Short answer. Yes. Article 474 of the Civil Code gives you that option when your material is more precious or more valuable than the transformed product. You may take the finished thing, but you must first pay the maker indemnity for the value of their work. Alternatively, you can simply demand indemnity for the material's value instead.
What the law says
If the material is more precious than the transformed thing or is of more value, its owner may, at his option, appropriate the new thing to himself, after first paying indemnity for the value of the work, or demand indemnity for the material.
Civil Code, Article 474 — Specification. Read the full provision →
The good-faith default and its exception
Article 474 of the Civil Code starts with the ordinary rule for good-faith specification: the maker who transforms another's material into a new thing ordinarily keeps the finished product and pays the material owner for the material's value. The maker is favored because the law assumes the transformation created something of greater value. But the law carves out an exception: if the material is more precious than the transformed thing or is of more value, the balance shifts, and the owner of the material may take control of the outcome.
Two paths open to the material owner
When your material outvalues the finished product, Article 474 gives you a choice at your option. First, you may appropriate the new thing to yourself, after first paying indemnity for the value of the work. You take possession of the finished object and compensate the good-faith maker for their labor. This recognizes that the maker was not at fault — they simply produced something worth less than what they started with. Second, you may instead demand indemnity for the material alone, leaving the finished product with the maker and recovering only the value of what was yours.
Choosing between the two options
The better choice depends on what you actually want. If the finished product has practical use to you — even if it is worth less than your raw material — taking it and compensating the maker may be worthwhile. If the object is useless to you, demanding cash indemnity for the material value is simpler. In either case, the value of the work you must pay if you take the object is separate from the value of the material. Work value covers the maker's labor and any transformation cost; material value is the worth of what was originally yours.
Valuing the material and the work
The central factual question is valuation: is your material genuinely worth more than the finished thing? This requires an honest comparison of the market value of the raw material against the market value of the finished product. If the values are close, the exception may not apply or the difference may not be worth pursuing. If the gap is significant, the law's protection is meaningful. Gathering independent appraisals of both — the material as it was before transformation and the finished product in its current state — provides the factual basis for asserting your rights under this provision. A lawyer can advise on the appropriate steps for your specific situation.