Hello Count, Martin and List,
I agree with the Count about painting numbers on specimens. As he points
out, Lylle, Huss, Nininger, and others have done it, and so do many museums.
I worked (volunteered) with the Curator of Collections in our local Science
Museum in 2008 to inventory their collection. In about 97% of all cases,
the Accession Number was painted directly on the item in an out of the way
place - be it a meteorite, mineral, or other piece in their collection. The
exception being, of course, where painting was impossible or problematic.
Stick-on labels can fall off as the adhesive can deteriorate with time. I
have purchased meteorite specimens with an adhesive label applied to the
cut/polished surface, and that is not a problem for me unless the label
falls off. Painting the numbers on eliminates that problem as long as the
surface is clean, dry, and free of loose particulate matter.
One of these days, when I get some time, I plan to label my large-enough
specimens with painted-on numbers, do a photographic record, and set up a
database for my collection. I have a decent DSLR, bellows, and macro
lenses. With a little practice and good lighting, I hope to be able to
master macro photography.
Ed Deckert
IMCA #8911
----- Original Message -----
From: <countde...@earthlink.net>
To: "martin goff" <msgmeteori...@googlemail.com>;
<meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Good Morning Martin and List,
I truly believe that we homo sapiens have a well developed ability to
remember past beneficial and not so beneficial actions accomplished by our
predecessors in order to guide us when important decisions have to be
made.
What was good enough for the likes of Lylle, Huss, Nininger, Kurat, Kulik
and so many other pioneers and experts in meteorite collection and
curating....should point the way for us...PAINT NUMBERS ON THEM!.....Or
write up a nice little piece of software that allows you to take a decent
digital macro photo of your sprecimens and manipulate it into a nicely
referenced data base for easily referenced identification and description.
Regards to all...and I had a wondefull time in Tucson..thanks to so many
from the List,
Count Deiro
IMCA 3536
-----Original Message-----
From: martin goff <msgmeteori...@googlemail.com>
Sent: Feb 27, 2010 3:50 AM
To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
All,
Thanks for your all your comments on and off list, most interesting. I
think i am being steered
away from directly labelling my stones unless they are NWA or
unclassified. However it seems a bit of a double standard that if i
were to label my specimens myself it would be somehow frowned upon yet
we as collectors value specimens with Nininger/Huss numbers etc. If
for example a specimen was obtained say from the Manchester museum
with one of their recently applied labels on would any of us remove the
label? I very much doubt it, we would prize that specimen as showing
provenance from that collection, that would match their catalogue etc.
etc. In 50 or 100 or however many years that specimen would only get
more and more historical and that label have more and more importance
attached to it.
I suppose my point is that would we now have the same number of
Nininger/Huss etc.labelled stones if they didn't have numbers written
directly on them? If say they had been displayed/sold in a bag or box
with a label but no markings on, over time would some have have been
separated from their boxes/bags and labels? I would hazard a guess
that quite a few would have suffered this fate and now we would be
left with some unidentifiable stones.
Although by saying this i am placing no importance whatsoever on me as
an individual collector or my own numbers as being valuable other than
to avoid the situation of misidentified or unidentified specimens in
the future. As only temporary custodians of our collections surely
making sure that our collections can easily be passed on without any
missing info is of prime importance?
Numbering specimens directly is surely the most foolproof method of
achieving this? All the labels on boxes/bags and display stands etc.
are meaningless when the specimen is removed. All the photos of the
specimen stored either in hard copy or digital form are subject to
being lost or destroyed. I know these are all extreme circumstances
and most of the time these steps that we take will be absolutely fine
as specimens stay with their displays/cards etc. but if there is a
possibility, however small of accidents happening should we not do
more?
As an example of the situation i want to avoid see the photo of the
orphaned stone in the article on a recent visit to the Manchester
museum (http://www.bimsociety.org/article-manchester.shtml) If this
had an original number on it it probably would not be in the situation
its in now. Its more than a distinct possibility that this is stone
from a historical fall and yet we may never know........
Anyway, some food for thought!
Cheers
Martin
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.1.0.447)
Database version: 6.14450
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.1.0.447)
Database version: 6.14450
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
