Examples of die struck vs cast rings?

[Pinkmartini87]

Hi all, would love to learn more about how to tell between die struck vs cast rings, if anyone can share some examples using pictures?

Was reading that antique pieces tend to be die struck, with the ring’s underside more smooth and thin, versus more poorly made modern reproductions being wax/mold cast and having a lumpier and thicker underside. But is this a reliable way to tell a repro from a true antique? What about the better made reproductions with higher quality wax cast? How to tell between those vs original antiques?

 

[MjK1]

I always assumed cast pieces to be higher quality than die struck.

 

[Pinkmartini87]

I always assumed cast pieces to be higher quality than die struck.

I think obv skill of bench is the deciding factor, but I think die struck tends to produce a more durable end product, sharper details, and cannot be mass produced:

Die struck jewelry - Understanding the Art of Creating Timeless Pieces

Die struck jewelryis a unique type of jewelry that is known for its intricate details and beautiful designs. It is a popular choice among those who want to add a touch of elegance and sophistication to their outfits. At Gesner Estate Jewelry, we specialize in creating stunning die struck jewelry...

gesner.com

But waiting for the real experts to chime in (and correct me if I’m mistaken!)

 

[Karl_K]

mainly look at the small details, sharp they are hand chased or die struck, rounded and soft they were cast.
The bulkiness is not always a give away because they sometimes use a true antique to create the mold pattern.
In modern production cast is usually bulkier than hand forged or die struck. Look at the finish in any hole in the ring will quickly tell the story.
In a cast piece they are rough and its not economical to polish then by hand using a leather strap that would be required.

 

[Pinkmartini87]

mainly look at the small details, sharp they are hand chased or die struck, rounded and soft they were cast.
The bulkiness is not always a give away because they sometimes use a true antique to create the mold pattern.
In modern production cast is usually bulkier than hand forged or die struck. Look at the finish in any hole in the ring will quickly tell the story.
In a cast piece they are rough and its not economical to polish then by hand using a leather strap that would be required.

Thank you!! I found an example online too perhaps in line with what you meant by the finish: the reproduction one has more roughness seen on the underside:



Their website states, “ Most reproduction rings are castings, meaning that a mold has been taken from an original ring, with a modern copy then produced using a casting process. Once a casting is made, it needs to be “cleaned up” by a jeweller. That is, removing bits of extra metal & smoothing rough surfaces. These processes take time & often they are very quickly finished leaving clues along the way. Such clues include porosity or tiny bubbles scattered across the ring, an orange peel like surface texture especially inside the filigree under-bezel or shoulder detail & a general lack of handmade precision expected in an original antique or vintage ring. ”

 

[Pinkmartini87]

I try to handle/feel examples in real life at reputable antique stores, to get a feel for the real deal so to speak.

Poorly done reproductions often stick out. But I would really just love tips in being able to more confidently tell apart the true antique vs a good reproduction, especially when the reproduction actually uses an antique ring die cast mold/technique, other than telltale signs of wear/age.

 

[Karl_K]

I try to handle/feel examples in real life at reputable antique stores, to get a feel for the real deal so to speak.

Poorly done reproductions often stick out. But I would really just love tips in being able to more confidently tell apart the true antique vs a good reproduction, especially when the reproduction actually uses an antique ring die cast mold/technique, other than telltale signs of wear/age.

Cast pieces will always stand out in one way or another.
The ones using old rings for master molds are the easiest.
Everything is soft like a used bar of soap.
No one puts the work into them to hide the clues.
The ones that are much harder to tell is a setting from the 60s-90s in the old style from one from the early 1900s.

 

[Pinkmartini87]

@Karl_K Really appreciative of your knowledge and experience esp as a member of the trade.

Gotcha, do you mean the die struck ones made in the 1960s-90s as being very close to the real deal from the 1900s? If you are able to provide an example via photo that would be fantastic!

I’ve seen what I think are some very well done art deco/Victorian/Edwardian reproductions. Some very common designs that pop up quite a bit as reproductions are art deco target rings with small stone accents and mil grain on the shoulders, or the boat Victorian rings with 3-5 stones set in them, or the Victorian clusters. For those reproductions, the detail is just a touch more rough, or the piece a touch too “shiny”, the claws too unworn/even, but nowadays I also see new settings use old/worn stones and even new settings being more purposely “worn” down (although the wear pattern is sometimes suspicious aka not commensurate with typical wear).

A very long winded way of saying I have a hard time still often telling apart the real deal and a well executed repro lol.

 

[Karl_K]

@Karl_K Really appreciative of your knowledge and experience esp as a member of the trade.

Gotcha, do you mean the die struck ones made in the 1960s-90s as being very close to the real deal from the 1900s? If you are able to provide an example via photo that would be fantastic!

Yes and even some were hand chased, I hate to call them repros because they were just in the same style not necessarily copies..
I dont have any good photos to show and photos don't really show enough anyway a lot of the time.

 

[Karl_K]

One thing to look for is solder lines where the parts are assembled on multi part rings.
Back in the day and over the years being polished the joints get blended in and very smooth.
The more recent ones often have some what messy joints in comparison.
If the joints are very smooth it does not always mean its old but if they are not its good indication its newer.

 

[Pinkmartini87]

One thing to look for is solder lines where the parts are assembled on multi part rings.
Back in the day and over the years being polished the joints get blended in and very smooth.
The more recent ones often have some what messy joints in comparison.
If the joints are very smooth it does not always mean its old but if they are not its good indication its newer.

Thank you! I will add your valuable tip to my current work-in-progress list that I use to try to distinguish between antique vs vintage. Would be honored if someone like you with much more experience have time to revise this list:

Suspicious signs:

-Lack of wear:
1) All intact details--no rub to milgrain/engravings, uneven solder/joints, sharp and fully intact hallmarks, pristine prongs
2) Pristine stones--unless recently replaced or polished--without surface wear

-Poor workmanship
1) overall bulky/wrong/disproportionate feel
2) unfinished bumpy underside, porous texture
3) uneven/clumsy borders either between different metals if such is used, or different parts joined together
4) hasty/less defined details--diff from overall normal wear and tear

-Continuity errors aka using materials not appropriate for age (white gold in a supposedly Victorian piece instead of silver plated gold, etc), or a Frankenstein mix of setting with stone (OMC in older setting, etc).

-Machine-like uniformity arguing against made/finished by hand: this is way more subjective and ultimately comes down to experience aka how many real antique rings of certain styles one has seen


Purely from a buyer’s perspective, I feel that although high end antique jewelry has always been in high demand and command high prices, I've seen in recent years a rise for demand for middle range antique jewelry--so whereas before this subset/middle tier range of antique jewelry did not appear to command an add-on "premium" simply for their age, it seems to do so now, and I suspect this trend and demand is thereby inspiring unscrupulous folks to make reproductions to try to pass for the real deal. Some are astonishingly bad and thus easy to spot. Others, not so much.

Yes, I'll try to be more thoughtful when I use the word "reproduction". It has often a negative connotation. I think high quality jewelry made in recent years in the style of Victorian, Edwardian, Art Deco, etc are certainly admirable in their own way, but unfortunately some of these end up in the wrong hands in that they are then being sold as the "real deal" antique with a tacked on premium for being antique.

 

[Pinkmartini87]

@Karl_K

Curious also how you think this ring was put together (I’m at work and it’s the only ring I have on right now lol). And its age? Tested platinum with single cut diamonds on the shoulders and unheated central sapphire. Has worn hallmark for maker inside shank. No metal hallmarks.

IMHO I think the individual now worn smooth solder lines between all the bars of the lattice work suggests it was soldered piece by piece to form the shoulder and gallery (possibly to fit the unique dimensions of the central sapphire), then attached to the rest of the ring shank? Is that even possible—building a ring from scratch without use of die struck mold or ring cast mold?

I see some evidence suggesting more recent repair where there’s some dark discoloration to the ends of some of the bars in the gallery (I don’t think that’s due to normal wear/tear of platinum). I also circled one side where I recently had the prong tightened and it’s as you say, the new solder line is much more defined than the bottom edge of the other tab prong which blends in with the rest of the gallery.

I had dated it to true art deco and not art deco inspired given the overall feel, the very small milgrain helping to hold the sapphire in place in addition to the two tab prongs, etc, etc. But will happily stand corrected!

 

[Karl_K]

Just from pictures its hard to make a good call, add to the fact it has had work done to it makes it even harder.

 

[Pinkmartini87]

For funsies I took this and a pair of what I thought were Victorian earrings to the antique roadshow a few years back. Kevin Zavian also dated this ring as an art deco ring, but sadly the earrings were a later reproduction albeit he said well done.

Trying to buy true antique jewelry for hobbyists like me is a bit like playing at the roulette table lol. Most of the time these days I tend to stay away, or just pay a premium to buy from a reputable antique jewelry vendor aka if I can’t wholly trust my eyes, I’ll pay to use someone else’s.