Rudrash Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 (edited) Help! This is real fossil or FAKE? I bought it from a seller from China at auction Ebay. Thank you! Edited March 20, 2013 by Rudrash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Hard to say from the posted pictures. To me it looks like there may be some painting on there, but, to be sure,... better, well lit, close up views of all parts would be necessary. Very hard to determine this without the fossil in hand. Search the forum for other threads about Keichosaurus - well covered territory here. Regards, 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...
Rudrash Posted March 20, 2013 Author Share Posted March 20, 2013 I added some new photos, you can say something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 The new pics look different than the first pics - did you remove the ink/paint? The wire brush marks look more distinct too. From the new pics - I think it looks more real, ... but I am not an expert on Keichosaurus. Still - you never know with chinese fossils. Regards, 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...
Rudrash Posted March 20, 2013 Author Share Posted March 20, 2013 (edited) First photo - Photo from seller on Ebay, my photos - what I received in the package. Thank you! Edited March 20, 2013 by Rudrash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Since you have the fossil in-hand, put a loupe to it. You will see details that are impossible to resolve from a picture on a monitor. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
araucaria1959 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 The pictures from the ebay seller were probably made in wet condition; this may explain the difference. I'm not experienced enough to say whether this is real or not, but I see no features which argue directly or without doubts in favour of a fake. Many fakes are very bad or with obvious anatomical mistakes ... your specimen seems to me anatomically correct. araucaria1959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickNC Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 I find all of those suspect. They always seem to be in the same position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelhead9 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Looks real, but a typically poor job of grind-prepping. Araucaria 1959 is correct. It was photographed wet for ebay. Black museum wax or shoe polish could be carefully applied to just the bones and buffed to make the contrast more permanent (wax is very easily removed). Still Life Fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudrash Posted March 21, 2013 Author Share Posted March 21, 2013 thank you everyone! It a first fossil in my collection and i want authentic fossil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 (edited) I am just wondering if the difference between the two sets of fossil pics could be explained by the dealer taking pics of the fossil while wet, or if there was some removal of paint involved somewhere? This is my attempt at comparison: To me, it appears that more "prepping" was done. Anyone else have thoughts about this? Regards, EDIT - I made a decent animated gif to compare the two - but it wouldn't work in the post. Sorry. Edited March 21, 2013 by Fossildude19 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...
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