Satoshi Posted October 9, 2021 Share Posted October 9, 2021 Hi, My name is Satoshi. I want to study Spinosaurus fossils. I think this fossil is not fake and high quality.But,very little. What do you think, guys? Please help. Thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted October 9, 2021 Share Posted October 9, 2021 (edited) @Satoshi On September 14 I asked you to read my last link in my signature. So this time I explain why. Pedagogical message Don't take your fossils in the hand to make your photos, it accentuates the blur of moving and the hands aren't a good indication of measurement, there are all sizes ! In addition to the origin and age of the terrain in which the fossils are found, size is also important for proper identification. I invite you to read my last link in my signature because if you don’t have a rule, print the document I made available and put your fossils on it before making your photos, making sure to leave a box with the apparent size Coco Edited October 9, 2021 by Coco 1 ---------------------- OUTIL POUR MESURER VOS FOSSILES : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 1 (Poissons et sélaciens récents & fossiles) : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 2 (Animaux vivants - sans poissons ni sélaciens) : ici Mâchoires sélaciennes récentes : ici Hétérodontiques et sélaciens : ici Oeufs sélaciens récents : ici Otolithes de poissons récents ! ici Un Greg... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satoshi Posted October 9, 2021 Author Share Posted October 9, 2021 Thank you for telling me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satoshi Posted October 9, 2021 Author Share Posted October 9, 2021 DESCRIPTION Genus: Spinosaurus aegyptiacus | Spinosauridae. Age: Cretaceous, Cenomanian-Turonian, 100,000,000 - 89,000,000 years. Origin: S.E.Morocco. SIZE L: 4.6 CM (mesial curvature) L: 4.6 CM (direct proximal to distal point) W: 0.7 CM H: 1.4 CM KG: 0.003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted October 9, 2021 Share Posted October 9, 2021 2 hours ago, Coco said: @Satoshi On September 14 I asked you to read my last link in my signature. So this time I explain why. Pedagogical message Don't take your fossils in the hand to make your photos, it accentuates the blur of moving and the hands aren't a good indication of measurement, there are all sizes ! In addition to the origin and age of the terrain in which the fossils are found, size is also important for proper identification. I invite you to read my last link in my signature because if you don’t have a rule, print the document I made available and put your fossils on it before making your photos, making sure to leave a box with the apparent size Coco Coco, these are likely photos from a commercial dealer, and the OP probably has no control over how the photos are taken. 1 Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 __________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paleorunner Posted October 9, 2021 Share Posted October 9, 2021 Sorry, I can't confirm if it's authentic. But looking at the photos, it gives me the feeling that it is repaired, as if it were broken in half, and they had stuck it, I am even thinking of a composition of two teeth, because it gives me the feeling that the tonality and texture of the teeth changes. two parts, (but that may be due to the lights when taking the photo). Wait for the responses of the most qualified members. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted October 9, 2021 Share Posted October 9, 2021 Lots of red flags...too much graining on the surface especially the distal part of the claw, the bloodgrooves should not be flat to the sides all the way toward the tip, might be a composite the dorsal area around the break repair appears to dip. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satoshi Posted October 9, 2021 Author Share Posted October 9, 2021 41 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said: Coco, these are likely photos from a commercial dealer, and the OP probably has no control over how the photos are taken. Thank you for telling me instead! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satoshi Posted October 9, 2021 Author Share Posted October 9, 2021 15 minutes ago, Paleorunner said: Sorry, I can't confirm if it's authentic. But looking at the photos, it gives me the feeling that it is repaired, as if it were broken in half, and they had stuck it, I am even thinking of a composition of two teeth, because it gives me the feeling that the tonality and texture of the teeth changes. two parts, (but that may be due to the lights when taking the photo). Wait for the responses of the most qualified members. I thought so too! Thanks for your comment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satoshi Posted October 9, 2021 Author Share Posted October 9, 2021 4 minutes ago, Troodon said: Lots of red flags...too much graining on the surface especially the distal part of the claw, the bloodgrooves should not be flat to the sides all the way toward the tip, might be a composite the dorsal area around the break repair appears to dip. It's a stone's throw! Your message will be very educational! thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now