CONCH-L Archives

Conchologists List

CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tom Eichhorst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Conchologists List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:16:20 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
Jim and others,

I applaud you on trying to ignite something, but I believe we are beating a
dead horse.  Shell grading is, after all is said and done, subjective.
Applying hard numbers; whether 1-10, 0-100, or good-fair-gem with half-step
pluses and minuses is, to quote an old and horrible phrase, "like nailing
jell-o to the wall" - just won't work.  The present system, if limited to
good, fair, and gem with pluses and minus (singles only, please), leaves us
8 categories, or 3-10 of Jim's system (and would 1 or 2 ever really be
used?).  Actually, as I can't see using a plus or minus with "good," I guess
it leaves us with six categories.  Still, this ought to be sufficient with
such a subjective enterprise.  If we all adhere to as firm a standard as
possible within this system, i.e.

gem = mature with NO flaws;
gem- = a minor flaw not readily discernable;
fine+ = a discernable minor flaw or two,
fine = a readily apparent flaw or two or a filed lip
fine- = large "reef scar," other evident flaws, broken spire, filed lip;
good = beached, worn with faded colors, major flaws;

poor = I had to add this as I have a couple of shells that are closer to
rocks than shells.  I have a Cypraea valentia that I paid $10 for (I just
had to see what a $10 C. valentia would look like).  Whatever you think, it
is worse.

Anyway, using this system (with none of this "gem for the species nonsense),
I have very few gem shells.  Gem seems mostly limited to Cypraea and
Marginella.  The species in most other genera always seem to have one or two
minor flaws; a tiny chip, surface scratch, etc., thus F+.  I have seen only
a couple of gem cones.  If you pick up a mature naticid or turrid and cannot
SEE a flaw, than it is genuinely a gem.  If you can find a minor flaw under
magnification, then gem-, etc.

I find that when an established shell dealer says a shell is gem or fine+, I
know what to expect.  It is kind of a gestalt process, and while far from a
perfect system, it does seem that we all (globally) pretty much understand
it.  That alone is worth something.

Tom Eichhorst

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2