"Auronis" Xui (sort of)

[Ezio Bonsignore]

Beyond the mispelled name (Auronis in lieu of Aurornis) this horrible thing is clearly described by the seller as a fake, so there is no need of further discussions on that. I'm however curious about 1) the tecnique used, and 2) the commercial logic of producing such things and then selling them as fakes. 

It doesn't seem carved to me, and the posture is identical to the well-know first fossil that led to the species being identified. Perhaps someone managed to obtain a negative cast of the original, and now is using it as a mould to produce "n" copies? In any case, the whole affair requires a not wholly insignificant investment in time and money - while the plate is being offered at a starting price of [price redacted] and I doubt very much whether it would sell. On the other hand, the carved fake crab fossils out of Indonesia require even more manual work and dexterity, yet people keep producing and I must assume selling these. Go figure...

[Fossildude19]

These could be plaster casts, painted to look real, in which case, I don't think there would be a ton of work involved, especially if there are multiple molds to work from. The "matrix" looks too smooth, and shiny to me. And obviously they do sell. I have seen much worse posing as real fossils.

 

[FossilDAWG]

Does the seller describe the item as a "fake" or as a "replica"?  A good quality replica would be much less expensive than an original, especially if only one or two authentic specimens exist.  I can see a demand for good replicas, to "complete"  a display or for teaching.  "Fake" implies an intention to deceive.

 

Don

[Ezio Bonsignore]

My apologies for having included the auction's starting price. I wrongly assumed that given the circumstances, doing so would not break the forum's rules. The auction is in German, and the item is described as "nicht echt" - not real. If fake implies the intention to deceive, then I used the wrong term.