Clypeaster restoration?

[KatzFeldkurat]

Hello!

I hope there is room for this topic in here.

 

I collect fossils since years, and began preparing for a year, but I always thrown away broken pieces. Now I found a totally new species of Clypeaster in one of my regularly visited locality (only this one in 8 years), but sadly a piece is missing (I saw it bouncing down the wall, and never found the white fragment amids of thousands of white rubbish...was so angry..). So I began to think about restoration, not just preparation. I want to find a way of restoring this piece for my collection, instead of dump it away.

 

I read about that putty will work for restoring missing pieces, I thought about maybe gypsum could be used, but I don't understand the way of copying the texture with some material. What can I use for taking off the texture of the intact parts and use it as a cast for the putty part? Where can I buy it? How is it used for this purpose?

What type of paint could be used with putty?

 

Is it even possible with this specimen? Is it even possible for a beginner? Maybe I should try the method out with Pectens from this locality..

 

Please if somebody could answer my questions, and help, or even explain it for me, it would make me really happy!  I don't want to create an abomination 

 

Thank you!

 

Here is the piece:

Edited March 16, 2017 by KatzFeldkurat

[Peat Burns]

PaleoSculp is a good material for this purpose.  You knead the two parts together like clay (1:1 ratio), using only as much as you need for the project at hand.  It can be worked for up to an hour before it starts to harden and can be softened with water during work.  It adheres well and can be painted.  

 

http://shop.paleobond.com/PaleoSculp-1-lb-PB121-01.htm

[Ludwigia]

Apoxie Sculpt is a similar product which may be more readily available in Europe. Just google it and you'll find lots of it.

[KatzFeldkurat]

Thank you for the advice! This is what I need!

 

Another question:

I read after how restorations works, and found the silicone rubbers that can be poured on the piece to take off the form and texture.

 

I will try Rubosil sr 20 type pourable silicone. If somebody has any experience with it, please share!

 

How much should I use? Is it enough to take a few cm rubber or should I pour a liter to get a big chunk to have a better hardness?

 

Is it hard enough to press it on the sculpt material, or should I press the sculpt in it?

 

It will be a first time job, I dont expect to be a great success, but I want to learn!

 

Greetings!

[Peat Burns]

This probably isn't going to be easy, and maybe others will have better ideas, but this is how I might approach it.

 

Make a "wall" of modelling clay around the area indicated here in red (either on your specimen, or better yet, on another specimen from the area in which yours is damaged, so you have the right spacing for the petaloids.

 

 

Tilt and prop the Clypeaster at an angle so you can pour your silicone rubber into the area bordered by clay.

 

Place your casting material in the cavity where the damage is and try to press the mold onto the casting material.  The problem with a casting material like paleosculp, in this case, is that if you press on it with your fingers after you remove the mold, you are going to damage the very surface structure you're trying to fabricate.  Moreover, it is stiff enough that the ultrastructure of the Clypeaster may not show up in the paleosculp.  

 

Therefore, using plaster of Paris (poured into your silicone mold) might be a better option, because you can carve the plaster to fit into the damaged area and then hide the gaps with plaster slip or paleosculp.

 

If there is no well-preserved ultra structure on the original fossil, I might just sculpt the missing piece by hand with paleosculp.

 

 

That's what I would try.  Maybe others have some other ideas.

 

With kind regards.

[KatzFeldkurat]

Thank you for your answer!

Now I think, I can imagine how this should work, and I will try my hardest to make it real.

 

You say that I could make a "wall" from putty? Like milliput? Is it good for this purpose?

I already ordered Milliput and MagicSculp (this two was available with reasonable price). I read that for modelling purpose, people use Milliput for base and filling, and MagicScuplt for texuring. I think I will try the same, and I hope that the 2 types of putty will like each other.

 

Until now I thought about to do this:

I will prepare the intact sides as good as I can with vibrotool and vinegar

With the MagicScupl I will fill in the cracks and chips, after that I will pour the silicone to make the mold.

I will use milliput to sculpt the bulk of the missing petals and form the base.

After that I will probe the mold to the base, and see how it fits. I hope it will have room for adjustment, and wont be rigid, but Clypeaster should be more or less symmetrical.

I will use MagicSculp on the milliput base and after that I will press the mold on the putty.

 

But I'm already thinking about what you wrote, to use plaster of Paris instead, because the ultra structure is more or less gone from the upper part, so there is not too much to mold. So I will reconsider! Thanks for the advice!

 

I thought about too, to just sculpt the missing parts, and use some knife point and needle to make the petals and use fine dust from the preparing to dye and dirty the surface of the putty, and if it's not enough, use water color, but molding seems better anyway, I fear that if I try to sculpt the whole part it will be ugly..

 

Here are 2 close ups on the piece, so all the details (no ultra structure):

 

 

 

 

With kind regards.

 

[steelhead9]

An easier way of making a cast would be to go to www.micromark.com and buy  a container of RTV silicone putty. You simply mix the 2 parts, giving you a nice putty, then press it over the area you want to cast. No need for walls to contain liquid silicone. It sets very quickly. You can then press milliput or apoxie sculpt into the mold to make your cast. Artist's acrylic paint is fine for painting.

[Harry Pristis]

An epoxy repair in this case may be overkill.  I don't think this is a museum standard.  I think I might use plaster -- Hydrocal, a plaster much harder than plaster of Paris.  I might build up the patch, then carve out a representation of the lost petals.  The repair will never be perfect, and probably you shouldn't try to make it so.  A plaster patch will be easier, quicker, and look just as good as an epoxy patch.  You can use the time saved to hunt for another example.

[KatzFeldkurat]

Thank You for the answers!

 

steelhead9:

Thank you for the advice! Now I got this pourable silicone, so I will go with it and see..

 

Harry Pristis:

You are absolutely right, that it is overkill, and the specimen is no museum grade! Peat Burns said that too, to use plaster. I choose this piece for learning purpose, to try out and learn how to use putty, and casting.

 

But now I will reconsider it a little bit more, and decide what to do.

 

 

With kind regards.

[Peat Burns]

1 hour ago, KatzFeldkurat said:

Thank You for the answers!

 

steelhead9:

Thank you for the advice! Now I got this pourable silicone, so I will go with it and see..

 

Harry Pristis:

You are absolutely right, that it is overkill, and the specimen is no museum grade! Peat Burns said that too, to use plaster. I choose this piece for learning purpose, to try out and learn how to use putty, and casting.

 

But now I will reconsider it a little bit more, and decide what to do.

 

 

With kind regards.

Hi @KatzFeldkurat

 

It sounded like, from your original post, that you were interested in reconstructing the missing piece in a way that included the fine surface texture.  Here is a close-up of a modern Clypeaster rosaceus from my collection.

 

 

I'm not sure if your fossil has this detail preserved.  But, if it does, the best way that I know to record that kind of low-relief, fine detail is with a high quality silicone rubber designed for mold-making as well as a liquid casting medium such as plaster or resin.   Having said that, it would be a difficult process to mold, carve, and match-up with the missing part of your fossil.  

 

As you said, it doesn't appear that your specimen is unusually rare, of high scientific importance, or likely to be of particular interest to a museum, so the extent to which you reconstruct it, and the extent to which your work is reversible, is up to your personal taste and judgement.

 

If I were to reconstruct it, and if I did not care about including the fine texture in the repaired area, I would use the epoxy material such as paleosculp or equivalent even though it is not easily reversible.  This is something that you can easily mold by hand and tool.  You have an hour of working time, it adheres like its own adhesive, and it can be carved, sanded, and painted when it has set-up.

 

Let us see how you came along when finished!

 

With kind regards and best wishes,

[KatzFeldkurat]

Thank you for your answer!

 

Yes, the first Idea was to reconstruct the missing part as good as possible, and it will be a learning piece.

 

The upper part is eroded (you can see it on the pics above) so not too much to mold..

 

Now I understand what is reversible work and what is not..

So now I have  to do the work,  I try making a mold, and making a cast from plaster,  if its not good enough, I will use putty. If its done, I will post pics about it!

 

With kind regards.

[KatzFeldkurat]

The experiences so far:

In a nutshell, this is much harder than it seems

 

I tried out things in a smaller and much easier learning piece. I used milliput, and learned that its color is not the best suited for this type of work... I also forgot to take "before" pictures...

 

I tried to make a mold from a smaller region, to use as rubber stamp on putty, but it didn't work well. I will try in a different way next time, because the details were not looked natural anyhow I tried it, as I pressed it on the putty, it showed pressure lines. So after hardening out, I used super glue and powder from the preparation to cover the not so nice, green-banana color of the milliput... It seems more legit, but in the end, no details, and it would have worked only with superglue too  So its a failure.

 

I will continue, and try out plaster casting, and/or putty with a full mold to use as stamp. I wont give up until the piece is not as good as I imagined it, or I had to admit it never will be.

 

I hope that a good quality silicone mold and Magic Sculpt with a well prepared milliput base will do the trick, but beforehand I will try out the mold, and cast test molds from plaster to see how the fine details are working.

 

Here are the pics from this piece:

The part that was reconstructed with milliput putty, and was worked with vibro tool to have a better surface for applying superglue and powder.

 

 

The finished piece

 

 

The bottom of the finished piece (the reconstructed part is on the upper-left side.)

 

 

 

 

 

With kind regards.

[Ptychodus04]

That's much better than my first attempt at restoration.

[KatzFeldkurat]

8 minutes ago, Ptychodus04 said:

That's much better than my first attempt at restoration.

 

Thank you!

I am happy to hear its not hopeless!

[Peat Burns]

@KatzFeldkuratHey, that looks great!  I admire your systematic approach to achieving your ultimate goal of replicating the fine details on your first piece.  Keep us posted!  (Btw, I often forget to take "before" photos, too )

[Ludwigia]

Nicely done!

[KatzFeldkurat]

On 4/3/2017 at 11:49 PM, Peat Burns said:

@KatzFeldkuratHey, that looks great!  I admire your systematic approach to achieving your ultimate goal of replicating the fine details on your first piece.  Keep us posted!  (Btw, I often forget to take "before" photos, too )

Thank you for the support!  I m only saw that others can do it, than I want to learn to do it too 

 

Now I learned that the putty and super glue is kind of hydrophobic, and plaster or limestone powder are not cover it perfectly. I had to apply more than 2 layer, and it must be calculated with, because the thickness grows rapidly. Now I will test further and fine tune this method with other pieces. For me it looks promising to use plaster or putty and carve the surface and use superglue and layers of powder to color and texture it, but it is completely inadequate for replicating fine details.

 

[KatzFeldkurat]

Greetings!

 

I am back with some experience to share.

I am not completed the piece yet (sadly there are always other things to distract me, like working, or prepping heteromorphs from a new locality ) but here are some pictures how it is now:

 

I done the prepping of the cracks with putty, and do the molding with silicone rubber. It was easier than I thought, but I do not know yet how to clean the equipment used..  The only delicate thing was, to fix the piece without touching the bottom of the bowl, and have the good angle to successfully mold the part what I needed.

 

The finished rubber mold, ready for casting with something. I used plaster for first try, and made a few different sizes too. I quickly learned that this echinoid is not so symmetric as it looks like at first

 

 

Here is the casted plaster piece, but it is small in some parts, so I will do another one and carve it.

All I want to do now is to fit the casted part, fill the cracks and color it with some powdered rock, to have more natural look, and the project will be finished.

 

Some fine detail is showing, so far I learned a lot, and I think it was worth it. But I will say it after I finally finish it.

 

With kind regards

 

 

[Ptychodus04]

Looking good. Post pics of your heteromorphs too. 

[JohnBrewer]

What great commentary and advice.  

[KatzFeldkurat]

11 hours ago, Ptychodus04 said:

Looking good. Post pics of your heteromorphs too. 

Thank you!

Ok, I gladly post pics about my other prepworks  Is there a better topic for those?

 

6 hours ago, JohnBrewer said:

What great commentary and advice.  

Thanks! I am glad you find it informative. It is my first try, so I note and comment all the steps and mistakes, and learn how to do a better work next time!

[Ptychodus04]

4 hours ago, KatzFeldkurat said:

Thank you!

Ok, I gladly post pics about my other prepworks  Is there a better topic for those?

 

I usually start a new thread for different preparation jobs. It is less confusing that way.

[RJB]

  Seems like a lot of work for a clypeaster, but then I think, this is great experience.  Iether way, I commend you on your perserverance.

 

RB

[KatzFeldkurat]

On 4/30/2017 at 4:15 PM, RJB said:

  Seems like a lot of work for a clypeaster, but then I think, this is great experience.  Iether way, I commend you on your perserverance.

 

RB

Thanks!

 

On 4/28/2017 at 1:57 PM, Ptychodus04 said:

 

I usually start a new thread for different preparation jobs. It is less confusing that way.

Ok, I will do this! I hope it will be interesting, because the material is hard to prepare, and I will have some questions regarding it.

[KatzFeldkurat]

Greetings!

 

I finally completed this project!

After the 5th casted plaster that I carved, I finally give up and put in 2 pieces, I will fill the cracks maybe with plaster later.  I give myself an above average score, but I learnt a lot of things from this work.

 

Because the piece is not totally symmetric (why I belived it should be?) I thought about to have the rubber mold twisted at least in 2 ways, and have the plaster casted so it will better fit, but I finally put it aside... Maybe some day

So in the final piece, the casted parts are clearly visible. I tried to match the thickness and shape as good as possible, but the outside form of the casting bonded me.. so I simply cracked the plaster piece in half, and it fitted much better at least 60% of the sides... 

 

For the coloring I used powdered stone from an another locality, but the color was good for this piece. I simply rubbed on the powder with my fingers, and it stuck. I filled up some bubble holes in the casted part with dirt from the locality, and for first sight it looks better.

 

 

 

Conclusions are the following:

Aside from that, I know that a Clypeaster does not need such restoration, (I emphasize this was simply a learning project, and the motivation was that it is my only Clypeaster acuminatus from this locality ) the rubber molding method works really good. The harder part for me was to do some good casting.

Putty was not needed, it was a mistake to use it on the top part, because the plaster casting did not fit well because of it, and I can not color it with stone powder.

 

I completely rejected the putty, because I wanted some fine structure in the first place, and casting from putty and putting it to fill the hole and have a good result was not feasible in my opinion. 

Regarding this piece, the fine surface structure is not preserved well, but the rubber could take the finest details, so in the future I will use it maybe for creating stamps, not molds for smaller restoration projects. So regarding the initial attempt to reproduce the fine detail, its a 50% fail.

 

With the rubber casting method the form of the missing petals are exactly as they should be, I do not want to imagine what would have happened if I tried sculpting it from putty. So regarding the shape and the first look it is a pass.

 

To sum it up, I am glad to have posted this project here, I got a lot of feedback from all of you, learned a lot of things, and could choose a method that worked quite well. So thanks for everybody who helped me!

 

With kind regards