Jump to content

Need some opinions


Recommended Posts

Hello. I found these fossils for sale and thought they looked interesting. I am new in the hobby and this is my first time I am thinking of buying an eurypterus. I wanted some opinions before I proceed if they look alright and which of these two in your opinion seems nicer (I know it is personal the matter of opinion but I would love to read your opinions).

IMG_20230329_021937.jpg

IMG_20230329_021921.jpg

Screenshot_2023-03-29-03-00-02-459-edit_com.ebay.mobile.jpg

IMG_20230329_030240.jpg

Edited by Savvas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both great specimens. Personally, I like the aesthetics of the first one.

  • I Agree 1

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  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

1 minute ago, Fossildude19 said:

Both great specimens. Personally, I like the aesthetics of the first one.

Thank you for your answer. The thing is that the one you like more ships from Ukraine and it will need to pass through customs, which I am afraid they will charge me a crazy price for something like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then what is the point of asking?

  • I Agree 1

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  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

5 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Then what is the point of asking?

I didn't say I am not thinking of buying it. I said that it troubles me that I might have to pay customs. I also asked about the originality, that was the main point of my question. Sorry if I made you feel that I wasted your time with a pointless question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Savvas said:

I didn't say I am not thinking of buying it. I said that it troubles me that I might have to pay customs. I also asked about the originality, that was the main point of my question. Sorry if I made you feel that I wasted your time with a pointless question.

I didn't say I felt my time was wasted. :headscratch:

I just asked why you asked the question. I still think the first one looks nicer.  :)

Saying you were still considering buying it would have been fine.  ;)

 

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  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

2 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

I didn't say I felt my time was wasted. :headscratch:

I just asked why you asked the question. I still think the first one looks nicer.  :)

Saying you were still considering buying it would have been fine.  ;)

 

That's alright. I am sorry I misunderstood your answer. Some times the language barrier is a problem for me. Thank you for your opinion on the matter. I like the first one esthetically more too, but considering that the tale is not preserved and that it should pay customs I am more in favor of the second one. I wanted to ask, is the second one's pinchers what I see on the sides of the fossil? :)

Edited by Savvas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMG_20230329_030240.jpg.575d2f24efcdfe652f035a8703d37879.jpg

  • I found this Informative 1

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  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

1 hour ago, Fossildude19 said:

IMG_20230329_030240.jpg.575d2f24efcdfe652f035a8703d37879.jpg

Very interesting observations! I am very surprised. So on the part that you say that there is an odd curve to the telson and that there is a brake, what could that mean? Also the right unidentified bits, could they be pinchers? Thanks again for you very informative and visual guide!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.thumb.png.4c135ffc8c713c6355546242a98bbbad.png
This is from Jan Nieszkowski's 1858 dissertation. Eurypterus did not have pincers in the sense that a crab or Pterygotus would, the Chelicerae of these creatures was a very small appendage and was likely mostly used for breaking up food near the mouth rather than grasping or being used defensively.  In the  "unidentifiable bits" I believe you are seeing on the right side of that specimen a portion of an appendage as well as a portion of the paddle appendage and subsequent paddle. Otherwise I agree with Fossildude's markups. 
EurypterusTFF.thumb.jpg.f90d98b24b032adc4f546be4c8a8069c.jpg

 


 

  • I found this Informative 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Savvas said:

Very interesting observations! I am very surprised. So on the part that you say that there is an odd curve to the telson and that there is a brake, what could that mean? Also the right unidentified bits, could they be pinchers? Thanks again for you very informative and visual guide!

The odd curve could indicate some trickery done on the fossil to make it appear articulated when it was not actually articulated. Though I will say I have seen curves like this on specimens as they came out of the ground. 

The "break" you are seeing does indeed look like that portion of the rock was reattached at best and perhaps even "Frankensteined" on to make the specimen appear articulated. It is possible that telson is from another specimen entirely. 

Something to keep in mind if you do decide to purchase that (some people have preferences of 100% natural, others are okay with restoration and care about aesthetics, no right or wrong)
 

  • I found this Informative 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As regards eurypteriid paleo-ecology and functional morphology,Waterston's series of articles in the Environmental Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinbugh

can't be beaten

For everybody's entertainment :

 

 

A Gustav Holm colllage*

Holms figurations are excruciatingy detailed,image below is downsized and consist of Two of his plates

images out of copyright

500tffpxqw-Holm_Eurypterus_Fischeri_plate_1.jpg

Edited by doushantuo
  • I found this Informative 2

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, A.C. said:

The odd curve could indicate some trickery done on the fossil to make it appear articulated when it was not actually articulated. Though I will say I have seen curves like this on specimens as they came out of the ground. 

The "break" you are seeing does indeed look like that portion of the rock was reattached at best and perhaps even "Frankensteined" on to make the specimen appear articulated. It is possible that telson is from another specimen entirely. 

Something to keep in mind if you do decide to purchase that (some people have preferences of 100% natural, others are okay with restoration and care about aesthetics, no right or wrong)
 

Thank you for your reply. The seller sent me a message and told me that there is a line that was fixed there. Here is the photo he sent me and the red circle indicates the part that was fixed. I don't know if I should buy it or not. Does it seem that bad that it was glued?

Screenshot_2023-03-29-20-57-08-017-edit_com.ebay.mobile.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Savvas said:

Thank you for your reply. The seller sent me a message and told me that there is a line that was fixed there. Here is the photo he sent me and the red circle indicates the part that was fixed. I don't know if I should buy it or not. Does it seem that bad that it was glued?

Screenshot_2023-03-29-20-57-08-017-edit_com.ebay.mobile.jpg

 

Completely your personal preference.

 

Some of our members are “purists” who only have raw out of the ground as found specimens others are happy to have restored specimens and even others are happy with replicas of specimens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A.C. said:

 

Completely your personal preference.

 

Some of our members are “purists” who only have raw out of the ground as found specimens others are happy to have restored specimens and even others are happy with replicas of specimens.

Very interesting! What kind of these collectors do you consider yourself if I may ask from curiosity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Savvas said:

Very interesting! What kind of these collectors do you consider yourself if I may ask from curiosity?


I personally prefer as natural as possible though I do not turn down adding a neat specimen to the collection if there is some restoration or repair done - especially if it is something that I have wanted. 

 

Again there really is no right or wrong answer here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, A.C. said:


I personally prefer as natural as possible though I do not turn down adding a neat specimen to the collection if there is some restoration or repair done - especially if it is something that I have wanted. 

 

Again there really is no right or wrong answer here.

I asked the seller, he told me there is a repaired crack line but no alternation or any Frankensteining done to the specimen. He says that he tries to sell as pure as possible with any repairs or alternations always stated in the comments. I think I like how this specimen looks. About collecting, I think my opinion is that I like my specimen to be as natural as possible with a few details touched up so it looks nice. I am not against restoration in general, but I wouldn't like a specimen that is composite or too much restored.

 

Edited by Savvas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/29/2023 at 10:34 AM, Fossildude19 said:

IMG_20230329_030240.jpg.575d2f24efcdfe652f035a8703d37879.jpg

 

Could there be more parts undiscovered on the rock? Would it be wise for someone to try clearing the rock? if yes what tools should be used? Or it is what it is and should not be left as 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Savvas said:

Could there be more parts undiscovered on the rock? Would it be wise for someone to try clearing the rock? if yes what tools should be used? Or it is what it is and should not be left as 

It is possible there are more parts covered by matrix. They could be prepped out by someone with the right tools, but, not sure it would improve the piece at all.

Bottom line for me is the second one looks like a composite to me.  There seem to be too many sections in the tail. I'd pass on it, myself.

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  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

14 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

It is possible there are more parts covered by matrix. They could be prepped out by someone with the right tools, but, not sure it would improve the piece at all.

Bottom line for me is the second one looks like a composite to me.  There seem to be too many sections in the tail. I'd pass on it, myself.

I appreciate your opinion. Sorry for asking but I want to be sure I understand correctly, when you say too many sections in the tail you mean it seems bigger than it should?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Savvas said:

I appreciate your opinion. Sorry for asking but I want to be sure I understand correctly, when you say too many sections in the tail you mean it seems bigger than it should?

Assuming I marked this correctly this does have the right number of segments.

 

To @Fossildude19's point though it really looks really suspect the transition between segment 11 and 12. Im probably in the belief at this point in time that Segment 12 and the telson are of a different specimen.


I think the overall opinion your going to find here is:

  • Specimen 1 is more natural with just a repaired crack
  • Specimen 2 at minimum has a repaired and restored crack though likely has more going on.



Eurypterid.thumb.jpg.27201745597d27adf971ea63c9c7f0a8.jpg

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, A.C. said:

Assuming I marked this correctly this does have the right number of segments.

 

To @Fossildude19's point though it really looks really suspect the transition between segment 11 and 12. Im probably in the belief at this point in time that Segment 12 and the telson are of a different specimen.


I think the overall opinion your going to find here is:

  • Specimen 1 is more natural with just a repaired crack
  • Specimen 2 at minimum has a repaired and restored crack though likely has more going on.



Eurypterid.thumb.jpg.27201745597d27adf971ea63c9c7f0a8.jpg

Thank you very much for the clarification! I am learning so much with all of you. An idea that I had is that could it be that the telson was from the same specimen, found in the same rock, but it was detached after the death of the organism, and when it was found it was found with space between the last segment and the telson and reattached with some restoration work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...