Lili,
Amazonite and turquoise are completely different minerals, with different values
as well. fortunately, they are not difficult to tell apart.
Amazonite is a type of feldspar. It is harder than turquoise, and a somewhat
blueish green in color, usually with white lines/markings in it, rather than
being a solid color. It's surfaces, on the rough material, tend to be
relatively shiny, as well, so if there are any small chips, you can see there
the difference easily too. turquoise will appear dull on those chips.
turquoise is also more opaque, while amazonite has a slight translucency when
you hold a light behind it. And while turquoise can be a greenish color, most
is bluer than most amazonite will be, and it's markings, if any, tend to be
random bits or pieces of limonite or other vein like markings, rather than the
fairly straight little lines or crystals that the white marks (which may also
appear more like just lines, or even tiny cracks) in amazonite tend to occur as.
turquoise is generally more valuable than amazonite, though everything is
relative. some "turquoise" is reconstituted junk, made more of plastic resins
than turquoise powder bound by the resins. It's pretty, but of little value as
a gem, other than as a manufactured material. At it's best, turquoise is sold
by the carat, and can be quite pricy, though this type of quality is not so
often used for beads. More common is a resin stabilized turquoise, which is a
natural, but somewhat poor/chalky quality of turquoise which has been soaked in
plastic resins to harden it and improve the color. It's better than the
reconstituted stuff by far, and still commands a decent price in some cases.
You also see considerable quantities of chinese turquoise on the bead market.
These are quite variable, with some qualities having more matrix than turquoise,
and others rivaling the finest qualities found anywhere. It sometimes tends to
be somewhat more likely to be harder and denser than equivalent qualities from
the American Southwest or Mexico, so it's lowest qualities are sometimes
costlier than the lower qualities of American sourced stone. These low
qualities will not be much more expensive than run of the mill amazonite. So
the question of whether your beads are more valuable as turquoise or amazonite
depends very largely, if they're turquoise, on just what qualities they are.
If you've got a decent scan/photo of the materials posted somewhere on the web,
you could post the URL of that image here on the newsgroup and we can take a
closer look for ourselves and help you with the identification. Yes, it IS
important to call gems by their correct name. You wouldn't want to be buying
something labeled ruby, when in fact it was garnet, would you? These two stones
are about that far apart, and it IS somewhat of a sin, especially if that
misrepresentation is intentional. In your case, I suspect it is not
intentional, and you may not even have misrepresented your material at all. It
might well be turquoise, and your one correspondent might be wrong. That's why
I suggest making an image available to the newsgroup, as there are many folks
here well qualified to tell you the difference. Remember that you cannot post
the images directly to this newsgroup, as the group's charter prohibits such
posts, and the software I use to moderate the group and repost your messages
after approval also doesn't correctly handle attachments to a message, so I cant
bend that rule if I wanted to.
Hope this helps.
Peter Rowe
moderator
rec.crafts.jewelry
Amazonite is a type of Feldspar and is usually less expensive than
Turquoise. That is why it is often misrepresented as Turquoise.
--
Jeffrey A. Sheer
"Lili" <jar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:8njeot8mrugbdc3k3...@4ax.com...