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:
"Cramer, John" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 25 Oct 1999 14:31:53 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
You can't detect paint from a picture but a thick coating would be apparent.
None is.  I suspect the thing has been soaked in some thin solution with
paint dissolved in it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aydin Orstan [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, October 25, 1999 10:34 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Phosphorescent Seashell?
>
> John,
> How can you tell if a shell was painted or not with a phosphorescent
> pigment
> by looking at its picture? If I were to make a shell glow in the dark, I'd
> use
> a phosphorescent ("glow-in-the-dark") nail polish, which are commonly
> sold.
> Nail polishes dissolve in acetone. So, a simple test would be to clean a
> part
> of the shell with acetone & then to see if that part glew less intensely
> than
> the rest. You need to convince the owner to do this, though.
>
> A.
>
>
> On Mon Oct 25 11:32:28 1999,
> "Cramer, John" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >Mark says he sees no sign of paint.  There is no sign of paint from the
> >pictures either.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Aydin Orstan [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> >> Sent: Monday, October 25, 1999 7:58 AM
> >> To:   [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject:      Re: Phosphorescent Seashell?
> >>
> >> Paul,
> >> The shell may be real, but it may have been painted with a
> phosphorescent
> >> paint.
> >>
> >> A.
> >

ATOM RSS1 RSS2