Home > Hobbies & Games > Crafts > Beading & Jewelry Making
Should a jewelry designer be required to reveal if stones are real or synthetic?
Results so far:
| Yes | 94% | 3136 votes | Total: 3329 votes | |
| No | 6% | 193 votes |
Yes
by Jay O'Toole
Created on: February 01, 2011 Last Updated: February 04, 2011
Jewelry expresses of the heart of the artist, who enjoys providing art with an inherently-practical method for display.
Jewelry that is distinct bears quality in every link.
If the materials are indeed excellent, then stating the exceptional quality of these materials, will assure the buyer that such jewelry is far-above-average in every way. Any piece of jewelry-created that falls below the standard of quality that artist requires for jewelry that bears the artist's name, then it can easily be kept from display or for sale.
In the opinion of this writer, and jewelry-artist, the debate would be more heated, and intense had it been worded, "Should a jewelry-designer be required to conceal the quality of the materials in his/her jewelry?"
Jewelry that leads to fame has quality in the name.
Any diamond, opal, emerald or topaz chosen by artist hands must have "Exquisite," emblazoned on every aspect of the stone.
Any ring or necklace, leaving the artist's shop must have the "Gasp-Response" as the most prominent Value-Added element in the creation of the same.
Requiring superior-quality in craftsmanship, and full-disclosure of materials, places the responsibility for the end-product, squarely on the artist's shoulders.
Jewelry that is an asset has quality in every facet.
In researching the facts on both sides of this issue, there was a growing experience of distress, connected to the word, "cheap," referring to real and synthetic gemstones.
The words, "unique," "one-of-a-kind," "exquisite," and "money-is-not-object," ought to be fairly standard in the realm of artistic discipline that is unique itself, since jewelry is intentionally-wearable art.
Jewelry should never be labelled, "50% to 80% Off." To do so is insulting to both artist and customer in the humble opinion of this writer.
What could possibly be the motive for hiding the fact that a stone is synthetic?
Could the motive for nondisclosure be the desire to "look rich, when one isn't actually rich?" This may seem acceptable on the surface, but in the heart, is it really?
We may sell synthetic gems, considering ourselves justified in concealing the quality in order to "improve our sale-ability."
However, who would stay in home-construction very long, if the general contractor only advertised movie studio back-lot "homes," with exceptional trompe l'oeil facades, as single-family upscale homes in Burbank ?
Does hiding the quality of a gem improve its inherent quality?
Jewelry that is graded has customers that are sated.
Learn more about this author, Jay O'Toole.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
by Kimberly McKinney
Created on: January 29, 2011 Last Updated: October 10, 2011
I am an avid crafter. If I see something, I think I can do it, and I at least give it a try. That includes making jewelry. Actually, making jewelry started my crafting obsession. I started with stringed friendship bracelets, and graduated designing, and making my own beads. I deal primarily with non-precious materials such as fimo clay, Shrinky Dinks plastic, and left overs, mostly because I lack the facilities to forage, smelt and the like.
Not having much experience with high end items, I make it a point to inform my clients of the quality of materials that I will be using. I tell them up front that what I have is faux items. I then leave the option of ordering a piece of work up to them. Now if the client is requesting that I use real gold or sterling silver or something for the commissioned work, I make the greatest effort to locate the items with the most reasonable price outcome.
Now, I would hope that any jeweler would make the honest and responsible decision, and inform their clientele that they are using precious or non-precious items. To force a sale this way is just wrong. You wouldn't want to go to a restaurant and order fish, and get beef jerky. It's not what you ordered. It's misleading. It's just not right.
I don't think that a designer should be required to inform the public, but I do believe the designer should have enough respect for those he/she serves and tell them the truth. Passing off synthetic stones for real just to make a sale is just plain wrong. I personally would not feel right without letting someone know. I sometimes have a problem with some of my completed craft items when I deliver the product, and I inform the person of the defect, or I just redo the piece until I'm satisfied that this is the best quality item I could present. If I don't feel right with cheapy costume jewelry leaving my studio, how much worse would I feel if the item was precious piece, and I took money for it?
I would encourage the jewelry buyer to ask the designer if the gems are synthetic. A trustworthy operator would have no problem letting a client know if their work includes synthetics or not. The problem is finding that reputable designer. I would also encourage the customer to cancel work done, or not to deal with a jewelry designer who is not going to let you know or pass off synthetics, and that's not what you want . I'm not certain if requiring designers to inform the public if what they use is real or not would make a lot more be misleading, or would make them be more truthful in how they do business. I would like to think that they would do it on their own, and not have to be fined for misrepresentation.
Learn more about this author, Kimberly McKinney.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Write and get published
Share with other writers
Polish your freelancing skills
Quality articles from proven freelancers
Exclusive rights, fast turnaround
Brand engagement, business blogging -- our writers do it all
INFORMATION
Copyright © 2002-2012 Helium, Inc. All rights reserved.
Helium.com: A Service of RR Donnelley