Are lustre and conductivity directly related?

In a question that I had asked before, Is chromium the shiniest metal?, I received the answer that silver was, in fact the most lustrous metal for visible wavelengths. At the same time, silver is also the best metallic conductor, having a resistivity of $1.59×10^{-8}$. I know that lustre of metals was explained by considering the oscillations of free electrons in them, so, I could hypothesize that silver allows the electrons to move around better than other metals, allowing to shine and conduct more. As a comparison, the pictures of polished silver, aluminum and iron are shown below.

Silver: ($\rho =1.59×10^{-8}$)

Aluminum: ($\rho =2.65×10^{-8}$)

Iron: ($\rho =9.71×10^{-8}$)

Can I safely conclude that conductivity and lustre are directly related?

• There aren't related, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrite for example. – Mithoron May 12 '17 at 14:58
• As interesting as the question is, posting pictures of different metals polished to different extents doesn't really help justify the "Lustre-Conductivity dependence" ;) – paracetamol May 12 '17 at 15:09
• What @Mith meant: Some samples of (iron)pyrites are more lustrous than some common metals (when polished to the same degree), but pyrites have poor electrical conductivity... so the Lustre-Conductivity "relationship" isn't something you should hinge upon ._. – paracetamol May 12 '17 at 15:18
• Those pictures look like they're straight off Google Images... I seriously doubt that they're polished to the greatest degree ;P – paracetamol May 12 '17 at 15:19
• @I see, thanks for explaining. And yes, they're from Google Images. I typed "polished iron" and I got that. – Pritt says Reinstate Monica May 12 '17 at 15:22