1,000 Fossils in TFF Collections

[DPS Ammonite]

The Fossil Forum has reached an important milestone: we now have 1,000 fossils with pictures and descriptions in our collections section.

We beat our fellow paleontology website MyFossil to the 1,000 mark even though they had a big head start; they started in November 2014 while we started last September. Check out the quality fossils and posts at MyFossil: http://www.myfossil.org/.

 

I encourage everyone to help create the best online digital collection of fossils in the world. Take a look at your best fossils and see if we could use a picture of it in our digital fossil collection. I have seen a lot of fossils in FF posts that are worthwhile to add to our collection.

 

 

[oilshale]

But still a long way to go to beat Steinkern's gallery with almost 7600 pictures: http://steinkern.de/steinkern-de-galerie.html  This should be our next goal.

Thomas
 

[sixgill pete]

This is a great achievement and is a testament to the membership of our forum about their passion of fossiling. It also shows their quest to gain more insight and knowledge into their "hobby" and the willingness to pass that knowledge along. (I for one have had to do some research into the taxonomy of most of the fossils I have put into the collections) 

The collections page has been a great addition to our forum. 

[Ludwigia]

Steinkern has been going at it much longer, so I would hope that we are moving along a bit quicker here exponentially speaking. I've uploaded all my relevant ammonites and nautiloids now and will probably carry on at some point with gastropods and bivalves. But I'm basically just restricted to the Jurassic. I'm sure that others here have a lot more cretaceous, paleogene, paleozoic and other things to show other than molluscs, so please don't hesitate to upload. There are still also a lot of mesozoic molluscs which aren't yet included which I'm sure some of the other participants in this forum have in their collections. I see a lot of things in the private albums which could contribute meaningfully to the collections database.

[Fossil-Hound]

Great milestone. I have a bunch of trilobites and other marine fossils that need to be added and I'll start this weekend. Just submitted a Bellacartwrightia last night and that was a first entry for that species of trilobite. They are very difficult to find intact.

[ynot]

Congratulations to all that contributed to make this happen!!!

 

@DPS Ammonite thanks for bringing it to Our attention.

[RJB]

Well Im throughly confused.  I have no idea what any of this is?     And what is MyFossil?

 

RB

[Ludwigia]

2 hours ago, RJB said:

Well Im throughly confused.  I have no idea what any of this is?     And what is MyFossil?

 

RB

 

@RJB, if you look at the very top of the page, to the right of TheFossilForum logo you'll see the word "Collections". Just click on that and you can then read what it's all about. Like it says, the idea is to build a database on as much fauna as possible for identification purposes. I'm sure you could contribute quite a few interesting things as well once you get used to using the function, which isn't all that complicated. You just need to be able to give the taxonomic, stratigraphic and a bit of other information on the particular fossil which you are uploading, but it's all laid out quite simply in order to do that.

I'm sure that @DPS Ammonite can give you more info about MyFossil, which appears to be another website for fossil enthusiasts which I also didn't know existed until he posted the link

[RJB]

Thank you Ludwigia.  

 

RB

[RJB]

Ok, I get it now. 

 

RB

[LordTrilobite]

Well that certainly grew fast!

Great to hear we already have so many fossils on there. I haven't kept up with all the fossils added but I think both @oilshale and @Ludwigia deserve a mention for adding such a rediculous amount of fantastic fossils to the collection already. Truly great job! This is the kind of thing that makes the collections section a really useful research tool.

 

 

 

I'd also like to mention the database of Fossiel.net.

https://english.fossiel.net/id_system/fossil_id.php

 

It's been around for quite a while and has almost 4000 fossils in it at this time. What makes it really useful is how easy it is to search on.

 

 

[Ludwigia]

2 hours ago, RJB said:

Ok, I get it now. 

 

RB

 

Great!

[EMP]

4 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

 

@RJB, if you look at the very top of the page, to the right of TheFossilForum logo you'll see the word "Collections". Just click on that and you can then read what it's all about. Like it says, the idea is to build a database on as much fauna as possible for identification purposes. I'm sure you could contribute quite a few interesting things as well once you get used to using the function, which isn't all that complicated. You just need to be able to give the taxonomic, stratigraphic and a bit of other information on the particular fossil which you are uploading, but it's all laid out quite simply in order to do that.

I'm sure that @DPS Ammonite can give you more info about MyFossil, which appears to be another website for fossil enthusiasts which I also didn't know existed until he posted the link

 

Can anyone add to that, or is just for certain members?

 

Also, how complete would something have to be to get in? I have a few things that aren't on there, but they're not the best looking pieces.

[Ludwigia]

Just now, EMP said:

 

Can anyone add to that, or is just for certain members?

 

Also, how complete would something have to be to get in? I have a few things that aren't on there, but they're not the best looking pieces.

 

It's open for every regular member. You do however have to be somewhat picky and choosy about what you post, since the collections are meant to help people identify their fossils, so it probably wouldn't make much sense to post incomplete or poorly preserved ones.

[EMP]

Just now, Ludwigia said:

 

It's open for every regular member. You do however have to be somewhat picky and choosy about what you post, since the collections are meant to help people identify their fossils, so it probably wouldn't make much sense to post incomplete or poorly preserved ones.

 

I'll look into maybe posting a couple of things. Not much of what I find is even half as good as what most other members have, so maybe they'll all have better examples of the species in time.

[Ludwigia]

1 minute ago, EMP said:

 

I'll look into maybe posting a couple of things. Not much of what I find is even half as good as what most other members have, so maybe they'll all have better examples of the species in time.

If the species are rare, then they're certainly worth posting, even if the preservation isn't all that good.

[FossilDAWG]

Collections is intended to serve as a virtual museum and reference collection to assist others in identifying their finds.  When preparing your submissions keep the following in mind:

 

1. You should be very confident of the identification of your specimen before submitting it.  Not every specimen needs to be IDed to the level of species; in some cases (such as many dinosaur teeth) accurate identification is possible only to the level of taxonomic family or genus.  Use the best ID you are very confident of, and don't just "take a shot" at the species.  Use "sp." (short for species) if you don't know the species but you do know the genus.  Also don't just parrot dealer IDs, you should know enough about the specimen to have independently verified the dealer ID.  Dealers often just pass on IDs they get from their suppliers, and not uncommonly these are of dubious accuracy.

 

2. While it is not always necessary that the specimen be perfectly complete, it must clearly illustrate the diagnostic features needed so that others can compare their fossils to the reference. For example, many trilobite species are known only from isolated cephalons or pygidia and no complete individual has ever been found.  Obviously a well preserved and well prepped cephalon or pygidium would be quite acceptable for Collections, as they would be for a reference research collection. 

 

3. The photo (or better yet multiple photos from different angles) must be well lighted, in very crisp focus, and either have only the fossil of interest in frame, or have that fossil as the unambiguous subject of the photo.  In other words, no photos of plates showing a dozen different fossils so the viewer has to guess, or know in advance, exactly what the fossil of interest is.  Really look at your photos and evaluate their quality before making your submission; poor photos of a great specimen won't make the grade.   

 

4. All the data about taxonomy, geology, and locality must be filled out.  For the locality you need not go so far as posting GPS coordinates, but county and a nearby town would be a reasonable minimum amount of data. 

 

Collections is curated, and will be even more so going forward, and the curators will guide you towards putting together a quality submission.  Sometimes, unfortunately, they may have to tell people their submission is not up to the standard we are trying to maintain.  Think of it this way, does you specimen provide enough detail that someone could confidently identify their find by comparing it to your photo(s)?  Collections is also not meant as an alternative to your personal galleries.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Don

[oilshale]

I HAVE A DREAM….. 

My dream is to build up – with the help of all other TFF members - the biggest and most comprehensive virtual museum in the web. I would guess ,TFF  being the largest fossil community in the world, this should be feasible.

"Collections" will also include some showy and rare fossils, but every fossil in this section will contribute in the same way to its value and usefulness. Species don't have to be rare to be of scientific value.
 

Want to know more about a certain species? Not sure about identification and would like to compare with other samples? Need a picture? Need a reference? Want to know what else can be found at a certain location? Need literary quotes?
In the future, collections might have the right answer to all of these questions (and even might be able to rival Wikipedia in this respect).

 

Got a fossil from somewhere? Have a decent photo? Know where it is from, what age it is and its name? Is it new to collections? Will it be of some help for others? If so, please post it – don’t hesitate!

 

Thomas

 

PS: Of course, @FossilDAWG (Don) is right, there are certain "rules" to keep in mind (and he gave an excellent overview), but help and guidance will be provided  - so don't be discouraged to contribute!

 

 

[Cris]

I will contribute a great deal of Florida Pleistocene vertebrate material from my collection as soon as I get the time.

There have been a lot of internal discussions about Collections lately and how we could go about encouraging more people to submit quality specimens to it. We know our members have them.  

I have no doubts that we can build up a massive database using Collections if we all work together on it.
 

[Auspex]

That's the goal! Clarifying the purpose will get the snowball rolling, especially when it is clear that the project is a global reference museum. Plenty of folks will want to have their stuff viewed as such!

[Mediospirifer]

If I can get my camera to cooperate, I have a lot of brachiopods and bryozoa that can be added. I noticed that there are (presently) only 11 brachipods in there, of which I have 1!

 

One suggestion: I notice that the "Sort By" menu gives results in reverse alphabetical order. I sorted gastropods by "Age" and was surprised to see the one Devonian gastropod in the middle of a lot of more recent ones! I think it would be useful to have a suggested notation for this field, perhaps as "45 MYA (Middle Lutetian)" instead of the other way around or just the name. That would still put 45 MYA after 400 MYA, but I think it would group better and be closer to chronological order.

 

Just a thought. I was looking for an option that would sort nicely by chronological age, and at present it doesn't.