Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Simple question is this trilobite real partially real or completely fake I understand much of large Cambrian trilobites are completely fake and have no actual genuine fossil remains in them I would like to be informed of which category this "fossil" falls into thanks in advance. (I'm expecting all the replies to be fake if it is completely fake with no fossil remains at all I ask for advice on what to look for next time I know most of the common signs only after the purchase of the "fossil" but before I completely give up the idea of a genuine fossil I figured some more experienced people could look at it again thanks in advance.

 

20170717_170921.jpg

20170717_170931.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

Moved your post to the correct sub-Forum. ;) 

Regards,

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fossildude19 said:

Moved your post to the correct sub-Forum. ;) 

Regards,

Thank you 

Link to post
Share on other sites
fossilized6s

The key to telling if this may be real or at least parts of it is to look for very small uniform bumpy details. Or please provide some better detailed pictures so we can see better details. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
LordTrilobite

I agree with fossilized6s. Better photos are required to make an accurate judgement.

 

Though I will say that based on just these photos I'd hazard a guess and say that the front is real and the dark parts in the back are sculpted. The back seems a bit lacking in detail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seguidora-de-Isis

In fact, for a better analysis, I would need better quality photos. But in my opinion, something is wrong with this fossil. A fossil must have a uniform color and not change suddenly from one color to another, although in very rare cases this may be possible, but I do not see how this may be the case here. I believe it may be a composition and the grooves around the fossil can hide suspicious fills.

 

 

01.PNG

 

It is very rare to discover an Trilobite Andalusiana sp. complete and still in good condition. I have one here in my private collection so you can compare. And note that mine is also possibly a composition.

 

 

02.PNG

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Seguidora-de-Isis said:

In fact, for a better analysis, I would need better quality photos. But in my opinion, something is wrong with this fossil. A fossil must have a uniform color and not change suddenly from one color to another, although in very rare cases this may be possible, but I do not see how this may be the case here. I believe it may be a composition and the grooves around the fossil can hide suspicious fills.

 

 

01.PNG

Good eye there Seguidora,

 

I missed that!

 

I was drawn to the strange fracturing and colour transition on the tail end which reminded me of some type of putty or filler inside the rock.

Hard to say without clearer pictures.

 

like you say that colour transition is odd, but not impossible. Exposed vs not exposed fossil for example (different weathering).

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
fossilized6s

The color difference is due to a common yellow oxide coating that usually covers these trilobites. The edges of the thorax and pygidium are often times sculpted. And you will notice a slight color difference in texture and color of a putty was used for sculpting. I'll will take pictures of my 90% real one when i get home and show you details to look for. 

 

This is a great link and addresses these Paradoxidae fakes in detail. 

https://www.paleodirect.com/fake-trilobites-how-to-identify/

 

  • I found this Informative 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seguidora-de-Isis
52 minutes ago, Doctor Mud said:

Good eye there Seguidora,

 

I missed that!

 

I was drawn to the strange fracturing and colour transition on the tail end which reminded me of some type of putty or filler inside the rock.

Hard to say without clearer pictures.

 

like you say that colour transition is odd, but not impossible. Exposed vs not exposed fossil for example (different weathering).

 

Thank you my friend Doctor Mud! I also think there is something weird about this fossil. But sadly it is common because 99.9% of these trilobites Andalusiana sp.  are being sold, or it is 100% sculpture, or it is composition ... It is very rare to find a Trilobite Andalusiana sp. complete and 100% true. Hugs!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fossilized6s said:

The color difference is due to a common yellow oxide coating that usually covers these trilobites. The edges of the thorax and pygidium are often times sculpted. And you will notice a slight color difference in texture and color of a putty was used for sculpting. I'll will take pictures of my 90% real one when i get home and show you details to look for. 

 

This is a great link and addresses these Paradoxidae fakes in detail. 

https://www.paleodirect.com/fake-trilobites-how-to-identify/

 

Great Link there Charlie.

Thanks for posting it. I see it is also in your signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Seguidora-de-Isis said:

ct, for a better analysis, I would need better quality photos. But in my opinion, something is wrong with this fossil. A fossil must have a uniform color and not change suddenly from one color to another, although in very rare cases this may be possible, but I do not see how this may be the case here. I believe it may be a composition and the grooves around the fossil can hide suspicious fills.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Doctor Mud said:

Good eye there Seguidora,

 

I missed that!

 

I was drawn to the strange fracturing and colour transition on the tail end which reminded me of some type of putty or filler inside the rock.

Hard to say without clearer pictures.

 

like you say that colour transition is odd, but not impossible. Exposed vs not exposed fossil for example (different weathering).

I noticed all of these factors especially color difference and the suspicious texture and color I think I located air bubbles too here is the supposed specimen under a microscope.

Here are some pictures what do you think? 

S20170717_0010.jpg

S20170717_0007.jpg

S20170717_0006.jpg

S20170717_0009.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LordTrilobite said:

I agree with fossilized6s. Better photos are required to make an accurate judgement.

 

Though I will say that based on just these photos I'd hazard a guess and say that the front is real and the dark parts in the back are sculpted. The back seems a bit lacking in detail.

That's what I was thinking to be honest I would be satisfied with that considering the price it was for. Here's a picture of the back darker end of the trilobite.

20170717_210952[1].jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those look more like minerals than bubbles.

Bubbles will be a small round hole in the surface.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ynot said:

Those look more like minerals than bubbles.

Bubbles will be a small round hole in the surface.

Really does that mean it's real? I've heard sometimes they use two different specimens but I don't know if that's really the case here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ryan Dye said:

Really does that mean it's real? I've heard sometimes they use two different specimens but I don't know if that's really the case here.

I can not say if it is real or not. Only that those did not look like bubbles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ynot said:

I can not say if it is real or not. Only that those did not look like bubbles.

Does it mean anything that orange stuff only on the brighter side of the trilobite was smeared on the bubble wrap when I un-packaged it from getting home from the trip I was on?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ryan Dye said:

Does it mean anything that orange stuff only on the brighter side of the trilobite was smeared on the bubble wrap when I un-packaged it from getting home from the trip I was on?

Iron oxide is often chalk like and will rub off onto anything it comes into contact with. (think of touching a rusted nail.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
fossilized6s

My genuine specimen, and here are a few signs that it is. 

 

20170717_195629.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case I think until further evidence is presented the beginning half of the trilobite is real however you mentioned you did not notice air bubbles on the back side of the trilobite either this area did not rub off anything like the front

1 minute ago, ynot said:

Iron oxide is often chalk like and will rub off onto anything it comes into contact with. (think of touching a rusted nail.)

 

1 minute ago, fossilized6s said:

My genuine specimen, and here are a few signs that it is. 

 

20170717_195629.jpg

 

What's your conjecture on the fossil at question? Do you think it is 100% fake or possibility to be partially reconstructed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
fossilized6s

Calcite filled cracks and breaks are a good sign. Most casts are almost flawless, which is a bad sign. 

20170717_204741.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ryan Dye said:

In that case I think until further evidence is presented the beginning half of the trilobite is real however you mentioned you did not notice air bubbles on the back side of the trilobite either this area did not rub off anything like the front

 

 

What's your conjecture on the fossil at question? Do you think it is 100% fake or possibility to be partially reconstructed?

I'd also like to note it wasn't commercially bought on the internet it was at a privately owned museum in Blowing rock NC

1 minute ago, fossilized6s said:

Calcite filled cracks and breaks are a good sign. Most casts are almost flawless, which is a bad sign. 

20170717_204741.jpg

There are a abundant cracks in the top half however the lower half is almost perfect

Link to post
Share on other sites
fossilized6s

Very fine detail, such as bumps and texturing.

20170717_204658.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, fossilized6s said:

Very fine detail, such as bumps and texturing.

20170717_204658.jpg

So what are you trying to convey that it's fake or real I understand your reasoning thank you for the tips much appreciated but what's your final opinion on the subject?

Link to post
Share on other sites
fossilized6s

In this specimen you can clearly see the poorly reconstructed parts. There is a color difference as well as texture difference. 

 

 

20170717_204905.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seguidora-de-Isis
1 hour ago, Ryan Dye said:

 

I noticed all of these factors especially color difference and the suspicious texture and color I think I located air bubbles too here is the supposed specimen under a microscope.

Here are some pictures what do you think? 

S20170717_0010.jpg

S20170717_0007.jpg

S20170717_0006.jpg

S20170717_0009.jpg

 

Looking at the new photos you uploaded, I think it's authentic yes, but it was a composition with 2 trilobites.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to post
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...