Featured UV testing of amber - please help reading results

Hi folks,
Sometime ago I posted a thread about an amber pendant I believed and knowledgable people here also suggested that it was real Baltic amber. Promised to post results when a UV test is done to it.
Today I found a beaded necklace that also looked to me as real amber so I bought it and did the UV test. But as I am not sure if I can read correctly the test results, I decided to apply a more radical test. Fortunately a small chip fell while I was washing the necklace so I took it and set it on fire with a lighter. In some moments it caught fire and burnt with beautiful yellow flame and after putting the fire out, emitted a strong pine tree or incense odour. I repeated it in front of my husband and he confirmed the odour. So I am now ultimately sure that at least the necklace is genuine Baltic amber The pendant will have to go without the burning test, for obvious reasons
Below I post the UV test images. Would appreciated any help in reading the results - do I correctly read them as showing real amber?
Thank you for watching!

 

Great work. That's what I look for. If it was not amber or other type of things that fluoresce under UV light then it would reflect the purple light back.

 

Both are good. The chip necklace is pretty typical of more modern pieces. I think the pendant may be reconstituted, but it's still amber.

 

Thank you, KikoBlueEyes and Ownedbybear! Your help is very much appreciated!

I also think that the pendant is reconstituted after heaving read about different types of real amber and how to differentiate them. It was in Russian, though, they differentiate three types: 1) melted=reconstituted, 2) pressed=formed and 3) made of a whole piece. It is my free translation, if Nathalie happens to see this thread, she may help with the terms.

About the nugget necklace I cannot decide, I will post tomorrow at daylight more close photos of its beads. It does not look reconstituted but I cannot decide if pressed or whole-piece.

 

I think your chip one is probably natural, they usually are.

 

Thank you, Ownedbybear! It seems logical as with nuggets they don't have to waste material to make certain shapes (round, elongated or other), they can just get the pieces, do little polishing and voila, it is ready. The reason to press amber is to save material, according to what I read.
Seen under a loupe, the chips have bubbles and various parts of seemingly organic matter inside.
P.S. What do you mean by "more modern", it looks to me USSR made, maybe 1980s.

 

That is modern to us.

 

Yup, 80s is modern! I bought a chip necklace like that near the Brandenberg Gate in 1990.

 

Here is another test result, of a brooch which looks also made of amber material but if so, it must be reconstituted. I posted it before, too. Does it you look to you as amber? Thank you!





Sorry to bother you, I am not at all confident, because of lack of experience.

 

I still see a flower in resin.

 

Thank you, Any and Ownedbybear! I just wanted to be sure that there is no mismatch in terminology. For instance, if it looks to you from 2020s, I saw on eBay that some guys from a Baltic state offer newly produced Baltic amber.

 

Thank you! Good to know the difference in UV images.

From all amber-like items that I have, these are the only pieces that looked at least somehow suspicious under the UV light, the rest could not be seen at all. I tried all of them

P.S. Disclaimer: I am in no way disappointed in any results, this is a learning experience for me, I only want to know how to read properly the UV images. So I really appreciate your kind help!

 

I have an amber chip necklace very similar to yours.This is the UV result in mine.

 

@IvaPan ....please remember that this is basically a site for Antiques....BUT....more recently it seems that a greater number of more recent items are showing up here.

It looks like we have become more of a general information site...... but something from 40 years ago...is still modern , to us !

So, don't worry about it !!

 

Thank you, KSW, very kind of you!

Komo, sure you are right, I take note of what you said

 

Amber is millions of years old, so it fits right in regardless.

 

Very nice and chunky, and I like that rough surface.

 

Me too! Indeed a very beautiful piece.