Featured CAMEOS: Show & Tell or Ask & Answer

I don't know if I have anything that is actually the Celluloid brand, but I have an assortment of faux ivory boxes, vanity jars & a few cameos. I take no special care of them other than none is tucked away in an airless place & none are in direct sunlight. Pieces in the display cabinet are not right under the lights. Some things had damage/deterioration when they came to me. A common problem is with boxes that have hinged rather than lift off lids: the metal rod that holds the hinge together is vulnerable to oxidation & can take the plastic with it.

Over the years have had the worst problem with old plastic meant to look like tortoiseshell. Some things have just crumbled to dust.

 

They managed to take a bunch of pix with none of them really head on:

https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/...link&queryId=db8c895aa4ed761f034b8146a39f25be



I see her most often in Vulcanite or similar, but another one that comes various ways.

 

I constantly misread photos, especially if I'm at all tired. Always amazed at how different things sometimes look when I examine them in another day or two. That happened here. My brain did not put the visual inputs together correctly at all. When I went back could see that you are, of course, correct.

 

Yeah it's the crumbling part that I dread. I had an animation cel vinegarize on me and it was so depressing to find that some materials are just not long for this world. I also live with high humidity so I have to take extra careful care. Celluloid also doesn't like water apparently.

 

I've had the superficial graining come off on a faux 'piano key' picture frame when a drop of coffee splashed on it. On the other hand, I recall soaking this piece to clean it up. It became very translucent, but returned to its original state once thoroughly dry:



I've read that Celluloid was invented when they had to find something to do with leftover stores of the raw material for a cellulose-based explosive after the latest war ended. There's a reason you don't see candle holders made of the stuff!

 

I think one of the first things they made was pool balls.

 

But film was...and then put in front of hot lights. We're so smart!

That documentation I found about preserving celluloid objects in collections talk about how they suspect water to be a catalyst for eventual deterioration, among other things like off gassing, acidic materials, metal...sigh. And of course so many celluloid objects have metal as part of their make up. I've read through knife and pen collecting forums lamenting their losses. It's so sad. At least we're recording them with photos for the future.

Aah yes, with fun explosions between them ever so often when they made contact!

 

How to make the game exciting!

Cellulose nitrate film caused lots of silent films to eat themselves, and even combust in their cans if I remember properly.

 

My close-up shot of this girl was blurry, but this one was OK. I was hoping for a gold frame when I got her, but it's late 1910s to early 20s costume. She's no great shakes. The earrings, btw, are bakelite screwbacks.

 

Not even silver, huh? Strange to see a shell piece be in less than silver. I think she looks decent for what I consider a "wearing" piece; ie pieces you can wear out and not worry about their worth as a "museum" piece. I think she'd still sell decently, especially if advertised as a Juno. People love that kind of extra info.

I love that charm bracelet. Nice variety of good prices and that roulette wheel is hilarious.

 

The wheel is marked Beau, no surprise there. I did a quick stone test on the cameo just to be certain and... nope. Not even gold-plated. She's not finely carved and in that era it's not a surprise that she's in a rhodium-plated setting or similar. There were tons of costume filigree pieces made in the same finish and she's have matched.

 

Think the clasp puts her solidly into the 20s. I don't see anything that says she's not in silver, but could be 800 if mount was made in Italy.

 

I think 1920s or later based on the the hinge and clasp, JMHO. Could be Beau Sterling, do you see a mark on the pin stem where I circled in red?

 

I had it under a 40x and there's nothing there but gunk.

The acid test doesn't lie. I was thinking early to mid 20s; the setting fits with the rhodium-plated

 

I'm always trying to learn about home testing with acid in case I ever get up the nerve to do it. Over the years I have seen sellers claim that acid showed something was sterling, but I also have the impression that, unlike the various strengths of acid used for testing gold, there is only one for silver? If so, can it differentiate between 925, 800 & even lower grades, such as Egyptian 600? What reaction did you get when you tested your piece? There is more delicacy to the frame than one generally sees with base metal work, which is why I thought it was conceivable it was silver.

 

I use 18k gold acid to test for silver because the silver test is really hard to read. Yes, the silver testing acid can test among the different silvers, but I just can't read the results. My 18k gold acid tests tell me silver or no, and that is how I mark my items.

Any time I need to confirm my results I bring the item to a local scrapper to have my test results double checked. So far so good, he has always confirmed my result

 

Mirabile dictu, DHL did actually make good on its projection of getting the cameo pendant I bought in a London auction to me by the end of the day yesterday, despite the package's having to get through customs. I had to do my bit, responding promptly when e-mails came in, both in the wee hours my time, demanding first, documentation of my social security number and address, & then payment of the tariff, along with an assortment of lesser fees. As I have moaned already, it was no bargain, but I am happy with it.

I am not, as a rule, a fan of 'blackamoor' pieces, but they are a genre within the field of glyptics, and I don't think their makers intended anything derogatory by them. These particular cameos are a sub-genre within the genre. More often than not, they are misidentified as hardstone when they are actually some type of bivalve shell I have yet to identify. While I do not believe they are portraits of actual individuals, they are more 'everyday' depictions rather than the exoticized Nubian royalty en habillé types.

In truth, I could have done without the diamonds, which appear to have been added in a later iteration. The cameo itself is in almost a little capsule, held by tripartite prongs, a bit like little paws.



There is an indentation on the back that looks a lot like a punch mark but nothing legible there:



The auction house made no representation about the metal. Other than the loop of the bail, which does look to be gold, guessing the rest is mainly gold-washed silver. Any other suggestions appreciated.

Once I had him in my hands I felt a little more understanding of the auction house specialist's insistence that the piece is hardstone. I don't doubt this type of shell was used because it was such a good mimic of layered agate, and when the mount hides the back & edges of the material, some of the clues that it is otherwise are also hidden. This one has a feature I had not encountered on my several other pieces of the type: the white layer used for the cap/head wrap is more nacreous, smoother & shinier, than the more matte surfaces of the other colors, more easily mistaken for stone.

I had taken an interest in these & the mysteries of their making some years back. When one turned up on a bejewelled & engraved elephant tusk from the 16th century, I became even more intrigued. I have shown the others in my collection before, but for easier comparison:



The new guy & the second & third ones above are all almost exactly 2cm in height; the guy in the turban is a couple of mm taller.

The range of subjects I ever see in this shell is quite limited. Another category seems to be Roman emperors. My one other belongs in this group:



This one is larger, just shy of 3.5 cm.

 

Since I'm on the topic, found this an interesting transformation:

https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/...link&queryId=9829cb19dc8793dc047e5e3904eefba4

Now a 'Roman' ring, just a few months ago he was a brooch:

https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/...1171/lot-17885055-51c7-4a51-836e-b1d200c0f812

 

My first kit's silver acid went bad quickly. I've used the 18k for testing ever since. You can get a good guesstimate of silver fineness with it once you've seen the reactions, if not something solid enough to "say so" in a listing. The speed of the reaction is key; the faster the test metal turns blue/white and curdles up, the purer the silver is. Silverplate is lightning quick, because it's often pure silver. The 18k eats through non-silver almost immediately. Real professionals don't use silver acid; it's too unreliable.

 

Thank you both for sharing your knowledge & experience.