.

Original Message:   Um..., No!
It has been some time since we had any discussion of the issues that are raised here.

One is "tagua"—and the fact that several organic materials (seeds, etc.) are exploited and called "vegetable ivory"—and it is not unusual for all of these products to be misidentified as "tagua." It happens constantly.

The other is the misidentification of the present material—that I have correctly ID'd in the past. This being "Chinese composition" (made from various factory dusts, glued together or 'reconstructed' to form a block material that is made into beads). Composition can be pale (from recycled bone or ivory dust), or colored (exploiting wood dust, incense ash, and possibly other materials).

A typical bead has been cut into spherical shapes, then dyed, then cut to have raised "eyes"—as we see with the present beads.

I have discussed all this so long ago, I suppose no one remembers. At the early days of Beads-L, and at the previous iteration of BeadCollector Forum.

In any event, a mistaken identification that Chinese composition is "tagua" (or 'vegetable ivory') is understandable—for anyone who doesn't have a handle on these topics. But there is a significant difference! JDA.

Copyright 2020
All rights reserved by Bead Collector Network and its users

BackPost Reply

 Name

  Register
 Password
 E-Mail  
 Subject  
  Private Reply   Make all replies private  


 Message

HTML tags allowed in message body.   Browser view     Display HTML as text.
 Link URL
 Link Title
 Image URL
 Attachment file (<256 kb)
 Attachment file (<256 kb)