Trilobase Users question

[crabfossilsteve 27]

Hey Trilobase Users.  Finally, decided it was time to seriously address cateloguing my fossil collection.  I just started using the Trilobase program, so I'm still on a learning curve.   So far I like many of its features, however, the Geologic Section for the Collection Site information does not seem to have a designated spot for including the site's geologic formation.  Since the geologic formation is important information for a fossil specimen, this seems to be an oversight.  I'm curious how you users have dealt with this issue?   Please let me know what you have done to resolve this issue.

  

           Thanks

 

[LordTrilobite 2,172]

I've been using Trilobase for a while now. And yeah it can be an issue that there's no field for filling in the formation. There's two methods I use to work around this. Sometimes I just use the formation as location. The downside is that you sometimes have to make duplicates. So for example I have locations set for Hell Creek formation Montana and another for Hell Creek formation South Dakota.

 

In other situations I do not have formation information in the location at all. Often formation is unknown for many fossils from certain locations. Like fossils from the Kem Kem beds often lack formation info. But when the info is present, what I do is I add the formation as a comment on the fossil page itself. So then it's not tied to the location, but I do have the formation info saved together with the fossil. Which is of course the most important as no information is lost.

[crabfossilsteve 27]

Thanks LordTrilobite for the information on how you are addressing this issue with Trilobase.  Danny also resonded to a message and indicated one could use the space below the Age: on the Fossil page for entering the Formation information.  That seems to be a good fit also, although I think it would be better to have a specific location titled Formation.  hope that helps.