what are these?

[kelceyrenea]

i got a pair of earings and a necklace from my gram mother.. i have no idea if they are real fake, good bad... or what to do with them please let me know what you think.. cuz i have nooo idea

the earrings are a redish gem either garnet or ruby color.. they have 925 on the back with like a forward c and a backward c they have black stones in the swirls..

the necklace has brown jems with little whiteish greenish and has van dell carved on the back.

sorry pics are kinda bad ha bad lighting

 

[RissaLou]

Sadly it's impossible to tell what they are from a photo, you definitely need to go to a trustworthy jewelry or gemstone expert if you really want to know what they are...that being said 925 stands for sterling silver which in a gold tone and older pieces usually (not always) means that the pieces were probably relatively cheap and probably not made with real stones. I won't go into detail as we're not to talk about those things on here. Good luck!

 

[FrekeChild]

I disagree that just because they are set in silver that means they are manmade. I have a beautiful Barry Bridgestock cut Namibian Tourmaline with diamonds set in silver. And Barry spinels with diamonds and sapphires in silver. A cuprian tourmaline. A 3+ carat hot pink spinel. You get the picture.

Without more information and clearer pictures, we can't give you much of an answer. Without tests, no one can give you a definitive answer.

For what it's worth, darker reddish garnets are plentiful and relatively inexpensive, so they very well could be natural.

 

[eastjavaman]

I disagree that just because they are set in silver that means they are manmade. I have a beautiful Barry Bridgestock cut Namibian Tourmaline with diamonds set in silver. And Barry spinels with diamonds and sapphires in silver. A cuprian tourmaline. A 3+ carat hot pink spinel. You get the picture.

Without more information and clearer pictures, we can't give you much of an answer. Without tests, no one can give you a definitive answer.

For what it's worth, darker reddish garnets are plentiful and relatively inexpensive, so they very well could be natural.

Agree, in this thread the "simple and no diamond pendant" holds 20+ct ruby worth ~800k US$

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ruby-on-tv-programme.193507/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ruby-on-tv-programme.193507/[/URL]

 

[movie zombie]

do a search for "van del 925".
there are lots of pieces on ebay and I saw one on etsy.com as well.
i'm sure you'll get some good ideas from just doing an online search.
other than taking the set to a personl knowledgeable re color stones there is no way to judge.
however, i'm going to guess garnet which is plentiful and was used lots as a ruby substitute.
good luck.

 

[GregS]

It's hard to tell, since we are guessing I will say the stone in the foreground looks to be a Garnet.

 

[RissaLou]

I disagree that just because they are set in silver that means they are manmade. I have a beautiful Barry Bridgestock cut Namibian Tourmaline with diamonds set in silver. And Barry spinels with diamonds and sapphires in silver. A cuprian tourmaline. A 3+ carat hot pink spinel. You get the picture.

Without more information and clearer pictures, we can't give you much of an answer. Without tests, no one can give you a definitive answer.

For what it's worth, darker reddish garnets are plentiful and relatively inexpensive, so they very well could be natural.

I agree with FrekeChild and I meant no offense. I personally have a beautiful Peridot set in silver custom made for me by Patrick Irla that I love dearly. I didn't mean to say the just because it's set in silver they are not natural stones, I know very well that's far from the truth. It's just from my experience with the older silver pieces that are done in a gold tone are usually but definitely NOT always made as "lux" or costume pieces. Again doesn't mean that's the case and sadly no one can say from a photo or without more info.

 

[T L]

They look like pyrope garnets, which were commonly set in silver.

 

[chrono]

Long ago, metals were not at the super high prices they are today, so typically, higher value stones were set in gold and platinum, lesser valued stones were set in silver. My guess is pyrope garnets set in silver.

 

[T L]

Long ago, metals were not at the super high prices they are today, so typically, higher value stones were set in gold and platinum, lesser valued stones were set in silver. My guess is pyrope garnets set in silver.

Although the jewelry pieces in the thread are not that old, Victorian pieces were often set in silver too, including diamonds. Just an interesting tidbit.

 

[partgypsy]

Thanks for pointing it out. Saying that stones set in silver are probably fake is a vast overgeneralization. There are times when precious stones were set in silver. Southwest turquoise jewelry, some with very high values are traditionally set in silver.
The look is of a garnet. No idea about the necklace; smoky quartz is a brown stone but is typically pretty clear.