is so true (the rest of the post too, of course).
The Chinese have had an interest in antiques and reproducing antiques for centuries, and a real boom in reproductions started during the Song dynasty, 960-1279. Those objects are now very antique, just not from the period they seem to be from.

 

Those are digital refractometers which measure a value transcribed by a computer, what I have in mind is an optical system like the normal optical refractometer used for grapes maturity, coolant car system etc…
I've send a mail to my friend for sending me a link to this optical system used for translucent stones.

 

Your photography, as always, is sublime. I'm being lazy and use my cell for photos here. I'll try to do some with my big camera. As always I do appreciate your knowledge and advice.