Staining fossils

[Righteous]

What’s your idea on buying a fossil that’s been stained? Yes no maybe?

i been looking at tracks that say they have been lightly stained and to tell the truth I have a hard time making out a track without it being stained. 

[Huntonia]

Really depends on personal preference. Some won't look twice at any fossil that has been stained or 'enhanced' in any way. I personally don't mind minor staining or wax applications to enhance natural colors. I don't like fossils that have had missing parts painted on but if it's relatively minor I won't write the piece off entirely, depending on price and availability of the type of fossil I might decide it's worth it. You should form your own opinions based on your preference but personally if some light staining is the difference between being able to easily see the fossil and not then I would say go ahead.

 

Plus depending on what was used it might be possible to remove the staining if you don't like it 

[Misha]

Just as huntonia said it depends on personal preference, but by staining what do you mean exactly? Does it have Paraloid on the fossil or is there some kind of oil actually in it? 

 

I would also say to be careful with those tracks, I have seen many on the market that are faked with the rock just being painted over to make it look like something is there when it truly does match up with the anatomy of these animals, generally you can tell when a nice track is real even without any coatings or enhancements.

[JohnJ]

Stains can suggestively influence the perception of whatever it is supposed to 'enhance'.  In other words, without the "stain", there may be no 'fossil'.

[Huntonia]

Yes definitely! As both Misha and JohnJ mentioned if a fossil is clearly stained make certain it is a fossil and not just overpriced artwork on a rock!

[Righteous]

3 minutes ago, JohnJ said:

Stains can suggestively influence the perception of whatever it is supposed to 'enhance'.  In other words, without the "stain", there may be no 'fossil'.

This is the part that bugs me. Sometimes I zoom in on a pic and I can’t even tell there was anything there to begin with 

[caldigger]

2 minutes ago, Righteous said:

This is the part that bugs me. Sometimes I zoom in on a pic and I can’t even tell there was anything there to begin with 

If that's the case, I would pass those by.

[Huntonia]

3 minutes ago, Righteous said:

This is the part that bugs me. Sometimes I zoom in on a pic and I can’t even tell there was anything there to begin with 

In those instances I would recommend passing. If you have difficulty seeing unaltered tracks you could purchase one and apply wax or something similar yourself. That way you know exactly how much of the fossil is genuine and you can see it well.

[Righteous]

9 minutes ago, Misha said:

Just as huntonia said it depends on personal preference, but by staining what do you mean exactly? Does it have Paraloid on the fossil or is there some kind of oil actually in it? 

 

I would also say to be careful with those tracks, I have seen many on the market that are faked with the rock just being painted over to make it look like something is there when it truly does match up with the anatomy of these animals, generally you can tell when a nice track is real even without any coatings or enhancements.

Sent you a PM

[fossilcrazy]

I have purchased trace fossils with "stain" enhancement. I would rather they weren't, but if it removes easy, no harm, no foul.

[Righteous]

Track in question has been posted in the : Is this real section 

[FranzBernhard]

2 hours ago, Huntonia said:

wax applications to enhance natural colors

 

2 hours ago, Huntonia said:

apply wax or something similar

 

2 hours ago, Misha said:

Does it have Paraloid on the fossil

This is an important distinction: Have only some parts been stained ("the fossil")? Or has everything been coated or impregnated (the whole specimen, including the matrix) in the same way? To me, first approach is in not ok. Second approach is sometimes ok*/**.

Its in some way like image processing: Do you adjust only some parts of a pic or do you adjust brightness/contrast/etc. of the whole image?

*Miocene fossils from my area look quite well and contrasting, as long as they are damp (not wet). Within a few days, contrast is disappearing somewhat upon drying. But I do not coat them, though. I just photograph them damp.

** @Ludwigia: Would you like to post one of your ammonites unwaxed and waxed side by side? Just to see the difference! Thanks!

Franz Bernhard

[Ludwigia]

To follow up on Franz' request, just click on this link and scroll down. I use a beeswax finish which can be easily removed with acetone. Staining is, as the others have noted, a matter of personal discretion and aesthics. It also depends on the type of fossil, whether it's for a pretty display or for scientific use, etc., etc.