Didymoceras cheyennense?

[Mochaccino]

Hello,

 

Does this association of Didymoceras cheyennense and Baculites compressus seem legitimate? Any restoration/reconstruction going on, or composite of multiple individuals, especially on the Didymoceras? Dimensions are 22cm x 14cm x 14cm, and listed as of Lower Cretaceous age and from the Pierre Shale of South Dakota.  

 

Also, if you had to pick one heteromorph ammonite specimen, would you personally purchase this for your collection (i.e. is it a good example of Didymoceras cheyennense)? I realize this is just a part of the inner whorls. Complete Didymoceras in general seem to be very rare and exorbitantly expensive so perhaps this is a good enough piece? I don't exactly have a fortune to spend, but I can justify one big purchase as a gift to myself.

 

Thanks.

Edited January 17, 2022 by Mochaccino

[JohnJ]

42 minutes ago, Mochaccino said:

2. Around how much would you pay for it?

 

A reminder to please keep in mind that valuations are prohibited on the Forum. Thanks.

[Mochaccino]

7 minutes ago, JohnJ said:

 

A reminder to please keep in mind that valuations are prohibited on the Forum. Thanks.

Sorry, edited.

[Mahnmut]

Hi,

more experienced members will have to tell you if this is unaltered or a composite,

but just aesthetically speaking its a fascinating piece in my eyes. Somewhat reminescent of sculptures like Laokoon or st. George with the dragon.

 

Best Regards.

J

[Mochaccino]

3 hours ago, Mahnmut said:

Hi,

more experienced members will have to tell you if this is unaltered or a composite,

but just aesthetically speaking its a fascinating piece in my eyes. Somewhat reminescent of sculptures like Laokoon or st. George with the dragon.

 

Best Regards.

J

Thanks for your input!

 

 

[Mochaccino]

Also something I noticed, based on the direction of the spines (arrows) and the way this transition looks (circle), does it seem like two pieces were glued together in the wrong orientation here? I feel like the spines should stay on one side of the whorl, and there shouldn't be such a sharp bend.

 

 

 

The abrupt bend is more evident here:

 

 

 

Edited January 17, 2022 by Mochaccino

[Mahnmut]

To good to be true.

[Mochaccino]

48 minutes ago, Mahnmut said:

To good to be true.

You think so, should I be wary of fabrication? Even considering the wonky-looking attachment?

[Mahnmut]

Hi, what I meant was that although on first look I thought thats a beautiful arrangement, as you pointed out yourself it is very obviously put together in a less than convincing way.

One could think that whoever put the pieces together in such a way would not have the means to fake the single pieces but tried to make do with whatever fragments they got.

But thats no guarantee.

My first comment was blinded by the sheer convoluted bizarreness of the piece, not doubt as the maker intended.

Best Regards,J

[Mochaccino]

2 hours ago, Mahnmut said:

Hi, what I meant was that although on first look I thought thats a beautiful arrangement, as you pointed out yourself it is very obviously put together in a less than convincing way.

One could think that whoever put the pieces together in such a way would not have the means to fake the single pieces but tried to make do with whatever fragments they got.

But thats no guarantee.

My first comment was blinded by the sheer convoluted bizarreness of the piece, not doubt as the maker intended.

Best Regards,J

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. Would you personally purchase such a piece for your collection? I personally prefer things as natural as possible but I don't think I'd ever be able to afford a complete didymoceras.

[Mahnmut]

I would not pay more for it than for the fragments involved, now that I realized that the bizarre shape is all made up. Some of the spines do look fishy, by the way.

 

If the price is really good maybe I would try to take it apart and reassemble it in a more realistic way. (But I am a modeler besides being a collector, so thats my thing.) My Dactylioceras for example sits removably and upright on a piece of Dactylioceras matrix that is not its own, makes one eyecatcher out of two unremarkable pieces.

Without talking prices, its to be expected that whoever built that thing intents to get more for it than the pieces are worth, which is fair enough if communicated properly, but not otherwise.

If your heart yearns for a Didymoceras, maybe you can get a nice and unaltered fragment via the members trade section of the forum?

Aloha,

J

 

[michele 1937]

I wouldn't buy it and weird

[Mochaccino]

5 hours ago, Mahnmut said:

I would not pay more for it than for the fragments involved, now that I realized that the bizarre shape is all made up. Some of the spines do look fishy, by the way.

 

If the price is really good maybe I would try to take it apart and reassemble it in a more realistic way. (But I am a modeler besides being a collector, so thats my thing.) My Dactylioceras for example sits removably and upright on a piece of Dactylioceras matrix that is not its own, makes one eyecatcher out of two unremarkable pieces.

Without talking prices, its to be expected that whoever built that thing intents to get more for it than the pieces are worth, which is fair enough if communicated properly, but not otherwise.

If your heart yearns for a Didymoceras, maybe you can get a nice and unaltered fragment via the members trade section of the forum?

Aloha,

J

 

 

4 hours ago, michele 1937 said:

I wouldn't buy it and weird

Thanks all. Yes I'm only interested in the Didymoceras so I'd likely be paying more for it than I should. I definitely would've just bought the fragments, but as is I'm no prepper or modeler, just a newbie amateur fossil collector. So it looks like this is a no-go for me, especially if the spines are also potentially reconstructed.

 

I didn't even realize the members trade was a thing, I'll check it out. Thanks!