Fish Fossil Identification

[violinistt]

Can anyone please help identify this fish fossil?

Thanks!

[Rockwood]

I'm not sure at all, but I suspect it may be called 'art'. 

[Pemphix]

Big one looks like Vinctifer comptoni from Santana Formation (lower creataceous, 110 m.a. years, Santana Formation, Romualdo or Crato Member, Ceara, Brasilia).

Others i don't know - @oilshale will know more...

[Fossildude19]

As Rockwood suggested, this is not a genuine fossil at all. 

The fish depicted here are probably supposed to represent species from the lower Cretaceous of Brazil.

The larger fish is supposed to depict a Vinctifer comptoni.  The two on the sides are probably meant to be Tharrias araripis, or Rhacolepis buccalis.

The one in the middle on top may be meant to depict a Brannerion sp. , or Notelops sp.

 

These are painted on facsimiles, however, and not actual fossils. There may be some partial fossils under the paint, but are mostly reproductions.

Real fossil material outlined in red.

[Rockwood]

Looks like it was prepped with a grinder.

 

[RJB]

1 hour ago, Fossildude19 said:

These are painted on facsimiles, however, and not actual fossils. There may be some partial fossils under the paint, but are mostly reproductions.

I agree 100% with this statement.

 

RB

[Fossildude19]

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

Looks like it was prepped with a grinder.

 

I think these may have been concretions, initially, then set into the matrix somehow, afterwards. 

[oilshale]

5 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

I think these may have been concretions, initially, then set into the matrix somehow, afterwards. 

Correct!

This kind of falsification can unfortunately be observed more and more often. Fish in concretions from the Santana Formation are made to fit and inserted into decorative sandstone- or slate-slabs as inlay. The fins are mostly removed and new (quite imaginatively designed) fins are painted on instead. And of course, if possible, several fish are arranged on one plate.
The new matrix comes from a completely different formation and quarry.

 

Edited October 9, 2020 by oilshale

[LabRatKing]

8 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

As Rockwood suggested, this is not a genuine fossil at all. 

The fish depicted here are probably supposed to represent species from the lower Cretaceous of Brazil.

The larger fish is supposed to depict a Vinctifer comptoni.  The two on the sides are probably meant to be Tharrias araripis, or Rhacolepis buccalis.

The one in the middle on top may be meant to depict a Brannerion sp. , or Notelops sp.

 

These are painted on facsimiles, however, and not actual fossils. There may be some partial fossils under the paint, but are mostly reproductions.

Real fossil material outlined in red.

Sort of off topic, but @Fossildude19 , which software do you use for all the great alternate chroma? I have been searching for some to use with my extant microturbellaria research and some vintage sci art restorations I have going on.

[Fossildude19]

1 hour ago, LabRatKing said:

Sort of off topic, but @Fossildude19 , which software do you use for all the great alternate chroma? I have been searching for some to use with my extant microturbellaria research and some vintage sci art restorations I have going on.

LRK, 

I use a free software called Photoscape X. It is highly intuitive to use, and quite powerful. 

I found it easier to use than Gimp or any other software.

[Rockwood]

So four partial fish that would be hard to sell becomes an expensive plate. 

[LabRatKing]

2 hours ago, Rockwood said:

So four partial fish that would be hard to sell becomes an expensive plate. 

Yup. My bovine fecal alarm shorted out on this one.

[violinistt]

Thanks for the feedbacks

here are some closer shots 

[Rockwood]

Just saw the price asked for something about like what they started with on line.