Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Aloha Martin, Ted, list, I have a modest collection of fresh fall individuals that i have been keeping in labeled ziploc bags. Which is fine when stored away in my collection vault. This strategy has worked for me while my collection was under 50 locations. But now that it has grown considerably, and since I now loan them to my institute for exhibits and displays, there is the opportunity for, and risk of having them mixed up and mislabeled (slices are not a problem since they remain in labeled membraneboxes or display boxes). Especially since I narrow my collection pieces to 20-60g complete individuals - many of which resemble each other, although I do pride myself in recognizing all of them by sight. However, just recently during an inventory, I noticed that my cataloged weights did not jive with a specimen, and discovered that a Pultusk and Oum Dreyga were accidentally switched (most probably from collecting them after an outreach event exhibit). D'oh! I try to keep meticulous records of my pieces, but oversights and accidents can occur. I am considering adopting a numbering strategy, but have concerns as well about what type of paint or pigment to use. Or perhaps if a small affixed numbered label would be a better solution - but then what type of adhesive should be employed? So are there any collectors on the list that do number or label their specimen? And if so, what strategy do they employ? gary On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:48 AM, martin goff wrote: > Hi Ted, > > > Funnily enough, i asked Dr. David Green exactly the same question. The > labels on the Manchester specimens were particularly small and neat. I > am at the point with my collection where i feel the need to number the > individual specimens. I have smaller specimens labelled on the boxes > themselves but the individual stones of a similar size can look very > much alike and i am considering numbering them on the specimen itself. > Then if by whatever means they were mixed up or the display cabinet > were knocked then i would be able to match them up again. > > The labels were printed using carbon ink on archival acid free paper > in very small type (i think he said size 3 or 4) then attached using > archival glue. I didn't ask any further on the exact type of glue > apart from that he mentioned that it was totally reversible. Even if > it is reversible i worry that the glue would permeate the specimen > somehow? > > I am still very much in 2 minds about this but the thought of having > my collection mixed up fills me with dread! > > What are peoples thoughts on labelling specimens? > > Cheers > > Martin > > > > From: ted brattstrom >> To: Meteorite List >> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:18:52 -0800 (PST) >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Manchester Museum (UK) Visit, Article and >> Images >> Very nice presentation... >> >> >> And it sparked a question: >> >> Museums / collectors "glue" labels onto their rocks (or used to) - What >> glue is used? and what are the ramifications for alteration to the rock. >> (thinking back to the discussion of putties for holding meteorites a week or >> so ago.) >> >> Likewise, for the paint and ink method... a> what was traditionally used? >> and b> effect on the rock. (which should be obvious once the paint is >> indicated :-) ) >> >> Thanks! >> >> ted > __ > 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 Gary Fujihara Big Kahuna Meteorites (IMCA#1693) 105 Puhili Place, Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 http://bigkahuna-meteorites.com/ http://shop.ebay.com/fujmon/m.html (808) 640-9161 __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Gary, Martin, and List, Just a thought about storage and labelling - I keep the majority of my collection inside a wood mineral cabinet that has many shallow drawers, and each drawer has a series of moveable compartments which I have lined with batting similar to what you see in Riker boxes. Each drawer has it's own rechargeable dessicant cartridge inside the humidity is ideally kept down to about 30-35%, which is about half of my usual Florida ambient humidity. The smaller micro specimens are kept in labelled gemjars in a seperate drawer. Larger pieces have a wood compartment and I keep the original dealer label and my own label inside the compartment and under the batting. I do not put a label on the specimen itself. I keep large amounts of crumbs, fragments and part slices in glass apothecary jars or small glass vials. I also use Riker boxes, gemjars, and membrane boxes. All of which fit neatly into drawers in the wood cabinet. Larger specimens are kept on easels or magnetic stands inside clear acrylic "ballqubes" to keep the dust. I use Roman's metal labels and custom make lookalike labels for the falls/finds he doesn't have labels for. Each individual gem jar, membrane box and glass vials are labelled with an adhesive label, but not the specimens themselves. Specimens in Riker boxes have the original dealer label under the batting and one of Romans labels facing outwards through the glass. I highly recommend a wooden collection cabinet for main storage - it looks good, it's permanent, it's sturdy, and it keeps specimens away from casual eyes/hands, but they are at ready access if you need them. Best regards, MikeG On 2/26/10, Gary Fujihara wrote: > Aloha Martin, Ted, list, > > I have a modest collection of fresh fall individuals that i have been > keeping in labeled ziploc bags. Which is fine when stored away in my > collection vault. This strategy has worked for me while my collection was > under 50 locations. But now that it has grown considerably, and since I now > loan them to my institute for exhibits and displays, there is the > opportunity for, and risk of having them mixed up and mislabeled (slices are > not a problem since they remain in labeled membraneboxes or display boxes). > Especially since I narrow my collection pieces to 20-60g complete > individuals - many of which resemble each other, although I do pride myself > in recognizing all of them by sight. > > However, just recently during an inventory, I noticed that my cataloged > weights did not jive with a specimen, and discovered that a Pultusk and Oum > Dreyga were accidentally switched (most probably from collecting them after > an outreach event exhibit). D'oh! > > I try to keep meticulous records of my pieces, but oversights and accidents > can occur. I am considering adopting a numbering strategy, but have > concerns as well about what type of paint or pigment to use. Or perhaps if > a small affixed numbered label would be a better solution - but then what > type of adhesive should be employed? > > So are there any collectors on the list that do number or label their > specimen? And if so, what strategy do they employ? > > gary > > On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:48 AM, martin goff wrote: > >> Hi Ted, >> >> >> Funnily enough, i asked Dr. David Green exactly the same question. The >> labels on the Manchester specimens were particularly small and neat. I >> am at the point with my collection where i feel the need to number the >> individual specimens. I have smaller specimens labelled on the boxes >> themselves but the individual stones of a similar size can look very >> much alike and i am considering numbering them on the specimen itself. >> Then if by whatever means they were mixed up or the display cabinet >> were knocked then i would be able to match them up again. >> >> The labels were printed using carbon ink on archival acid free paper >> in very small type (i think he said size 3 or 4) then attached using >> archival glue. I didn't ask any further on the exact type of glue >> apart from that he mentioned that it was totally reversible. Even if >> it is reversible i worry that the glue would permeate the specimen >> somehow? >> >> I am still very much in 2 minds about this but the thought of having >> my collection mixed up fills me with dread! >> >> What are peoples thoughts on labelling specimens? >> >> Cheers >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> From: ted brattstrom >>> To: Meteorite List >>> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:18:52 -0800 (PST) >>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Manchester Museum (UK) Visit, Article and >>> Images >>> Very nice presentation... >>> >>> >>> And it sparked a question: >>> >>> Museums / collectors "glue" labels onto their rocks (or used to) - What >>> glue is used? and what are the ramifications for alteration to the rock. >>> (thinking back to the discussion of putties for holding meteorites a week >>> or so ago.) >>> >>> Likewise, for the paint and ink method... a> what was traditionally use
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
>>I keep the majority of my collection inside a wood mineral cabinet that has many shallow drawers, and each drawer has a series of moveable compartments which I have lined with batting similar to what you see in Riker boxes. Each drawer has it's own rechargeable dessicant cartridge inside the humidity is ideally kept down to about 30-35%, which is about half of my usual Florida ambient humidity<< Any chance that you have photographs showing the set up you mentioned in this post? GeoZay __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi GeoZay and List, Here is a semi-recent photo showing the cabinet and some of the jars and rikers. Some of these specimens have been sold/traded and some have been moved into the cabinet shown. It is not the biggest cabinet, but with careful use of space, I have managed to cram a lot into it. Larger cabinets get very very expensive. I'd love a bigger one, but I need to get lucky and find some old relic at a thrift store or rummage sale. http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/Meteorites/The%20Collection/met-wall-1.jpg Here is one of the small drawers with micros - http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/Meteorites/Gallery/micro-drawer.jpg Here is a photo showing some of micromounts and crumb collections in labelled glass vials. This portion of my collection has grown recently and has outgrown this wall rack. http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/bottles.jpg Best regards, MikeG On 2/26/10, geo...@aol.com wrote: > >>>I keep the majority of my collection inside a wood mineral cabinet > that has many shallow drawers, and each drawer has a series of > moveable compartments which I have lined with batting similar to what > you see in Riker boxes. Each drawer has it's own rechargeable > dessicant cartridge inside the humidity is ideally kept down to about > 30-35%, which is about half of my usual Florida ambient humidity<< > Any chance that you have photographs showing the set up you mentioned in > this post? > GeoZay > > __ > 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 > -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites http://www.galactic-stone.com http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Thanks! Nice display and probably a good conversation room. GeoZay __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Mike, I'm very familiar with that wooden case that you use for meteorites. It's in fact a machinist's tool box. They are also made of metal and are high quality. Cheers, Jim K From: meteoritem...@gmail.com To: geo...@aol.com CC: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: 2/26/2010 2:13:23 P.M. Central Standard Time Subj: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hi GeoZay and List, Here is a semi-recent photo showing the cabinet and some of the jars and rikers. Some of these specimens have been sold/traded and some have been moved into the cabinet shown. It is not the biggest cabinet, but with careful use of space, I have managed to cram a lot into it. Larger cabinets get very very expensive. I'd love a bigger one, but I need to get lucky and find some old relic at a thrift store or rummage sale. http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/Meteorites/The%20Collection/met-wall-1.jpg Here is one of the small drawers with micros - http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/Meteorites/Gallery/micro-drawer.jpg Here is a photo showing some of micromounts and crumb collections in labelled glass vials. This portion of my collection has grown recently and has outgrown this wall rack. http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/bottles.jpg Best regards, MikeG On 2/26/10, geo...@aol.com wrote: > >>>I keep the majority of my collection inside a wood mineral cabinet > that has many shallow drawers, and each drawer has a series of > moveable compartments which I have lined with batting similar to what > you see in Riker boxes. Each drawer has it's own rechargeable > dessicant cartridge inside the humidity is ideally kept down to about > 30-35%, which is about half of my usual Florida ambient humidity<< > Any chance that you have photographs showing the set up you mentioned in > this post? > GeoZay > > __ > 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 > -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites http://www.galactic-stone.com http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Jim, Yup, you nailed it. They make 3 sizes that I am aware of - one smaller than mine, my size and a larger one. It makes a good mineral/meteorite cabinet. I fashioned some wooden dividers for the larger drawers and to works great. :) Best regards, MikeG On 2/26/10, meteorite...@comcast.net wrote: > > > Mike, I'm very familiar with that wooden case that you use for meteorites. > It's in fact a machinist's tool box. They are also made of metal and are > high quality. > > Cheers, > Jim K > > > > > From: meteoritem...@gmail.com > To: geo...@aol.com > CC: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Sent: 2/26/2010 2:13:23 P.M. Central Standard Time > Subj: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > Hi GeoZay and List, > > Here is a semi-recent photo showing the cabinet and some of the jars > and rikers. Some of these specimens have been sold/traded and some > have been moved into the cabinet shown. It is not the biggest > cabinet, but with careful use of space, I have managed to cram a lot > into it. Larger cabinets get very very expensive. I'd love a bigger > one, but I need to get lucky and find some old relic at a thrift store > or rummage sale. > > http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/Meteorites/The%20Collection/met-wall-1.jpg > > Here is one of the small drawers with micros - > > http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/Meteorites/Gallery/micro-drawer.jpg > > Here is a photo showing some of micromounts and crumb collections in > labelled glass vials. This portion of my collection has grown > recently and has outgrown this wall rack. > > http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj24/Meteoritethrower/bottles.jpg > > Best regards, > > MikeG > > > On 2/26/10, geo...@aol.com wrote: >> >>>>I keep the majority of my collection inside a wood mineral cabinet >> that has many shallow drawers, and each drawer has a series of >> moveable compartments which I have lined with batting similar to what >> you see in Riker boxes. Each drawer has it's own rechargeable >> dessicant cartridge inside the humidity is ideally kept down to about >> 30-35%, which is about half of my usual Florida ambient humidity<< >> Any chance that you have photographs showing the set up you mentioned in >> this post? >> GeoZay >> >> __ >> 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 >> > > > -- > > Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites > http://www.galactic-stone.com > http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone > > __ > 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 > -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites http://www.galactic-stone.com http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Gary/All, My whole stones tend to be in the 20 to 100g range and i dread bumping the display cabinet and having a melange of Zag, Chergach, Oum Dreyga, Gau Guenie etc. etc. rolling around the bottom. Like i said before the specimens in membrane/riker/other type box are all fine, all sealed with label etc. The larger irons and slices also distinct and easily identifiable if separated from their display labels. Its just the similar sized whole stones that i worry about. I have photos of specimens from every angle and also would personally be able to recognise most of them (i hope!) but i worry that this isnt foolproof enough! Does anyone here directly label their whole stone specimens? Cheers Martin On 26 February 2010 19:29, Galactic Stone & Ironworks wrote: > Hi Gary, Martin, and List, > > Just a thought about storage and labelling - > > I keep the majority of my collection inside a wood mineral cabinet > that has many shallow drawers, and each drawer has a series of > moveable compartments which I have lined with batting similar to what > you see in Riker boxes. Each drawer has it's own rechargeable > dessicant cartridge inside the humidity is ideally kept down to about > 30-35%, which is about half of my usual Florida ambient humidity. The > smaller micro specimens are kept in labelled gemjars in a seperate > drawer. Larger pieces have a wood compartment and I keep the original > dealer label and my own label inside the compartment and under the > batting. I do not put a label on the specimen itself. I keep large > amounts of crumbs, fragments and part slices in glass apothecary jars > or small glass vials. I also use Riker boxes, gemjars, and membrane > boxes. All of which fit neatly into drawers in the wood cabinet. > Larger specimens are kept on easels or magnetic stands inside clear > acrylic "ballqubes" to keep the dust. I use Roman's metal labels and > custom make lookalike labels for the falls/finds he doesn't have > labels for. Each individual gem jar, membrane box and glass vials are > labelled with an adhesive label, but not the specimens themselves. > Specimens in Riker boxes have the original dealer label under the > batting and one of Romans labels facing outwards through the glass. > > I highly recommend a wooden collection cabinet for main storage - it > looks good, it's permanent, it's sturdy, and it keeps specimens away > from casual eyes/hands, but they are at ready access if you need them. > > Best regards, > > MikeG > > > On 2/26/10, Gary Fujihara wrote: >> Aloha Martin, Ted, list, >> >> I have a modest collection of fresh fall individuals that i have been >> keeping in labeled ziploc bags. Which is fine when stored away in my >> collection vault. This strategy has worked for me while my collection was >> under 50 locations. But now that it has grown considerably, and since I now >> loan them to my institute for exhibits and displays, there is the >> opportunity for, and risk of having them mixed up and mislabeled (slices are >> not a problem since they remain in labeled membraneboxes or display boxes). >> Especially since I narrow my collection pieces to 20-60g complete >> individuals - many of which resemble each other, although I do pride myself >> in recognizing all of them by sight. >> >> However, just recently during an inventory, I noticed that my cataloged >> weights did not jive with a specimen, and discovered that a Pultusk and Oum >> Dreyga were accidentally switched (most probably from collecting them after >> an outreach event exhibit). D'oh! >> >> I try to keep meticulous records of my pieces, but oversights and accidents >> can occur. I am considering adopting a numbering strategy, but have >> concerns as well about what type of paint or pigment to use. Or perhaps if >> a small affixed numbered label would be a better solution - but then what >> type of adhesive should be employed? >> >> So are there any collectors on the list that do number or label their >> specimen? And if so, what strategy do they employ? >> >> gary >> >> On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:48 AM, martin goff wrote: >> >>> Hi Ted, >>> >>> >>> Funnily enough, i asked Dr. David Green exactly the same question. The >>> labels on the Manchester specimens were particularly small and neat. I >>> am at the point with my collection where i feel the need to number the >>> individual specimens. I have smaller specimens labelled on the boxes >>> themselves but the individual stones of a similar size can look very >>> much alike and i am considering numbering them on the specimen itself. >>> Then if by whatever means they were mixed up or the display cabinet >>> were knocked then i would be able to match them up again. >>> >>> The labels were printed using carbon ink on archival acid free paper >>> in very small type (i think he said size 3 or 4) then attached using >>> archival glue. I didn't ask any further on the exact type of glue >>> apart from that he mentioned that it was totally reversible. Eve
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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
I have said this before and I am saying it again! The meteorite comunnity needs to take some lessons from the rare coin dealers and start sellling specimens in packages with standards. Hermatically sealed specimens of standard size and provanance, sealed in thin collector sized cases. To create an investor market we need to sell 1 cm square slices 4mm thick in sealed dessicated containers that are tamper proof and graded like collector coins. this would be a lot better than the current method of selling irregular chunks sent in a baggy with a business card. by establishing a standard of grading for collector meteorites we will create a larger market of collector specimins with a higher value which will allow them to be traded like gold or silver on the commodities market. and dramitically increase the vALUE OF METEORITES FOR EVERYONE ON THE LIST. I may have problems trying to figure out if a meteorite is a 4 or a 5 but if its in a dime sized container graded and authenticated by the imca. it would be a win win situation cheers Steve Dunklee --- On Sat, 2/27/10, martin goff wrote: > From: martin goff > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Date: Saturday, February 27, 2010, 8:50 AM > 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Steve, I have to say that I disagree in relation to 'slabbing' meteorites as is done in coin market. For me as a collector I collect for the variety and difference in specimens and would definitely not want a display cabinet filled with identical sized specimens lined up like dominoes. That would hold no interest for me whatsoever. I don't primarily collect for investment, I obviously know the value of specimens but for me its the science and history and aesthetics of individual specimens that attract me. In all honesty if meteorites were traded like silver or gold it would put me off the hobby. Each to their own though and your opinion is appreciated Cheers Martin Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange -Original Message- From: Steve Dunklee Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:28:17 To: ; martin goff Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens I have said this before and I am saying it again! The meteorite comunnity needs to take some lessons from the rare coin dealers and start sellling specimens in packages with standards. Hermatically sealed specimens of standard size and provanance, sealed in thin collector sized cases. To create an investor market we need to sell 1 cm square slices 4mm thick in sealed dessicated containers that are tamper proof and graded like collector coins. this would be a lot better than the current method of selling irregular chunks sent in a baggy with a business card. by establishing a standard of grading for collector meteorites we will create a larger market of collector specimins with a higher value which will allow them to be traded like gold or silver on the commodities market. and dramitically increase the vALUE OF METEORITES FOR EVERYONE ON THE LIST. I may have problems trying to figure out if a meteorite is a 4 or a 5 but if its in a dime sized container graded and authenticated by the imca. it would be a win win situation cheers Steve Dunklee --- On Sat, 2/27/10, martin goff wrote: > From: martin goff > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Date: Saturday, February 27, 2010, 8:50 AM > 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 >
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Michael, Steve and group, I have to agree with Michael here. The investment value of a specimen is secondary (or tertiary) to my other reasons for collecting. As for the IMCA - any statement of authenticity would only be worth the paper it's on. Certificates of authenticity have been discussed in the past and the general consensus is that they are not worth the paper they are printed on. (they are mostly a gimmick) As for actual "verification" of a sample, that verification is changed every time the specimen changes hands, especially for rare falls. The chain of provenance is key here. Best regards and happy huntings, MikeG On 2/27/10, msgmeteori...@googlemail.com wrote: > Hi Steve, > > I have to say that I disagree in relation to 'slabbing' meteorites as is > done in coin market. For me as a collector I collect for the variety and > difference in specimens and would definitely not want a display cabinet > filled with identical sized specimens lined up like dominoes. That would > hold no interest for me whatsoever. I don't primarily collect for > investment, I obviously know the value of specimens but for me its the > science and history and aesthetics of individual specimens that attract me. > In all honesty if meteorites were traded like silver or gold it would put me > off the hobby. Each to their own though and your opinion is appreciated > > Cheers > > Martin > Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange > > -Original Message- > From: Steve Dunklee > Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:28:17 > To: ; martin > goff > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > I have said this before and I am saying it again! The meteorite comunnity > needs to take some lessons from the rare coin dealers and start sellling > specimens in packages with standards. Hermatically sealed specimens of > standard size and provanance, sealed in thin collector sized cases. To > create an investor market we need to sell 1 cm square slices 4mm thick in > sealed dessicated containers that are tamper proof and graded like collector > coins. this would be a lot better than the current method of selling > irregular chunks sent in a baggy with a business card. by establishing a > standard of grading for collector meteorites we will create a larger market > of collector specimins with a higher value which will allow them to be > traded like gold or silver on the commodities market. and dramitically > increase the vALUE OF METEORITES FOR EVERYONE ON THE LIST. I may have > problems trying to figure out if a meteorite is a 4 or a 5 but if its in a > dime sized container > graded and authenticated by the imca. it would be a win win situation > cheers > Steve Dunklee > > --- On Sat, 2/27/10, martin goff wrote: > >> From: martin goff >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens >> To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >> Date: Saturday, February 27, 2010, 8:50 AM >> 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
>>I have said this before and I am saying it again! The meteorite comunnity needs to take some lessons from the rare coin dealers and start sellling specimens in packages with standards. Hermatically sealed specimens of standard size and provanance, sealed in thin collector sized cases. To create an investor market we need to sell 1 cm square slices 4mm thick in sealed dessicated containers that are tamper proof and graded like collector coins. this would be a lot better than the current method of selling irregular chunks sent in a baggy with a business card. by establishing a standard of grading for collector meteorites we will create a larger market of collector specimins with a higher value which will allow them to be traded like gold or silver on the commodities market. and dramitically increase the vALUE OF METEORITES FOR EVERYONE ON THE LIST. I may have problems trying to figure out if a meteorite is a 4 or a 5 but if its in a dime sized container graded and authenticated by the imca. it would be a win win situation>> You gotta be kidding? I for one wouldn't want small pieces like you describe. If the meteorite community did some how agree to such a hair brain idea, I'd still seek out the sizes I would want and ignore the 1 cm square pieces. I also bet there would be enuf folks out there that would do the same. I can just see now people cutting up their favorite Sikhote-alin individuals into little chunks, so they can be fitted into their little hermatically sealed containers. As for gold and silver, well I've done some gold prospecting and sold a fair amount of gold on ebay in the years past. One thing I became keenly aware of, you can sell natural gold nuggets for a higher price than the same weight of gold bullion. Also the gold nuggets is not as pure as the bullion. Over time, I've converted my gold bullion into natural gold nuggets, knowing that some day I can sell the same amount of gold for a higher price, just because they are now in the form of natural nuggets. When it comes to meteorites, if such a scheme was put into motion, I think you'll find those that didn't went along with it will have a more successful time. GeoZay __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello Steve, My opinion is pretty much the opposite from yours. standard size and provenance Province would be okay, but I would not collect meteorites if they came in standard sizes. I like variety To create an investor market I don't really want investors to get involved in the meteorite market. If investors were to come in droves, I'm leaving. The prices would skyrocket and there would be no point in my collecting something I could not afford. we need to sell 1 cm square slices 4mm thick Again, I would leave. I don't want 1 cm square slices. graded like collector coins "collector" coins aren't graded. "investment" coins are. The field of stamp collecting recently started "grading" stamps. That, and rampant dealer dishonesty, have turned me away from stamp collecting, which I have done since I was a kid. I am not exaggerating when I say a formally .75 stamp, once "graded" now has an asking price of 75.00. Why, because Professional Stamp Experts (what a dumb sounding name) says is has a certain grade. "Grading" would be worse then having a flood of investors inter the market. To me grading is for people who don't want to take the time to actually learn something about meteorites (e.g., investors - gh :-) larger market of collector specimins with a higher value Higher value translates into higher prices. Personally, I don't really want that. I would be very pleased if the asking prices for meteorites took a nose dive. THAT might generate more collectors and less investors. vALUE OF METEORITES FOR EVERYONE Again, you mean higher prices. authenticated by the imca. Steve, aren't you being presumptious? The IMCA does not authenticate meteorites, and I think it pretty safe to say it never will. it would be a win win situation Everyone will lose. Except of course, the "investors" who would make some money then pull out. Not to be argumentative. Just my opinions. -Walter Branch __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
ebate is in my eyes so hysterical. Instead to tell everywhere fairy tales, about meteorite people getting billionaires and poor science and crying for laws, those guys and gals should just care for getting the funds for a single mid-sized research project - like it is common use in EACH and EVERY branch of institutional science too - and they simply could buy off all meteorites of da World completely and at will and at peanuts compared to that, what their ancestors had to pay. Of course, if some of the top twenty World collections, have an annual budget for meteorite purchases of 1000$ to 10,000$ only - then they might feel like the prohibition-yellers But it's not our fault, if they have such funds lower than the village museum of Poopaloosa - they have to care for that, we aren't entitled to do that or to be heard. So the collectors profit to an extreme degree from the circumstance, that the meteorite "market" is all in all so - and that word has also a positive meaning - so "amateurish". (lat. "amare" means "to love"). If it wouldn't be like that - meteorite collecting would be an activity only for very wealthy people (and the countries would have then really to think about legal restrictions). Therefore I can't see a win-win-situation, if the "market" would be more professionalized (respectively it would be a win-win only for the dealers and hunters). Cheers! Martin -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von msgmeteori...@googlemail.com Gesendet: Samstag, 27. Februar 2010 14:37 An: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hi Steve, I have to say that I disagree in relation to 'slabbing' meteorites as is done in coin market. For me as a collector I collect for the variety and difference in specimens and would definitely not want a display cabinet filled with identical sized specimens lined up like dominoes. That would hold no interest for me whatsoever. I don't primarily collect for investment, I obviously know the value of specimens but for me its the science and history and aesthetics of individual specimens that attract me. In all honesty if meteorites were traded like silver or gold it would put me off the hobby. Each to their own though and your opinion is appreciated Cheers Martin Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange -Original Message- From: Steve Dunklee Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:28:17 To: ; martin goff Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens I have said this before and I am saying it again! The meteorite comunnity needs to take some lessons from the rare coin dealers and start sellling specimens in packages with standards. Hermatically sealed specimens of standard size and provanance, sealed in thin collector sized cases. To create an investor market we need to sell 1 cm square slices 4mm thick in sealed dessicated containers that are tamper proof and graded like collector coins. this would be a lot better than the current method of selling irregular chunks sent in a baggy with a business card. by establishing a standard of grading for collector meteorites we will create a larger market of collector specimins with a higher value which will allow them to be traded like gold or silver on the commodities market. and dramitically increase the vALUE OF METEORITES FOR EVERYONE ON THE LIST. I may have problems trying to figure out if a meteorite is a 4 or a 5 but if its in a dime sized container graded and authenticated by the imca. it would be a win win situation cheers Steve Dunklee --- On Sat, 2/27/10, martin goff wrote: > From: martin goff > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Date: Saturday, February 27, 2010, 8:50 AM > 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 s
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 curatingshould 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 >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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
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: To: "martin goff" ; 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 curatingshould 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 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.
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Greetings list, It seems to me that even if we paint numbers on our specimens, their identification still relies on whether or not our documentation accompanies them. A number #47.02A doesn't mean anything to future generations unless there is a catalog to indicate what it means. And if all of this is going to rely on a paper/digital catalog, then why bother painting numbers on them at all? I think a catalog with detailed photos can do the job just as well without harming the aesthetics of the piece. I imagine a future collector trying to identify an unlabeled 5.5g meteorite from a known collection. They look in the paper/digital catalog, sorted by weight, and find the photos of any 5.5g pieces. Then they can quickly identify the specimen without having a number painted on 25% of the surface. Although, this makes me wonder if maybe specimens should still have a "mark" to indicate whose collection/catalog they belonged to. This mark could be smaller and less obtrusive than a full ID number would be. Maybe something like the owner's initials or IMCA number. I guess what I'm saying is that digital cameras make documenting our collections easier than ever before - so let's take advantage of this! Documenting a collection with detailed photos is fun, too. --Noah - Original Message - From: "Ed Deckert" To: ; "martin goff" ; Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 1:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens 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: To: "martin goff" ; 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 curatingshould 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 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, ov
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Ed, Count and list, I'd like to second the count's and Ed'd considerations regarding numbering your specimens. Of course most private collectors recognize their individual meteorites. Mix ups are not so much a problem during one's lifetime. At least not unless we don't start to juggle with a couple of hundred specimens which we lend to exhibitions, for research, or have our kid's kindegarden pals sort through them. However, as Dave Gheesling recently has pointed out in his excellent article on Temporary Custodians, sooner or later every collection will be broken up, separated or turned over to the following generation. If no written track on the individual specimens has been kept, the knowledge on these treasures will perish with the previous owner. Dealer and museum curators can tell you stories of collections offered by heirs, where all the information that was passed with a specimen, if any at all, was a name on a crumpled paper card. When pieces are not individually packed, which is also quite common, no safe attribution of specimen cards and meteorites can be untertaken at all. Photos are one way to assign identity to a specimen, but unless you do not have the patience of a Zen monk and you are faced with a collection that has 20 small Gaos, Pultusks, Wilunas and Zags in it, you soon discover the limits of this approach. I very much encourage everyone to undertake the little effort. All that it takes to preserve the identity of a specimen is a printed or digital inventory list, which contains some sort of distinct, non-ambigous assignment of a specimen and the information associated. The pendant should be applied directly on the specimen itself, it's the safest way. Painted numbers in my experience have prooven superior, but other means of course are appropriate too. Safely storing, better publishing or distributing your collection catalogs of course is crucial to preserve that information. There are many and perhaps better examples how one may label and number his specimens, anyway, to get a picture this may be sufficient: http://www.meteorite-recon.com/en/Meteoritensammlung.htm cheers Svend www.meteorite-recon.com - Original Message - From: "Ed Deckert" To: ; "martin goff" ; Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 7:39 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > 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: > To: "martin goff" ; > > 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 >> curatingshould 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---
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello All, When we decided that we wanted to start numbering our specimens a few years ago, we had a few dilemmas to work out. First-off, how should we apply the numbers? Some of the museum numbers that we'd seen seemed to have a layer of underlying paint with numbers painted over, resulting in a rather large patch of paint, especially on a stone that might weigh a mere gram or so. As such, we decided to write collection numbers directly on the meteorite, so as to cover as little of the meteorite's surface as possible. But - what to use? We pondered the question for a few weeks, and then had an idea - every time we've been to the local Page Museum at the La Brea Tar Pits (repetitive, right?), we've seen every single bone meticulously numbered and cataloged, with fine white numbers 'painted' on each one. So Peter went and asked them; what they use there is what we use now: a fountain pen with white Pelikan ink. http://www.pelikan.com I wasn't able to find the same ink on their website - or any white ink in general, but I do know that they produce it and that it is supplied to an art-supplies store near our house. I think this might be the same ink: http://www.duall.com/store/product/113116.113116/pelikan-drawing-ink-10ml-18-white.html At any rate, it dries quickly and tends to be pretty hard to remove, so it's good for marking specimens. I don't know much about its chemical composition, but we haven't seen any signs of oxidation on or near ink on marked specimens, so I assume that it's not doing much harm. A cheap fountain pen will run you up ten dollars at most (you can check out the Pelikan site for pricier models if you wish), and the ink is a few dollars a bottle. Reasonable, effective. Regards, Jason On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:12 PM, i...@niger-meteorite-recon.de wrote: > Ed, Count and list, > > I'd like to second the count's and Ed'd considerations regarding numbering > your > specimens. Of course most private collectors recognize their individual > meteorites. Mix ups are not so much a problem during one's lifetime. At least > not unless we don't start to juggle with a couple of hundred specimens which > we > lend to exhibitions, for research, or have our kid's kindegarden pals sort > through them. > > However, as Dave Gheesling recently has pointed out in his excellent article > on > Temporary Custodians, sooner or later every collection will be broken up, > separated or turned over to the following generation. If no written track on > the > individual specimens has been kept, the knowledge on these treasures will > perish > with the previous owner. > > Dealer and museum curators can tell you stories of collections offered by > heirs, > where all the information that was passed with a specimen, if any at all, was > a > name on a crumpled paper card. When pieces are not individually packed, which > is > also quite common, no safe attribution of specimen cards and meteorites can be > untertaken at all. > > Photos are one way to assign identity to a specimen, but unless you do not > have > the patience of a Zen monk and you are faced with a collection that has 20 > small > Gaos, Pultusks, Wilunas and Zags in it, you soon discover the limits of this > approach. > > I very much encourage everyone to undertake the little effort. All that it > takes > to preserve the identity of a specimen is a printed or digital inventory list, > which contains some sort of distinct, non-ambigous assignment of a specimen > and > the information associated. The pendant should be applied directly on the > specimen itself, it's the safest way. Painted numbers in my experience have > prooven superior, but other means of course are appropriate too. Safely > storing, > better publishing or distributing your collection catalogs of course is > crucial > to preserve that information. > > There are many and perhaps better examples how one may label and number his > specimens, anyway, to get a picture this may be sufficient: > http://www.meteorite-recon.com/en/Meteoritensammlung.htm > > cheers > Svend > > www.meteorite-recon.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Ed Deckert" > To: ; "martin goff" ; > > Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 7:39 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > >> 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, >> th
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hey Jason and List, Thanks for that very informative cataloging solution. I have also been pondering how to mark meteorites, fossils and artifacts without having to use the white matt paint with black ink overtop. I always thought this old way was rather ugly and distracting from specimens. Best regards, Greg Greg Hupe The Hupe Collection NaturesVault (eBay) gmh...@htn.net www.LunarRock.com IMCA 3163 Click here for my current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault - Original Message - From: "Jason Utas" To: ; "Meteorite-list" Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hello All, When we decided that we wanted to start numbering our specimens a few years ago, we had a few dilemmas to work out. First-off, how should we apply the numbers? Some of the museum numbers that we'd seen seemed to have a layer of underlying paint with numbers painted over, resulting in a rather large patch of paint, especially on a stone that might weigh a mere gram or so. As such, we decided to write collection numbers directly on the meteorite, so as to cover as little of the meteorite's surface as possible. But - what to use? We pondered the question for a few weeks, and then had an idea - every time we've been to the local Page Museum at the La Brea Tar Pits (repetitive, right?), we've seen every single bone meticulously numbered and cataloged, with fine white numbers 'painted' on each one. So Peter went and asked them; what they use there is what we use now: a fountain pen with white Pelikan ink. http://www.pelikan.com I wasn't able to find the same ink on their website - or any white ink in general, but I do know that they produce it and that it is supplied to an art-supplies store near our house. I think this might be the same ink: http://www.duall.com/store/product/113116.113116/pelikan-drawing-ink-10ml-18-white.html At any rate, it dries quickly and tends to be pretty hard to remove, so it's good for marking specimens. I don't know much about its chemical composition, but we haven't seen any signs of oxidation on or near ink on marked specimens, so I assume that it's not doing much harm. A cheap fountain pen will run you up ten dollars at most (you can check out the Pelikan site for pricier models if you wish), and the ink is a few dollars a bottle. Reasonable, effective. Regards, Jason On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:12 PM, i...@niger-meteorite-recon.de wrote: Ed, Count and list, I'd like to second the count's and Ed'd considerations regarding numbering your specimens. Of course most private collectors recognize their individual meteorites. Mix ups are not so much a problem during one's lifetime. At least not unless we don't start to juggle with a couple of hundred specimens which we lend to exhibitions, for research, or have our kid's kindegarden pals sort through them. However, as Dave Gheesling recently has pointed out in his excellent article on Temporary Custodians, sooner or later every collection will be broken up, separated or turned over to the following generation. If no written track on the individual specimens has been kept, the knowledge on these treasures will perish with the previous owner. Dealer and museum curators can tell you stories of collections offered by heirs, where all the information that was passed with a specimen, if any at all, was a name on a crumpled paper card. When pieces are not individually packed, which is also quite common, no safe attribution of specimen cards and meteorites can be untertaken at all. Photos are one way to assign identity to a specimen, but unless you do not have the patience of a Zen monk and you are faced with a collection that has 20 small Gaos, Pultusks, Wilunas and Zags in it, you soon discover the limits of this approach. I very much encourage everyone to undertake the little effort. All that it takes to preserve the identity of a specimen is a printed or digital inventory list, which contains some sort of distinct, non-ambigous assignment of a specimen and the information associated. The pendant should be applied directly on the specimen itself, it's the safest way. Painted numbers in my experience have prooven superior, but other means of course are appropriate too. Safely storing, better publishing or distributing your collection catalogs of course is crucial to preserve that information. There are many and perhaps better examples how one may label and number his specimens, anyway, to get a picture this may be sufficient: http://www.meteorite-recon.com/en/Meteoritensammlung.htm cheers Svend www.meteorite-recon.com - Original Message - From: "Ed Deckert" To: ; "martin goff" ; Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 7:39 PM Subject: Re: [mete
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Jason, Very good point. Nothing should ever be done to these little treasures that is not reversible. In other words it should be done with something that will come off later should the need ever arise. Carl . -- Carl or Debbie Esparza Meteoritemax Jason Utas wrote: > Hello All, > When we decided that we wanted to start numbering our specimens a few > years ago, we had a few dilemmas to work out. First-off, how should > we apply the numbers? Some of the museum numbers that we'd seen > seemed to have a layer of underlying paint with numbers painted over, > resulting in a rather large patch of paint, especially on a stone that > might weigh a mere gram or so. As such, we decided to write > collection numbers directly on the meteorite, so as to cover as little > of the meteorite's surface as possible. > But - what to use? We pondered the question for a few weeks, and then > had an idea - every time we've been to the local Page Museum at the > La Brea Tar Pits (repetitive, right?), we've seen every single bone > meticulously numbered and cataloged, with fine white numbers 'painted' > on each one. So Peter went and asked them; what they use there is > what we use now: a fountain pen with white Pelikan ink. > > http://www.pelikan.com > > I wasn't able to find the same ink on their website - or any white ink > in general, but I do know that they produce it and that it is supplied > to an art-supplies store near our house. > I think this might be the same ink: > > http://www.duall.com/store/product/113116.113116/pelikan-drawing-ink-10ml-18-white.html > > At any rate, it dries quickly and tends to be pretty hard to remove, > so it's good for marking specimens. I don't know much about its > chemical composition, but we haven't seen any signs of oxidation on or > near ink on marked specimens, so I assume that it's not doing much > harm. A cheap fountain pen will run you up ten dollars at most (you > can check out the Pelikan site for pricier models if you wish), and > the ink is a few dollars a bottle. > Reasonable, effective. > Regards, > Jason > > > > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:12 PM, i...@niger-meteorite-recon.de > wrote: > > Ed, Count and list, > > > > I'd like to second the count's and Ed'd considerations regarding numbering > > your > > specimens. Of course most private collectors recognize their individual > > meteorites. Mix ups are not so much a problem during one's lifetime. At > > least > > not unless we don't start to juggle with a couple of hundred specimens > > which we > > lend to exhibitions, for research, or have our kid's kindegarden pals sort > > through them. > > > > However, as Dave Gheesling recently has pointed out in his excellent > > article on > > Temporary Custodians, sooner or later every collection will be broken up, > > separated or turned over to the following generation. If no written track > > on the > > individual specimens has been kept, the knowledge on these treasures will > > perish > > with the previous owner. > > > > Dealer and museum curators can tell you stories of collections offered by > > heirs, > > where all the information that was passed with a specimen, if any at all, > > was a > > name on a crumpled paper card. When pieces are not individually packed, > > which is > > also quite common, no safe attribution of specimen cards and meteorites can > > be > > untertaken at all. > > > > Photos are one way to assign identity to a specimen, but unless you do not > > have > > the patience of a Zen monk and you are faced with a collection that has 20 > > small > > Gaos, Pultusks, Wilunas and Zags in it, you soon discover the limits of this > > approach. > > > > I very much encourage everyone to undertake the little effort. All that it > > takes > > to preserve the identity of a specimen is a printed or digital inventory > > list, > > which contains some sort of distinct, non-ambigous assignment of a specimen > > and > > the information associated. The pendant should be applied directly on the > > specimen itself, it's the safest way. Painted numbers in my experience have > > prooven superior, but other means of course are appropriate too. Safely > > storing, > > better publishing or distributing your collection catalogs of course is > > crucial > > to preserve that information. > > > > There are many and perhaps better examples how one may label and number his > > specimens, anyway, to get a picture this ma
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Ed, Svend, Jason, all, Very good points indeed and interesting reading. Theres a lot to chew over there but looks like i may be taking the plunge and starting the process at some point. Thanks very much for all your considered and informative replies Regards 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello, I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to change it? Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. Just my opinion, Best, Arnaud The Tricottet Collection of Natural History Specimens (Minerals, Fossils & Meteorites) www.thetricottetcollection.com Facebook: The Tricottet Collection Twitter: TricottetColl > Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:52:34 + > From: msgmeteori...@googlemail.com > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > Hi Ed, Svend, Jason, all, > > Very good points indeed and interesting reading. Theres a lot to chew > over there but looks like i may be taking the plunge and starting the > process at some point. > > Thanks very much for all your considered and informative replies > > Regards > > 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 _ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/ __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello Arnaud, You wrote, "I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless graffiti -..." I should clarify my comments on labeling specimens of meteorites, fossils or artifacts. At this point, I do not intend to 'number' each of my items with my own collection number. I was mainly referring to find locations, dates, etc. on larger fossils, artifacts and meteorites I find. I would never think of painting (tagging/painting graffiti) fresh meteorites, or delicate fossils or artifacts. On the other hand, most of these items don't have a handy hole to string a thread with paper ID card, which I actually like that old school look! Best regards, Greg Greg Hupe The Hupe Collection NaturesVault (eBay) gmh...@htn.net www.LunarRock.com IMCA 3163 Click here for my current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault - Original Message - From: "The Tricottet Collection" To: "MeteoriteList" Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 4:51 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hello, I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to change it? Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. Just my opinion, Best, Arnaud The Tricottet Collection of Natural History Specimens (Minerals, Fossils & Meteorites) www.thetricottetcollection.com Facebook: The Tricottet Collection Twitter: TricottetColl Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:52:34 + From: msgmeteori...@googlemail.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hi Ed, Svend, Jason, all, Very good points indeed and interesting reading. Theres a lot to chew over there but looks like i may be taking the plunge and starting the process at some point. Thanks very much for all your considered and informative replies Regards 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 _ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/ __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello Arnaud, All, I agree with you - to an extent. While we have inked many of our specimens, we have never sold a single meteorite (and the few we've traded were never marked). With so many collectors buying, selling, and trading collection pieces, I can easily visualize the numbering situation getting far out of control. But...an issue still remains. I can easily remember the 174 gram stone that was on ebay no more than a few months back - that was from a witnessed fall in Northwest Africa, but that didn't have a name because the buyer (and his supplier - I asked) had forgotten its name. If the collector who had originally purchased said meteorite had numbered it and kept his records straight, that individual wouldn't have lost its identity. It is now a "fresh unclassified NWA stone." At least, that's what it sold as on ebay So...there's something of a dilemma. Yes, stones shouldn't me overmarked. But we have the opportunity to ensure that stones will not be misnamed or misplaced. And that's where the judgement call must happen; people shouldn't inherently mark their meteorites with collection numbers, because, well, it can't be undone. But at the same time, people know how well they keep track of things; if they know that they're that disorganized, perhaps they should go and draw on their meteorites. If it's the only way they can be sure of keeping track of their collection with 110% certainty, I would say that they should go ahead and do it. I've seen more than one meteorite go miscataloged and lose its identity; it was enough for me to say that the person who allowed it to happen was grossly negligent, and didn't have the *right* to curate such scientifically important items. After all, when all we are is a temporary steward to a rock that's held its identity for more than four and a half billion years, who are we to misplace its label and effectively erase its terrestrial history. Hence my two-mindedness. I think that, yes, if everyone numbers their meteorites, there will be problems - unless, of course, there is a universal system off of which numbers can be derived. But that's not going to happen. And at the same time, I think that our current system of doing things is inadequate; meteorites are being honestly misnamed and misplaced in such a way that they lose their identities. That simply shouldn't happen. Ever. We have brains that are more than capable of ensuring that it doesn't happen, so the fact that it does only goes to show that keeping such things straight simply isn't a priority. So...I would advocate having meteorites with multiple numbers on them. I'd rather have a meteorite with a known identity - with three numbers on it - than a meteorite with no identity and no numbers on it. Hell, I'd rather have ten meteorites with five numbers on them than a thirty meteorites without names. Or a hundred. After all, they'd be completely worthless. Just my opinion. Jason On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 1:51 AM, The Tricottet Collection wrote: > > Hello, > > I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers > on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless > graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So > the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a > lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig > or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if > you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to > change it? > > Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer > to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important > characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. > > Just my opinion, > > Best, > Arnaud > > > > The Tricottet Collection of Natural History Specimens > (Minerals, Fossils & Meteorites) > www.thetricottetcollection.com > Facebook: The Tricottet Collection > Twitter: TricottetColl > > > > >> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:52:34 + >> From: msgmeteori...@googlemail.com >> To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens >> >> Hi Ed, Svend, Jason, all, >> >> Very good points indeed and interesting reading. Theres a lot to chew >> over there but looks like i may be taking the plunge and starting the >> process at some point. >> >> Thanks very much for all your considered and informative replies >> >> Regards >> >> Martin >> __ >> Visit the Archives at >> http://www.met
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
I would tend to agree with Arnaud and I don't think everyone painting their own numbers is a good idea... at all! It would seem that identity is the driving factor here and the only way it would work is if there was a standard system. You would only need one common number for each meteorite. So say the number for Kilabo (LL6) is 12307. Anyone who needed to adopt a numbering system on their meteorites could just have 12307 painted on. You don't need anything else. Weights, descriptions, features, etc, etc are all secondary and can still be maintained in a database. But if that is lost, those details can still be determined by anyone at a later date... at least the meteorite is still identified. Who does the numbering system? The Meteoritical Society. They already sort of do in their online database. I'm sure something official could be implemented if something like this was needed. FYI: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/metbull.php?code=12307 Cheers, Jeff - Original Message - From: "Jason Utas" To: "The Tricottet Collection" ; "Meteorite-list" Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 10:16 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hello Arnaud, All, I agree with you - to an extent. While we have inked many of our specimens, we have never sold a single meteorite (and the few we've traded were never marked). With so many collectors buying, selling, and trading collection pieces, I can easily visualize the numbering situation getting far out of control. But...an issue still remains. I can easily remember the 174 gram stone that was on ebay no more than a few months back - that was from a witnessed fall in Northwest Africa, but that didn't have a name because the buyer (and his supplier - I asked) had forgotten its name. If the collector who had originally purchased said meteorite had numbered it and kept his records straight, that individual wouldn't have lost its identity. It is now a "fresh unclassified NWA stone." At least, that's what it sold as on ebay So...there's something of a dilemma. Yes, stones shouldn't me overmarked. But we have the opportunity to ensure that stones will not be misnamed or misplaced. And that's where the judgement call must happen; people shouldn't inherently mark their meteorites with collection numbers, because, well, it can't be undone. But at the same time, people know how well they keep track of things; if they know that they're that disorganized, perhaps they should go and draw on their meteorites. If it's the only way they can be sure of keeping track of their collection with 110% certainty, I would say that they should go ahead and do it. I've seen more than one meteorite go miscataloged and lose its identity; it was enough for me to say that the person who allowed it to happen was grossly negligent, and didn't have the *right* to curate such scientifically important items. After all, when all we are is a temporary steward to a rock that's held its identity for more than four and a half billion years, who are we to misplace its label and effectively erase its terrestrial history. Hence my two-mindedness. I think that, yes, if everyone numbers their meteorites, there will be problems - unless, of course, there is a universal system off of which numbers can be derived. But that's not going to happen. And at the same time, I think that our current system of doing things is inadequate; meteorites are being honestly misnamed and misplaced in such a way that they lose their identities. That simply shouldn't happen. Ever. We have brains that are more than capable of ensuring that it doesn't happen, so the fact that it does only goes to show that keeping such things straight simply isn't a priority. So...I would advocate having meteorites with multiple numbers on them. I'd rather have a meteorite with a known identity - with three numbers on it - than a meteorite with no identity and no numbers on it. Hell, I'd rather have ten meteorites with five numbers on them than a thirty meteorites without names. Or a hundred. After all, they'd be completely worthless. Just my opinion. Jason On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 1:51 AM, The Tricottet Collection wrote: Hello, I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to change it? Personally I will never paint anything on my
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello Jeff, Yes - hence I said "unless, of course, there is a universal system off of which numbers can be derived. But that's not going to happen." It won't happen. We already have a numbering system for our collection, and it's not changing. And every other university and museum has its own system - and they're not going to change. And many other private collections are the same way. So...yes, that's the answer to the problem, but it's not a plausible one. I would still err on the side of having excess numbers that allow individual collectors to maintain a stones identity than having meteorites lost/misnamed. In one case you have a meteorite with paint on it - with a known identity. In the other, you have a rock that, while it still contains a record of its extraterrestrial history, is essentially worthless because you don't know where or when it was found. Even NWA's are more valuable than that... **Someone noted: "but how can you be sure the original numbering system would have made its way up to you?" You can't. The only way it works is if the person selling to you knows what the number means. But if I paint a number on a stone, it's much easier to check in my computer to see if that number corresponds with a similar meteorite in my collection. And if the number on the stone is meaningless to the person selling the stone to me, I could still send a query to the list asking for anyone who uses a numbering system that might include a stone matching a given description with the particular number. It simply increases the odds of the meteorite retaining its identity, even if it falls into the hands of a negligent collector. They also said: "Even great meteorite collectors like the Labenne's appear to have lost a large amount of data with their Saharan finds. At least you know thanks to the number that it's a Labenne find -- and you have also the find year, but that's all." Yes, but that's not a property of the number. In that case, the reason why you don't have more information is because the Labenne's aren't releasing it. If they did actually submit that information (like they promised they would over a decade ago), we would all have that information. As it is, the fact that those meteorites have numbers painted on them makes them significantly more valuable than ordinary NWA's ($$-wise), namely because it gives at least some information about their recovery. You can't blame the fact that the Labenne's don't release information about their finds on the fact that they paint numbers on their stones. At any rate, assuming that they keep the information for themselves, I can hand them a stone with one of their numbers painted on it and they *could* tell me where and when it was found. Even if they choose not to. *** The stone in question was from a NWA *fall* - Zag, Amgala, Bassikounou, etc. Unknown. Regards, Jason On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Jeff Kuyken wrote: > I would tend to agree with Arnaud and I don't think everyone painting their > own numbers is a good idea... at all! > > It would seem that identity is the driving factor here and the only way it > would work is if there was a standard system. You would only need one common > number for each meteorite. So say the number for Kilabo (LL6) is 12307. > Anyone who needed to adopt a numbering system on their meteorites could just > have 12307 painted on. You don't need anything else. Weights, descriptions, > features, etc, etc are all secondary and can still be maintained in a > database. But if that is lost, those details can still be determined by > anyone at a later date... at least the meteorite is still identified. Who > does the numbering system? The Meteoritical Society. They already sort of do > in their online database. I'm sure something official could be implemented > if something like this was needed. > > FYI: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/metbull.php?code=12307 > > Cheers, > > Jeff > > - Original Message - From: "Jason Utas" > To: "The Tricottet Collection" ; "Meteorite-list" > > Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 10:16 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > >> Hello Arnaud, All, >> I agree with you - to an extent. >> While we have inked many of our specimens, we have never sold a single >> meteorite (and the few we've traded were never marked). >> With so many collectors buying, selling, and trading collection >> pieces, I can easily visualize the numbering situation getting far out >> of control. >> >> But...an issue still remains. >> >> I can easily remember the 174 gram stone that was on ebay no more than >> a few months back - that was from a wit
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi All, Thanks Martin for bringing up this subject...very interesting to see what the general consensus is. Arnaud...I agree that we would not want lots of numbers covering historical stones...but I don't think that would happen. If you had a stone with a Huss or any other number then there is no need to add other numbers anyway...the existing historic number is fine and can be logged alongside any numbers for your other meteorites. I too have been worried about curating my collection as it grows and am leaning towards adding numbers to specimens large enough that may leave their containers or get parted from their cards. Regards, Graham E, UK The Tricottet Collection wrote: > > Hello, > > I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers > on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless > graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So > the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a > lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig > or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if > you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to > change it? > > Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer > to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important > characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. > > Just my opinion, > > Best, > Arnaud > > > > The Tricottet Collection of Natural History Specimens > (Minerals, Fossils & Meteorites) > www.thetricottetcollection.com > Facebook: The Tricottet Collection > Twitter: TricottetColl > > > > > > Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:52:34 + > > From: msgmeteori...@googlemail.com > > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > > > Hi Ed, Svend, Jason, all, > > > > Very good points indeed and interesting reading. Theres a lot to chew > > over there but looks like i may be taking the plunge and starting the > > process at some point. > > > > Thanks very much for all your considered and informative replies > > > > Regards > > > > 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 > > _ > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/ > __ > 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi All, Thanks Martin for bringing up this subject...very interesting to see what the general consensus is. Arnaud...I agree that we would not want lots of numbers covering historical stones...but I don't think that would happen. If you had a stone with a Huss or any other number then there is no need to add other numbers anyway...the existing historic number is fine and can be logged alongside any numbers for your other meteorites. I too have been worried about curating my collection as it grows and am leaning towards adding numbers to specimens large enough that may leave their containers or get parted from their cards. Regards, Graham E, UK The Tricottet Collection wrote: > > Hello, > > I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers > on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless > graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So > the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a > lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig > or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if > you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to > change it? > > Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer > to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important > characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. > > Just my opinion, > > Best, > Arnaud > > > > The Tricottet Collection of Natural History Specimens > (Minerals, Fossils & Meteorites) > www.thetricottetcollection.com > Facebook: The Tricottet Collection > Twitter: TricottetColl > > > > > > Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:52:34 + > > From: msgmeteori...@googlemail.com > > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > > > Hi Ed, Svend, Jason, all, > > > > Very good points indeed and interesting reading. Theres a lot to chew > > over there but looks like i may be taking the plunge and starting the > > process at some point. > > > > Thanks very much for all your considered and informative replies > > > > Regards > > > > 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 > > _ > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/ > __ > 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Jeff A universal system sounds a great idea. Infact in many ways all the NWA numbers, Sahara etc could be used as is, with extra numbers for 'named' meteorites. Graham Jeff Kuyken wrote: > I would tend to agree with Arnaud and I don't think everyone painting their > own numbers is a good idea... at all! > > It would seem that identity is the driving factor here and the only way it > would work is if there was a standard system. You would only need one common > number for each meteorite. So say the number for Kilabo (LL6) is 12307. > Anyone who needed to adopt a numbering system on their meteorites could just > have 12307 painted on. You don't need anything else. Weights, descriptions, > features, etc, etc are all secondary and can still be maintained in a > database. But if that is lost, those details can still be determined by > anyone at a later date... at least the meteorite is still identified. Who > does the numbering system? The Meteoritical Society. They already sort of do > in their online database. I'm sure something official could be implemented > if something like this was needed. > > FYI: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/metbull.php?code=12307 > > Cheers, > > Jeff > > - Original Message - > From: "Jason Utas" > To: "The Tricottet Collection" ; "Meteorite-list" > > Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 10:16 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > > > Hello Arnaud, All, > > I agree with you - to an extent. > > While we have inked many of our specimens, we have never sold a single > > meteorite (and the few we've traded were never marked). > > With so many collectors buying, selling, and trading collection > > pieces, I can easily visualize the numbering situation getting far out > > of control. > > > > But...an issue still remains. > > > > I can easily remember the 174 gram stone that was on ebay no more than > > a few months back - that was from a witnessed fall in Northwest > > Africa, but that didn't have a name because the buyer (and his > > supplier - I asked) had forgotten its name. If the collector who had > > originally purchased said meteorite had numbered it and kept his > > records straight, that individual wouldn't have lost its identity. It > > is now a "fresh unclassified NWA stone." > > At least, that's what it sold as on ebay > > > > So...there's something of a dilemma. Yes, stones shouldn't me > > overmarked. But we have the opportunity to ensure that stones will > > not be misnamed or misplaced. > > And that's where the judgement call must happen; people shouldn't > > inherently mark their meteorites with collection numbers, because, > > well, it can't be undone. But at the same time, people know how well > > they keep track of things; if they know that they're that > > disorganized, perhaps they should go and draw on their meteorites. If > > it's the only way they can be sure of keeping track of their > > collection with 110% certainty, I would say that they should go ahead > > and do it. > > > > I've seen more than one meteorite go miscataloged and lose its > > identity; it was enough for me to say that the person who allowed it > > to happen was grossly negligent, and didn't have the *right* to curate > > such scientifically important items. > > After all, when all we are is a temporary steward to a rock that's > > held its identity for more than four and a half billion years, who are > > we to misplace its label and effectively erase its terrestrial > > history. > > > > Hence my two-mindedness. I think that, yes, if everyone numbers their > > meteorites, there will be problems - unless, of course, there is a > > universal system off of which numbers can be derived. > > But that's not going to happen. > > And at the same time, I think that our current system of doing things > > is inadequate; meteorites are being honestly misnamed and misplaced in > > such a way that they lose their identities. > > That simply shouldn't happen. Ever. We have brains that are more > > than capable of ensuring that it doesn't happen, so the fact that it > > does only goes to show that keeping such things straight simply isn't > > a priority. > > > > So...I would advocate having meteorites with multiple numbers on them. > > I'd rather have a meteorite with a known identity - with three > > numbers on it - than a meteorite with no identity and no n
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi everyone, Thought I'd throw in my two cents on this interesting topic. First, painting numbers on a meteorite for identification purposes is only good if you have a master sheet that translates that number into a specific meteorite. If that sheet is lost the painted number is useless. I prefer having photo's on the master sheet along with all the pertinent information such as date of purchase, classification, weight, purchased from, etc. etc. etc. I believe that a photo is as good as a fingerprint for identification. A small label with some corresponding info and number inserted into or on the container (jem jar or riker)for smaller specimens is also helpful. If digital photography was available back in the day, I wonder how many meteorites would have painted numbers on them. Personally purchasing a meteorite with a number painted on it would be a turn off for me. Unless it's a historic rare piece. Cheers, Jim K __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Jim and List, I used a Dremel tool to carefully carve and identification number into all of my specimens. I put the name of the specimen, date, origin, type, what I paid for it, catalogue number, and 5 things I like about it using only adjectives. All of this information is carved in letters that are 1mm x 1mm. If the specimen is too small for these engravings, then I buy new duplicate material which I then superglue to the existing specimen. When the specimen becomes big enough to hold the engravings, I also make an extra note that shows how many additional pieces were superglued into place to provide room for the labels. Finally, I dunk the specimen into clear acrylic and let it harden into a fun shape (like a star or rhombus), which I then put into my cabinet for posterity. ;) Best regards, MikeG On 2/28/10, meteorite...@comcast.net wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Thought I'd throw in my two cents on this interesting topic. First, painting > numbers on a meteorite for identification purposes is only good if you have > a master sheet that translates that number into a specific meteorite. If > that sheet is lost the painted number is useless. > > I prefer having photo's on the master sheet along with all the pertinent > information such as date of purchase, classification, weight, purchased > from, etc. etc. etc. I believe that a photo is as good as a fingerprint for > identification. A small label with some corresponding info and number > inserted into or on the container (jem jar or riker)for smaller specimens is > also helpful. > > If digital photography was available back in the day, I wonder how many > meteorites would have painted numbers on them. Personally purchasing a > meteorite with a number painted on it would be a turn off for me. Unless > it's a historic rare piece. > > Cheers, > Jim K > __ > 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 > -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites http://www.galactic-stone.com http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Me too, as a professional I'm aware of the rareness of meteoritic specimens, sometimes they are unique and irreplaceable - and I'm aware of the often enormous endeavours it took, to recover such stones and the circumstances until they finally landed in my custody (yes also for the 20$-ebay-bogey). I simply feel myself not important enough, to deteriorate a meteoritic specimen in branding it, like a dog marks his property. Today we have simpler and more gentle means to keep a specimen identifiable. Take a simple digital camera, a lamp or the sun, a scale cube, a scale and a simple data base - all that costs today almost no money. Don't forget to print out your documentation from time to time, the electronic data storage media aren't made for eternity. It takes some time, yes. But more time it took for the material to form and to travel to Earth and to be found to end in your drawer. And more time it takes, to keep your collection free from oxidation, and anyway a good documentation belongs to the collector's duties to curate his meteorite collection. To apply stickers, to paint numbers on meteorites, isn't in my eyes a modern way of documentation and should be avoided. Best! Martin -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von The Tricottet Collection Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. Februar 2010 10:52 An: MeteoriteList Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hello, I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to change it? Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. Just my opinion, Best, Arnaud __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Mike and list, You can also drill a hole into it and insert a chip like they use for pet identification. Then epoxy over it. :) Jim K - Original Message - From: "Galactic Stone & Ironworks" To: meteorite...@comcast.net Cc: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 9:11:53 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hi Jim and List, I used a Dremel tool to carefully carve and identification number into all of my specimens. I put the name of the specimen, date, origin, type, what I paid for it, catalogue number, and 5 things I like about it using only adjectives. All of this information is carved in letters that are 1mm x 1mm. If the specimen is too small for these engravings, then I buy new duplicate material which I then superglue to the existing specimen. When the specimen becomes big enough to hold the engravings, I also make an extra note that shows how many additional pieces were superglued into place to provide room for the labels. Finally, I dunk the specimen into clear acrylic and let it harden into a fun shape (like a star or rhombus), which I then put into my cabinet for posterity. ;) Best regards, MikeG On 2/28/10, meteorite...@comcast.net wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Thought I'd throw in my two cents on this interesting topic. First, painting > numbers on a meteorite for identification purposes is only good if you have > a master sheet that translates that number into a specific meteorite. If > that sheet is lost the painted number is useless. > > I prefer having photo's on the master sheet along with all the pertinent > information such as date of purchase, classification, weight, purchased > from, etc. etc. etc. I believe that a photo is as good as a fingerprint for > identification. A small label with some corresponding info and number > inserted into or on the container (jem jar or riker)for smaller specimens is > also helpful. > > If digital photography was available back in the day, I wonder how many > meteorites would have painted numbers on them. Personally purchasing a > meteorite with a number painted on it would be a turn off for me. Unless > it's a historic rare piece. > > Cheers, > Jim K > __ > 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 > -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites http://www.galactic-stone.com http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
I'm not sure if anyone else remembers this, but there were some Muonionalusta etched slices on eBay about a year ago. They had the word MUONIONALUSTA etched in on one side in big letters - about six inches across. On the other side, they had something like 67°46'N, 23°15'E... this was also several inches across. I'm not even kidding. They were hideous, but at least future owners won't mistake their identity. --Noah - Original Message - From: "Galactic Stone & Ironworks" To: Cc: Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 10:11 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hi Jim and List, I used a Dremel tool to carefully carve and identification number into all of my specimens. I put the name of the specimen, date, origin, type, what I paid for it, catalogue number, and 5 things I like about it using only adjectives. All of this information is carved in letters that are 1mm x 1mm. If the specimen is too small for these engravings, then I buy new duplicate material which I then superglue to the existing specimen. When the specimen becomes big enough to hold the engravings, I also make an extra note that shows how many additional pieces were superglued into place to provide room for the labels. Finally, I dunk the specimen into clear acrylic and let it harden into a fun shape (like a star or rhombus), which I then put into my cabinet for posterity. ;) Best regards, MikeG On 2/28/10, meteorite...@comcast.net wrote: Hi everyone, Thought I'd throw in my two cents on this interesting topic. First, painting numbers on a meteorite for identification purposes is only good if you have a master sheet that translates that number into a specific meteorite. If that sheet is lost the painted number is useless. I prefer having photo's on the master sheet along with all the pertinent information such as date of purchase, classification, weight, purchased from, etc. etc. etc. I believe that a photo is as good as a fingerprint for identification. A small label with some corresponding info and number inserted into or on the container (jem jar or riker)for smaller specimens is also helpful. If digital photography was available back in the day, I wonder how many meteorites would have painted numbers on them. Personally purchasing a meteorite with a number painted on it would be a turn off for me. Unless it's a historic rare piece. Cheers, Jim K __ 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 -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites http://www.galactic-stone.com http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Noah and List, LOL, yes I recall those slices. There were some others that had abstract shapes on them. It looked like someone masked or taped off the design and then etched the face. And yes, they were hideous. LOL Best regards, MikeG On 2/28/10, ro...@projectargus.com wrote: > I'm not sure if anyone else remembers this, but there were some > Muonionalusta etched slices on eBay about a year ago. They had the word > MUONIONALUSTA etched in on one side in big letters - about six inches > across. On the other side, they had something like 67°46'N, 23°15'E... this > was also several inches across. I'm not even kidding. > > They were hideous, but at least future owners won't mistake their identity. > > --Noah > > > - Original Message - > From: "Galactic Stone & Ironworks" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 10:11 AM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > >> Hi Jim and List, >> >> I used a Dremel tool to carefully carve and identification number into >> all of my specimens. I put the name of the specimen, date, origin, >> type, what I paid for it, catalogue number, and 5 things I like about >> it using only adjectives. All of this information is carved in >> letters that are 1mm x 1mm. If the specimen is too small for these >> engravings, then I buy new duplicate material which I then superglue >> to the existing specimen. When the specimen becomes big enough to >> hold the engravings, I also make an extra note that shows how many >> additional pieces were superglued into place to provide room for the >> labels. Finally, I dunk the specimen into clear acrylic and let it >> harden into a fun shape (like a star or rhombus), which I then put >> into my cabinet for posterity. ;) >> >> Best regards, >> >> MikeG >> >> >> On 2/28/10, meteorite...@comcast.net wrote: >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> Thought I'd throw in my two cents on this interesting topic. First, >>> painting >>> numbers on a meteorite for identification purposes is only good if you >>> have >>> a master sheet that translates that number into a specific meteorite. If >>> that sheet is lost the painted number is useless. >>> >>> I prefer having photo's on the master sheet along with all the pertinent >>> information such as date of purchase, classification, weight, purchased >>> from, etc. etc. etc. I believe that a photo is as good as a fingerprint >>> for >>> identification. A small label with some corresponding info and number >>> inserted into or on the container (jem jar or riker)for smaller specimens >>> >>> is >>> also helpful. >>> >>> If digital photography was available back in the day, I wonder how many >>> meteorites would have painted numbers on them. Personally purchasing a >>> meteorite with a number painted on it would be a turn off for me. Unless >>> it's a historic rare piece. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jim K >>> __ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites >> http://www.galactic-stone.com >> http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone >> >> __ >> 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 > -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites http://www.galactic-stone.com http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Kind of like this? http://cgi.ebay.com/METEORITE-MUONIONALUSTA-ORIGINAL-POLISHED-SLAB-267-8-g_W0QQitemZ160310539397QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item255340b485 Steve Steve Witt IMCA #9020 http://imca.cc/ --- On Sun, 2/28/10, ro...@projectargus.com wrote: > From: ro...@projectargus.com > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Date: Sunday, February 28, 2010, 11:41 AM > I'm not sure if anyone else remembers > this, but there were some Muonionalusta etched slices on > eBay about a year ago. They had the word MUONIONALUSTA > etched in on one side in big letters - about six inches > across. On the other side, they had something like > 67°46'N, 23°15'E... this was also several inches > across. I'm not even kidding. > > They were hideous, but at least future owners won't mistake > their identity. > > --Noah > > > - Original Message - From: "Galactic Stone & > Ironworks" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 10:11 AM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > > > Hi Jim and List, > > > > I used a Dremel tool to carefully carve and > identification number into > > all of my specimens. I put the name of the > specimen, date, origin, > > type, what I paid for it, catalogue number, and 5 > things I like about > > it using only adjectives. All of this > information is carved in > > letters that are 1mm x 1mm. If the specimen is > too small for these > > engravings, then I buy new duplicate material which I > then superglue > > to the existing specimen. When the specimen > becomes big enough to > > hold the engravings, I also make an extra note that > shows how many > > additional pieces were superglued into place to > provide room for the > > labels. Finally, I dunk the specimen into clear > acrylic and let it > > harden into a fun shape (like a star or rhombus), > which I then put > > into my cabinet for posterity. ;) > > > > Best regards, > > > > MikeG > > > > > > On 2/28/10, meteorite...@comcast.net > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi everyone, > >> > >> Thought I'd throw in my two cents on this > interesting topic. First, painting > >> numbers on a meteorite for identification purposes > is only good if you have > >> a master sheet that translates that number into a > specific meteorite. If > >> that sheet is lost the painted number is useless. > >> > >> I prefer having photo's on the master sheet along > with all the pertinent > >> information such as date of purchase, > classification, weight, purchased > >> from, etc. etc. etc. I believe that a photo is as > good as a fingerprint for > >> identification. A small label with some > corresponding info and number > >> inserted into or on the container (jem jar or > riker)for smaller specimens is > >> also helpful. > >> > >> If digital photography was available back in the > day, I wonder how many > >> meteorites would have painted numbers on them. > Personally purchasing a > >> meteorite with a number painted on it would be a > turn off for me. Unless > >> it's a historic rare piece. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Jim K > >> __ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > -- > > > Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks > Meteorites > > http://www.galactic-stone.com > > http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone > > > > > __ > > 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 > __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
A very interesting discussion and very informative. I'm another person with individual stones that don't have any outward way of IDing them. Most of my collection are micros and this majority are encased in labeled membrane boxes, or for the larger slices and end cuts, appropriately sized clear plastic cases. I have them all sorted in their storage boxes by classification, which is also how I have them listed in my catalog, which is done on a spreadsheet. I record the weights of each specimen to 1/100th gram using my own scale, or if the dealer I purchased them states the precision to 1/1000th gram, I record it using their weight. I have no specimens that weigh exactly the same. For me, that should be enough to ID specimens if they become mixed up or for my estate. One concern I have while reading this thread is the ubiquitous dependence on digital... Digital cameras, databases, etc, etc. While in many cases digital makes collecting of the information easier, whatever format one chooses for cataloging their collection never, NEVER rely on digital only copies! For the digital versions, make multiple copies, in multiple formats and put them on various media, stored in different locations. And ALWAYS make paper copies, also distributed to more than one location. Sounds like a lot of work, but it really isn't. I have a copy of my spreadsheet on two computers, plus on my backup drive, plus I use a program called CutePDF to "print" a copy of the spreadsheet to a pdf file, also kept in a few locations. Finally I use the pdf file to print out hard copies. Since drives crash, files get deleted or data erased, technology moves on, and "Standard" file formats all eventually vanish, nothing will ever beat a hard copy safely stored away. Don't waste you hard effort on creating a catalog only to lose it because it was only digital. -- Richard Kowalski Full Moon Photography IMCA #1081 __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Too bad they don't show this sellers face. He also has an " L" etched to his forehead. Too funny. -- Carl or Debbie Esparza Meteoritemax Steve Witt wrote: > Kind of like this? > > http://cgi.ebay.com/METEORITE-MUONIONALUSTA-ORIGINAL-POLISHED-SLAB-267-8-g_W0QQitemZ160310539397QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item255340b485 > > > Steve > > > Steve Witt > IMCA #9020 > http://imca.cc/ > > > --- On Sun, 2/28/10, ro...@projectargus.com wrote: > > > From: ro...@projectargus.com > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > Date: Sunday, February 28, 2010, 11:41 AM > > I'm not sure if anyone else remembers > > this, but there were some Muonionalusta etched slices on > > eBay about a year ago. They had the word MUONIONALUSTA > > etched in on one side in big letters - about six inches > > across. On the other side, they had something like > > 67°46'N, 23°15'E... this was also several inches > > across. I'm not even kidding. > > > > They were hideous, but at least future owners won't mistake > > their identity. > > > > --Noah > > > > > > - Original Message - From: "Galactic Stone & > > Ironworks" > > To: > > Cc: > > Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 10:11 AM > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > > > > > > Hi Jim and List, > > > > > > I used a Dremel tool to carefully carve and > > identification number into > > > all of my specimens. I put the name of the > > specimen, date, origin, > > > type, what I paid for it, catalogue number, and 5 > > things I like about > > > it using only adjectives. All of this > > information is carved in > > > letters that are 1mm x 1mm. If the specimen is > > too small for these > > > engravings, then I buy new duplicate material which I > > then superglue > > > to the existing specimen. When the specimen > > becomes big enough to > > > hold the engravings, I also make an extra note that > > shows how many > > > additional pieces were superglued into place to > > provide room for the > > > labels. Finally, I dunk the specimen into clear > > acrylic and let it > > > harden into a fun shape (like a star or rhombus), > > which I then put > > > into my cabinet for posterity. ;) > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > MikeG > > > > > > > > > On 2/28/10, meteorite...@comcast.net > > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi everyone, > > >> > > >> Thought I'd throw in my two cents on this > > interesting topic. First, painting > > >> numbers on a meteorite for identification purposes > > is only good if you have > > >> a master sheet that translates that number into a > > specific meteorite. If > > >> that sheet is lost the painted number is useless. > > >> > > >> I prefer having photo's on the master sheet along > > with all the pertinent > > >> information such as date of purchase, > > classification, weight, purchased > > >> from, etc. etc. etc. I believe that a photo is as > > good as a fingerprint for > > >> identification. A small label with some > > corresponding info and number > > >> inserted into or on the container (jem jar or > > riker)for smaller specimens is > > >> also helpful. > > >> > > >> If digital photography was available back in the > > day, I wonder how many > > >> meteorites would have painted numbers on them. > > Personally purchasing a > > >> meteorite with a number painted on it would be a > > turn off for me. Unless > > >> it's a historic rare piece. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Jim K > > >> __ > > >> 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 > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks > > Meteorites
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello Everyone, I don't like the idea of marking in any way a meteorite specimen. Over the years, I have bought planetary specimens from Jim Strope and I think Jim has a great way of producing an adequate paper record of a specimen. Jim scans the specimen and prints a COA with the scanned image, large enough to unmistakenly identify the specimen. He also adds a brief description of the specimen (weight, clasification ,etc.). Scanning works well for flat specimens such as slices but for individuals, a picture would serve the same purpose. I remember seeing a piece of software a few years ago that was a database of geological specimens, meant for collectors. The fields could be customized for a meteorite collection and images could be incorporated as part of the recoard for a given specimen. I can't remember if it was a flat file or relational type database. Has anyone seen this? -Walter Branch __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hi Martin, List, 1. I just want to let you know that every specimen in EoM (http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/) has it's own and unique id number! I'm not saying that storing specimen info in EoM is a perfect solution for every collector. But with some extensions it might be an idea to think about. 2. I want to introduce my new project: http://labels.sv-meteorites.com/ It is just a start. My big THANKS! to all who already joined the project and shared their images and information! Any comments, suggestions and new information will be very appreciated! Best regards, Sergey -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com]on Behalf Of Martin Altmann Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 4:15 PM To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Me too, as a professional I'm aware of the rareness of meteoritic specimens, sometimes they are unique and irreplaceable - and I'm aware of the often enormous endeavours it took, to recover such stones and the circumstances until they finally landed in my custody (yes also for the 20$-ebay-bogey). I simply feel myself not important enough, to deteriorate a meteoritic specimen in branding it, like a dog marks his property. Today we have simpler and more gentle means to keep a specimen identifiable. Take a simple digital camera, a lamp or the sun, a scale cube, a scale and a simple data base - all that costs today almost no money. Don't forget to print out your documentation from time to time, the electronic data storage media aren't made for eternity. It takes some time, yes. But more time it took for the material to form and to travel to Earth and to be found to end in your drawer. And more time it takes, to keep your collection free from oxidation, and anyway a good documentation belongs to the collector's duties to curate his meteorite collection. To apply stickers, to paint numbers on meteorites, isn't in my eyes a modern way of documentation and should be avoided. Best! Martin -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von The Tricottet Collection Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. Februar 2010 10:52 An: MeteoriteList Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens Hello, I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting numbers on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of useless graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" collection? So the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say "minor", I mean not a lot of people have a collection which can be compared to a Nininger, Monnig or any national museum collection! And with time, with more maturity, what if you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, what if you decide to change it? Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. Just my opinion, Best, Arnaud __ 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens
Hello Sergey and List, My compliments Sergey. What a fine archive and resource you hard work has produced. Your example and the learned comments of the others on the List has shown me the error of my ways. Meteorites and related specimens should not be marked, or marred in anyway except for preparation, analysis and distribution. I failed to notice the way diamonds are identified by the GIA (Gemological Institute of America). Specimens are photographed,weighed and measured with the identification placed on a disc with saved hardcopy...like you are doing with your database. It is true that some diamond merchants have etched ID numbers on the girdle of a stone because gem stones can be today easily altered through substitution with imitations, radiation, laser removal of inclusions, doubling and "yehudi". I have never heard of the alteration of a meteorite. Again my compliments and thanks for your sharing your work, Count Deiro IMCA 3536 -Original Message- >From: Sergey Vasiliev >Sent: Mar 1, 2010 2:51 AM >To: Martin Altmann , >Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > >Hi Martin, List, > >1. I just want to let you know that every specimen in EoM >(http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/) >has it's own and unique id number! >I'm not saying that storing specimen info in EoM is a perfect solution for >every >collector. But with some extensions it might be an idea to think about. > >2. I want to introduce my new project: >http://labels.sv-meteorites.com/ >It is just a start. >My big THANKS! to all who already joined the project and shared their >images and information! >Any comments, suggestions and new information will be very appreciated! > >Best regards, >Sergey > > >-Original Message- >From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com >[mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com]on Behalf Of Martin >Altmann >Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 4:15 PM >To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > >Me too, > >as a professional I'm aware of the rareness of meteoritic specimens, >sometimes they are unique and irreplaceable - and I'm aware of the often >enormous endeavours it took, to recover such stones and the circumstances >until they finally landed in my custody (yes also for the 20$-ebay-bogey). > >I simply feel myself not important enough, to deteriorate a meteoritic >specimen in branding it, like a dog marks his property. > >Today we have simpler and more gentle means to keep a specimen identifiable. >Take a simple digital camera, a lamp or the sun, a scale cube, a scale and a >simple data base - all that costs today almost no money. >Don't forget to print out your documentation from time to time, the >electronic data storage media aren't made for eternity. > >It takes some time, yes. But more time it took for the material to form and >to travel to Earth and to be found to end in your drawer. >And more time it takes, to keep your collection free from oxidation, >and anyway a good documentation belongs to the collector's duties to curate >his meteorite collection. > >To apply stickers, to paint numbers on meteorites, isn't in my eyes a modern >way of documentation and should be avoided. > >Best! >Martin > >-Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >Von: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com >[mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von The >Tricottet Collection >Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. Februar 2010 10:52 >An: MeteoriteList >Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Labeling specimens > > >Hello, > >I would like to disagree with everyone here. If we all start painting >numbers on meteorites, in 2-3 generations, all specimens will be full of >useless graffiti - who will know which number matches which "minor" >collection? So the problem would remain exactly the same. When I say >"minor", I mean not a lot of people have a collection which can be compared >to a Nininger, Monnig or any national museum collection! And with time, with >more maturity, what if you find your inventory numbering system inefficient, >what if you decide to change it? > >Personally I will never paint anything on my collection specimens. I prefer >to take 1 or more pictures per specimen + weight + other important >characteristics, label them and keep then in different boxes. > >Just my opinion, > >Best, >Arnaud > > > > > >__ >Visit the Archives at >http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html >Meteorite-list mailing list >Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >htt
