Real Walliserops trilobite?

[zschagrin]

I just acquired this from a mineral show outside Philadelphia. I'm pretty sure the specimen is real, but I just want to double-check. I'm also pretty sure there are a couple spots on the underside of the matrix that have been filled in, but I don't mind that. I checked and there aren't any air bubbles from resin drying, and I used my teeth to check the hardness, and the trilobite feels harder than the trilobite casts I have my made. I also asked a couple of guys from the Delaware Mineralogical Society, who were at the show, and they said the fossil is real. My concern is some of the red on the trilobite body, but I'm thinking that could just be from oxidation.

I appreciate any help!

Thanks

[prem]

I'm sorry to inform you...this is a (rather poorly done) cast. I hope you didn't pay too much for it.

---Prem

Edited April 2, 2016 by prem

[Fossil Claw]

I'm sorry to inform you...this is a (rather poorly done) cast. I hope you didn't pay too much for it.

---Prem

Why not help him and explain why you feel it is a cast.

[zschagrin]

Do you think it is a cast?

Why not help him and explain why you feel it is a cast.

[prem]

Ok...further explanation:

1. if you look on e-bay, there are several almost identical to this where the vendor clearly states it is a cast, as well as oodles of very similar casts seen on the "how to identify trilobite fakes" pages.

2. the body proportions are all wrong - the terminal pygidial spine should be shorter than the others, the genal spines more "flared out", the trident is much longer than the longest legitimate one I have ever seen. There is very little differentiation between the body segments and pygidium (I'm not even sure if the last six or seven spines are supposed to be pygidium or pleurae) - a real, long-forked Walliserops would have five pygidial spines on either side of the shorter terminal spine - for a total of eleven.

3. lack of detail - no lenses in the eyes, no bumps where the spines might have been even if it was a very poor prep job, no furrows on the glabella.

4. lack of the "devonian crack" - a crack running through the matrix and the fossil, where the original specimen-containing-rock would have been cracked open and glued back together.

5. lack of layering - no matrix between segments...no overlap of segments...it is clearly a painted cast.

6. tons of random tool marks used to hide the fact that it is a cast.

Is that better?

---Prem

Edited April 2, 2016 by prem

[Fossil Claw]

Ok...further explanation:

1. if you look on e-bay, there are several almost identical to this where the vendor clearly states it is a cast, as well as oodles of very similar casts seen on the "how to identify trilobite fakes" pages.

2. the body proportions are all wrong - the terminal pygidial spine should be shorter than the others, the genal spines more "flared out", the trident is much longer than the longest legitimate one I have ever seen. There is very little differentiation between the body segments and pygidium (I'm not even sure if the last six or seven spines are supposed to be pygidium or pleurae) - a real, long-forked Walliserops would have five pygidial spines on either side of the shorter terminal spine - for a total of eleven.

3. lack of detail - no lenses in the eyes, no bumps where the spines might have been even if it was a very poor prep job.

4. lack of the "devonian crack" - a crack running through the matrix and the fossil, where the original specimen-containing-rock would have been cracked open and glued back together.

5. lack of layering - no matrix between segments...no overlap of segments...it is clearly a painted cast.

6. tons of random tool marks used to hide the fact that it is a cast.

Is that better?

---Prem

Yes, thank you.

[zschagrin]

Ok...further explanation:

1. if you look on e-bay, there are several almost identical to this where the vendor clearly states it is a cast, as well as oodles of very similar casts seen on the "how to identify trilobite fakes" pages.

2. the body proportions are all wrong - the terminal pygidial spine should be shorter than the others, the genal spines more "flared out", the trident is much longer than the longest legitimate one I have ever seen. There is very little differentiation between the body segments and pygidium (I'm not even sure if the last six or seven spines are supposed to be pygidium or pleurae) - a real, long-forked Walliserops would have five pygidial spines on either side of the shorter terminal spine - for a total of eleven.

3. lack of detail - no lenses in the eyes, no bumps where the spines might have been even if it was a very poor prep job, no furrows on the glabella.

4. lack of the "devonian crack" - a crack running through the matrix and the fossil, where the original specimen-containing-rock would have been cracked open and glued back together.

5. lack of layering - no matrix between segments...no overlap of segments...it is clearly a painted cast.

6. tons of random tool marks used to hide the fact that it is a cast.

Is that better?

---Prem

Thank you very much. I actually used these reasons as a way to get a refund from the vendor. I really appreciate your help!

[glu]

I agree,a badly painted cast. You can see it's not well coloured between the trilobite and the matrix

[FossilDudeCO]

I agree,a badly painted cast. You can see it's not well coloured between the trilobite and the matrix

Are you talking about the little black spots on the matrix there?

[prem]

Thank you very much. I actually used these reasons as a way to get a refund from the vendor. I really appreciate your help!

I'm glad you managed to get a refund. Real Walliserops are fairly pricey, and will set you back anywhere between $600 and $1500, depending on the quality of the fossil. I did manage to find a real one with relatively poor prep, but not terrible, for $100 one time. You may want to try getting a few less expensive, but real, bugs to build your collection - reasonably priced Hollardops, Coltraneia, Cheirurus/Crotalocephalus, Paralejurus, Scutellum, Gerastos, and Cornuproetus can be found.

I just sent another member a list of trilo dealers that I have dealt with and/or that I feel comfortable with their photographs that they have genuine fossils and not fakes. If you send me a personal message requesting it, I would be happy to forward it to you. NOTE: I am not a dealer--just a happy customer.

---Prem