Log InRegister
Quick Links : The Mindat ManualThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryMindat Newsletter [Free Download]
Home PageAbout MindatThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusWho We AreContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatCorporate SponsorshipSponsor a PageSponsored PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic Time
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
Mining CompaniesStatisticsUsersMineral MuseumsClubs & OrganizationsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice SettingsThe Mineral Quiz
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesSearch by ColorNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryPhotography

Mineral PhotographyPhoto not on photo of the day....

8th Jan 2012 09:40 UTCPierre Rondelez

To whoever is responsible for accepting photo's on Mindat.

Yesterday I posted this photo on Mindat:

http://www.mindat.org/photo-436059.html

As I notice once again -this is the 3rd time recently that I post a "Kalahari Manganese Fields" mineral on Mindat -that it is not accepted and only shown in "My photo's"

The 2 others before were Olmiite and Orlymannite, both N'Chwaning mine.

I am 100% sure of the ID of the gageite on the photo I posted yesterday as I suspect that is the reason why it is not being shown.

Can I ask who decides to reject it and on what grounds?

I know that gageite is not the easiest mineral to recognise but that can be said about hundreds of other photo's that I encounter here, have they all been analysed?

Anyway:

I have put in a request to delete it as it is of no use on Mindat at all when nobody will ever find it here.

What disappoints me most of all is the fact that I must be one of a very rare breed of collectors who has had hundreds of "difficult" minerals analysed, both EDX and XRD, plus also hundreds of SEM photos taken of extremely small crystals.

Well, so be it, from now on: only photo's of the easy ones so you will have no problem with recognising them........

Pierre Rondelez

8th Jan 2012 10:08 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager

Relax, Pierre! I am sure there is an explanation for this one! If I am correct, either all of your photos get accepted right away, or none at all. Nobody verifies them before they are added, mistakes are reported afterworths.

And I understand your point, but you are not completely correct... I do visit your personal photos from time to tim, because I do not check added photos every day. So I would have seen it after all. I have a number of people from whom I enjoy their pictures, from an aesthetic and scientific point of view. And you are certainly one of them! So keep em coming please!

8th Jan 2012 10:09 UTCGeorge Eric Stanley Curtis

It often takes many days for a photo to be approved, it is necessary to wait.


Eric ;-)

8th Jan 2012 10:10 UTCByron Thomas

Pierre just because you post a photo does not mean it will be a photo of the day ive been here and i have quite a few photos and none have ever been a photo of the day. Don't take it personally, you have to remember there 10's of thousands of photos on mindat and there is only 365 days in a year. So that means that 9635 photos wont be shown.


Personally i think the photo you have linked is a very nice photo and a very nice specimen.



Byron

8th Jan 2012 10:28 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager

That is not what Pierre means, Byron. He is talking about the photo's 'new added today', or 'new added yesterday'.

8th Jan 2012 10:55 UTCTrevor Dart

I've had similar problems that when I upload a photo it sometimes does not appear in "new photos today" section. I've put it down to the fact that Australian time is a day ahead of GMT and the system must be confused... perhaps there should be a section for "new photos tomorrow"


One day, I might even make it into the elite club of those who have had their photo chosen for POTD. Mine have so far been in the 9635 that didn't make it. However, I still have a lot of samples as well as places of interest to photograph and post on mindat...


Cheers Trev

8th Jan 2012 12:00 UTCAmir C. Akhavan Expert

Pierre,


your photo has not been rejected (what makes you think so?)

It has simply not yet been approved.


As you certainly know, the photo approval process can be slow at times, however much we'd like to speed it up.

You have just uploaded the photo yesterday afternoon.

8th Jan 2012 12:14 UTCCraig Mercer

Yeah I know what saying Trevor, it really is a honour to have one of your specimens displayed as POTD


Keep trying Pierre, keep trying.........


http://www.mindat.org/photo-170516.html

8th Jan 2012 12:21 UTCAmir C. Akhavan Expert

You've uploaded several olmiite photos and all have been approved and are shown on the locality pages.


Not sure what happened to the orlymanite photo.

I can't see anything in your personal gallery.

8th Jan 2012 12:32 UTCPierre Rondelez

Yes Amir,

All my olmiite photo's have been approved but not without a struggle!

This one:

http://www.mindat.org/photo-412193.html

was at first rejected and it took me a lot of mailing back and fro + mailing other photo's from the same specimen before approval....

About orlymannite:

On the capture of this photo:

http://www.mindat.org/photo-430386.html

I had to change to "Calcite" and leave the name "orlymannite" only in the text so anybody looking for orlymannite will indeed never come across it.

On what basis do you ask: because " there is no mention in the literature of orlymannite from N'Chwaning II", now how silly is that...........

Because it is not published, it doesn't exist!!!!

And yes guys, I know that sometimes it takes time but the mere fact that it was not in yesterday's photo's means there is trouble......

Cheers for now,

Pierre

8th Jan 2012 12:52 UTCAmir C. Akhavan Expert

Pierre,


you are not the only one to "struggle", many others have to discuss the ID of their minerals with whoever in the management has a question about it.

And some people do not get their photos approved for general view on the basis of the information they could give.


And that is a good thing.


Mindat does certainly not claim that something that is not in the literature or on Mindat does not exist.


> And yes guys, I know that sometimes it takes time but the mere fact that it was not in yesterday's photo's means there is trouble......


I don't think there's any trouble, but you can help us speeding up the approval process:

If you have information that could help or that substantiates the ID, provide it!

It does not hurt to put a note on how the minerals were identified in the photo description (and you have done that already for some photos).

8th Jan 2012 12:54 UTCPierre Rondelez

To Graig,


I know perfectly well it's an honour Graig to have a photo selected to be 'POTD", I had the honour 8 times !

but as you mentioned: I will keep trying..........

Cheers,

Pierre

8th Jan 2012 13:02 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

Pierre

its been approved (site-wide) now, and I see now reason to delete it. I'm not sure why your other photos were not approved for site-wide, if you tell us the numbers we could check them. You do have a few olmiites approved, maybe the other was similar but poorer? We sometimes make them user only if they are poor photos.

8th Jan 2012 13:20 UTCPierre Rondelez

To Ralph:

Thanks, please do not delete the photo....

To Amir:

How am I sure it is what I say it is?

Here goes:

Some time ago I bought 2 specimens from a South African dealer, they had on the label:

Rhodochrosite+Manganite on Gageite from KMF/South Africa.

Beautiful specimens but with no specific location.......

Last Friday I received the book "The Manganese Adventure" by Cairncross Bruce et al.

Lo and behold: on page 171 is a photo of exactly the same specimen with:

"Wessels Mine, Rhodochrosite + Hausmannite on Gageite matrix, collection Cairncross".

Bingo: the exact location+ Manganite was wrong should have been Hausmannite.

So now I can upload a photo on Mindat, being sure of the identity of the 3 minerals (who am I not to believe Prof. Bruce Cairncross) and also to at last have the correct location.

Should I have mentioned all of that on the text with the photo, I think not................

Cheers again,

Pierre

8th Jan 2012 13:26 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

(I was beaten to the gun with my last post).

If you have any published report or analysis of orylmandite we are very happy to add it to the list, or we can sometimes even quote it as from someones collection if need be, if its something common - it does look right, but rare minerals usually requre some evidence. We try to avoid adding any mineral to a location that someone thinks just looks right.

8th Jan 2012 13:38 UTCAmir C. Akhavan Expert

> Should I have mentioned all of that on the text with the photo, I think not................

No.

If you have useful general information like "identified by method X" then, of course, put it in the photo description.

Other stories whenever a discussion starts.

Arguing by authority will not really help, though.

8th Jan 2012 22:03 UTCDebbie Woolf Manager

First of all I am the one that is looking at South African mineral photo's approval since November last year. I had no dispute that it was Rhodochrosite & Gageite, as Amir stated it was only loaded into the database around 2.30pm GMT, I am sorry I did not approved it quickly enough for you.


Regarding the Orlymanite, yes I did question this, I said it might not be the mineral stated & that it again might not be the locality, as far as I know it remains unique to the deposit according to the author mentioned above in another of his books.


I did do a little research prior to sending the complaint & found this specimen was originally sold on an auction site in SA, nowhere in the title or description states it is from N'Chwaning II Mine. I am not saying you are wrong or that I am right but you did not reply, we could have discussed this further but you made the edit & removed the Orlymanite.


A streak test may help to clarify this matter.


Regarding your comment "so anybody looking for Orlymanite will indeed never come across it" is not true, enter it as a 'keyword' in search boxes & it does show up.

9th Jan 2012 08:42 UTCPierre Rondelez

Good morning Debbie,

"I am not saying you are wrong or that I am right but you did not reply, we could have discussed this further but you made the edit & removed the Orlymanite. "

In all fairness: I was the one who answered your mail and never got a reply, that's why I edited the Calcite/Orlymannite photo and left the name Orlymannite only in the text.

You see: I can not prove 100% that orlymannite indeed is correct, I only have 1 specimen and will not have it analysed

"A streak test may help...."

I seriously think not, streak colour should be "light brown" but as good as all the other suspects such as Goethite, Caryopilite and others all have shades of brown as streak colour.........

In the past 35 years of mineral collecting I have never identified a "difficult" mineral by means of streak test, always by analysis: XRD or EDX !


Indeed, the seller only mentioned KMF as the location on that auction site but in an email to me (before posting the photo on Mindat) he stated that specimen coming from N'Chwaning II.

"as far as I know it remains unique to the deposit according to the author mentioned above in another of his books".

As I told you in my mail: when the miner who sold the specimen to the South African dealer states it comes from N'Chwaning II, so be it.


Pierre

9th Jan 2012 13:33 UTCDebbie Woolf Manager

Hello Pierre,


I have not received any emails from you, did you use the private message service or the contact form via my homepage ?


I do not think that the ID & locality can always be trusted/relied upon by a miner in South Africa.


If you are not 100% positive on the accuracy of the ID or locality of a specimen it is my understanding that it is not included as a mineral on the upload form, only in the description.


Debbie

9th Jan 2012 13:41 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

From an outside view we have two statements:


1. From a miner, information that the specimen came from N'Chwaning II.


2. From a published reference stating the mineral is unique to another deposit.


Without firm evidence to support item 1, I would have to agree the greatest probability is that either the locality listed is wrong or the identification of Orlymanite is wrong.


As such, it should not be listed on either the Orlymanite page or the N'Chwaning II page, and setting it to user-only gallery is the best option.


Jolyon

9th Jan 2012 14:14 UTCPierre Rondelez

Hi Debbie,


I just answered to the mail I received from you, where it ended up, I don't know.


Just because you questioned the identification of the orlymannite, I removed the word from the title but kept it only in the text.

I never said that I was not 100% sure about the ID, I just said I could not prove it........


To Jolyon,


Unless self collected, we have to rely on the miner or the dealer for the location.

About published reference: as you well know, things in the field tend to change rapidly after publications.

How old is the published reference you seem to refer to?

So when the miner states it comes from a certain location, so be it, future publications may or may not catch up.


This is my last reply to this topic, this is rapidly going nowhere....................


Pierre

9th Jan 2012 14:38 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

> So when the miner states it comes from a certain location, so be it


You did not hear about this from the miner. You heard about this from a dealer who heard about this from a miner.


This is NOT a reliable source of information, and cannot be used as a way of confirming that the mineral came from this mine, unless other samples are found independently from samples collected from this mine, it must be assumed to be an error.


Accuracy of information on this site is very important to us.


Jolyon

10th Jan 2012 09:45 UTCRock Currier Expert

Debbie,

Usually mines don't like miners taking things from their mines. If a miner works at a particular mine he may not want to say he got it from the mine he works at especially if a nearby mine with similar minerals is available to attribute it to.

10th Jan 2012 13:51 UTCDebbie Woolf Manager

Rock, that is so true.

16th Jan 2012 15:34 UTCAntonio Gamboni Expert

Very nice photo of the day, very significantly, the pain, exhaustion, joy. All in one photo.

29th Jan 2012 09:12 UTCMatteo Chinellato Expert

sinceraly I not understand the POTD of today.....

29th Jan 2012 12:09 UTCAccount Closed

The photos are not selected for their qualities but mostly to encourage photographers. It is easy to understand by all

29th Jan 2012 13:57 UTCHarjo Neutkens Manager

This topic is about a specific photo by Pierre, it is NOT about POTD, what Pierre wanted to point out, was the fact that it took a rather long time before some of his photos showed up in the "New Photos Today" gallery, it was not about the choices made for POTD.

So, my friends, your grievances regarding POTD please not here, but in the appropriate topic.

29th Jan 2012 15:36 UTCRoberto Bosi

Hi all, please excuse me if I add my thought to the discussion. Like I've already written before about a similar question, it's important we don't forget about the true meaning of our posting images: we all would like to see always all our photos standing out on Mindat...This is not strange, we are human beings; for this same reason it's normal too, sometimes, to be a little angry if something don't meet our wishes...but Mindat's not our personal gallery, this is the crucial point. Our contribute to the database is important (I hope), but I think we've to do this with humbleness and with a simple, pure and decoubertinian spirit of sharing this passion for minerals. Mindat is an organism, we are the cells of this organism, so we must work for a common target. First of all I always go over this concept to myself.

A strong and friendly handshake to all.

Roberto

29th Jan 2012 15:54 UTCChristian Auer 🌟 Expert

... and a strong and friendly handshake back Roberto, amen!

21st Apr 2012 06:27 UTCMatteo Chinellato Expert

I was doing some calculations on my past POTD in my and Domenico account with my photos


2009 - 21 POTD

2010 - 34 POTD

2011 - 13 POTD

2012 - 0 POTD


mah ... probably to the Mindat headman's do not like anymore the specimens of Domenico... :-D

21st Apr 2012 07:36 UTCDon Windeler

A question for Jolyon et al: are there stats on the total number of photos uploaded to MinDat by year? I would guess that the site continues to grow and more pics are uploaded each year, whereas the number of days available for a POTD in a given year doesn't fluctuate very much. Assuming a similar distribution of quality overall, plus a constantly growing backlog of images from which to draw, it would imply that the probability of any one pic being selected must necessarily decrease.


Just a hypothesis with the kids in bed and a glass of wine in front of me...


Cheers,

D.

21st Apr 2012 10:19 UTCRock Currier Expert

Matteo,

I have no idea how many POD images you have nor do I care. But I do know that almost always when I look at one of your pictures I think, now that is one fine photograph! All this POD stuff makes me crazy, I try and stay as far away from it as I can.

21st Apr 2012 10:25 UTCDebbie Woolf Manager

Matteo, there are some photo's of yours in the queue.

21st Apr 2012 11:57 UTCMatteo Chinellato Expert

thanks, but this question is not for say " I WANT MY PHOTOS POTD " is just for say its strange in the other years many are become POTD and from the start of 2012 none has been chosen, after the doubts are that the photos or sample represented are not interesting

21st Apr 2012 16:29 UTCDavid Von Bargen Manager

Photo uploaded to mindat

2007 - 49000

2008 - 61000

2009 - 72000

2010 - 79600

2011 - 77200


You are overrepresented 3-4 times in POTDs from what your uploading numbers would suggest. Thanks for bringing this up.

21st Apr 2012 20:15 UTCD Mike Reinke

David thanks for that. 200/day-plus is a nice pile of pics. And a bit of work for somebody(s)

And when friends or even acquaintances show diplomacy and long suffering toward criticism or pettiness, I am more deeply impressed.

Thanks to the many for the great threads and uploads.
 
Mineral and/or Locality  
Mindat Discussions Facebook Logo Instagram Logo Discord Logo
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: March 28, 2024 20:20:21
Go to top of page