Learning Center What is a mineral?The most common minerals on earth Information for Educators Mindat Articles The Elements The Rock H. Currier Digital Library Geologic Time

Minerals by Properties Minerals by Chemistry Advanced Locality Search Random Mineral Random Locality Search by minID Localities Near Me Search Articles Search Glossary More Search Options

The Mindat Manual Add a New Photo Rate Photos Locality Edit Report Coordinate Completion Report Add Glossary Item

Mining Companies Statistics Users Mineral Museums Clubs & Organizations Mineral Shows & Events The Mindat Directory Device Settings The Mineral Quiz

Photo Search Photo Galleries Search by Color New Photos Today New Photos Yesterday Members' Photo Galleries Past Photo of the Day Gallery Photography

Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

╳Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

Groups

Recent Images in Discussions

GeneralTo be focused or not to be focused. That is the question!

10th Jun 2015 15:52 UTCBob Harman

So here I go again, starting a thread that might be interesting and some food for thought.

As a child, when I first started collecting stamps, my parents took me to a department store in NYC and, with their help, let me pick out an appropriate stamp album for a 10 year old. It was general worldwide album with spaces for the common U.S. and worldwide stamps. By the time I was a 20 y.o. and still interested in my growing collection of stamps……yes even thru my college and medical school years!!…..I had come to realize that specializing, "focusing", was my way to go. In 1997 I sold all my various focused stamp collections and have never looked back.

Actually not quite true as I had a very superior collection of the U.S.Canal Zone, including many rare varieties, which I still think about. But moving on…...

Thru out my earlier years I also always had more than a passing interest in minerals (interestingly, much more so than fossils). I had built a small very mediocre self-collected group of local specimens from wherever I lived. I had never even considered buying a mineral altho I had attended a few local shows over those 30+ years. After my stamp collection was sold, shortly before the year 2000, I began to seriously collect minerals and was faced with the common dilemma of just "what to collect?" While there is a very finite number of stamps; like one nice example to fill each album space, there is a much much larger number of minerals, even of the same type from the same locations. So, I began to specialize; to "focus" if you will. For me, focusing became the natural way to go. Currently, while I love going to shows and looking everything over, I have little real interest unless it is something I focus on.

I must say that when I see many colorful (and often expensive) display examples in one case from all over, I think they are "real nice" but….. "yawn"…..just pretty minerals, unfocused. Let me hasten to say that "focusing" can be anything you wish. Self-collected, location, mineral, size, color, combinations, price, etc etc etc, but there still are a lot of general unfocused collections out there in the show display cases….."yawn"! And let me add that an "all purchased collection" doesn't for me qualify as "focused". Maybe I am being a bit harsh here; what do you think???? CHEERS…….BOB

10th Jun 2015 17:11 UTCRob Woodside 🌟 Manager

At the age of 8 I came home with an armful of road rock and began collecting minerals. By the age of 14, i needed to focus and did so until I was 58 and sold the collection. Actually the collection owned me. After the sale was a done deal, I was still acquiring pieces that the collection really needed!!! Surprisingly selling the collection was a monkey off my back.

Mineralogy is now so diverse that some kind of focus is almost necessary. My reasons for focusing was space and money. I could only afford $14 for the first edition of Dana 7, so missed the lovely secondaries in the second volume. Further I omitted the oxides and tried to obtain 4x6 cm specimens of elements, sulfides and sulfosalts in the best state of xllization I could find. Collecting smaller pieces was less expensive, saved space, and in those days gave no competition to museums which I always have felt was where the best pieces should reside. This mandate was quite comfortable as if I saw a thumbnail or a cabinet piece of something I wanted, I would honestly congratulate the owner for having such a fine piece and not have the slightest inclination or thought to try to acquire it. This probably made me a little more tolerable. Although the elements have the greatest diversity of geological environments and sulfides/sulfosalts have the most interesting structures, focusing on them not only cut down on the articles to read but left me horribly ignorant of silicates and secondaries. Then there are also the wonderful specimens that didn't fit the mandate and that I knew would never be available again. Some of them were so wonderful that I still regret not getting them. Collecting what you like rather than following a mandate avoids this, if you can afford it.

10th Jun 2015 20:40 UTCUwe Ludwig

I think the most "advanced" collectors (see another thread) are focused collectors because you need a scientifical relation to your collection. If you are focused on a special mineral or mineral class you will become a specialist for this mineral and the locations of it worldwide. If you are focused on a location you will become a specialist for the minerals of this location. So far I agree with Bob that the majority of the serious collectors are (or should be) probably focused collectors

However, I not agree that a purchased collection may not be a focused collection. I'm focused on the minerals of my home region - the Erzgebirge. If I make a field trip today the most or nearly all my finds I have already better in my collection. In order to complete my collection I have to purchase. It is the time now that here more and more old miners of my region are 80 years old and older. So a lot of good material comes on the local shows. I'm not the only collector who completes his focused collection mostly by purchasing.

Rgds.

Uwe Ludwig

10th Jun 2015 20:57 UTCBob Harman

UWE, Thanks for your reply! I should have specifically noted that purchased specimens are just fine when there is any type of focusing to the purchases. Bought or otherwise accumulated worldwide specimens willy nilly and with no apparent focus other than they are just aesthetically pleasing are what I was specifically referring to as not being of much interest to me. CHEERS…….BOB

10th Jun 2015 22:11 UTCRock Currier Expert

I have found that over the years my focus has changed and in the end is much more general that it was at the beginning. Started with borates. Then I started to collect stuff from the mines in the south west which included the pegmatites off San Diego Co. Then I went back east and became interesed in old Eastern classics, the zeolites from the Wachung basalts, specimens from Asbestos Quebec and St. Hilaire. Then I went to India and became interested in the zeolites and related minerals from Deccan traps. Then I went to Peru and became interested in the metallic sulfides from that country. Then I went to Tsumeb. Then I went to Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, China etc etc. OH yes, rare minerals and Micros. So now I am rather unfocused and sort of grab up what ever runs under my nose if I take a fancy to it. Life is good! Everything is not nearly enough! Except that you run out of space to put the stuff.

11th Jun 2015 01:13 UTCDavid Von Bargen Manager

I think that as a person's collection grows (unless you collect micromounts) you come to the realization that if you want to improve the quality of specimens, you need to specialize in either related minerals, one mineral or one locality. People tend to run into space constraints for their collection, or financial constraints in purchasing specimens.

11th Jun 2015 07:30 UTCDale Foster Manager

When I first started collecting I went for anything pretty and different. If I spotted a mineral I didn't recognise in the local rock shops and my meagre funds stretched to it I would add it to the collection.

Having taken an extended break from mineral collecting I decided to get back into it, however now I decided to specialise in collecting location tin and tungsten specimens from Cornwall and Devon.

Reasoning for this is there are a large number of localities to get material from and the material is diverse in its form and associations.

In terms of field collecting, Cassiterite particularly is very durable and survives well the effects of weathering that has taken place on mine dumps, that in many cases are now well over 100 years old.

Quality of specimens is not always great - material from some localities is sparse and you have to accept what turns up, but equally there are some real stunning specimens still to be found out there if you are willing to put the time in.

I am happy to purchase material as well as some localities have been obliterated.

I find specialising to be more satisfying as I have a deeper understanding of the material I collect rather than just having a cabinet full of aesthetically attractive miscellaneous specimens.

11th Jun 2015 14:36 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Hello Dale,

Good choice! plus you now have the time to look into the history of it all which can be just as interesting as the specimens.

11th Jun 2015 16:16 UTCPaul Brandes 🌟 Manager

As diverse as mineral specimens/localities are, I would find it very difficult to not narrow the focus of a collection down some how. However, that doesn’t mean you couldn’t narrow it down to two or three options. Myself, I try to self-collect as much as possible Great Lakes minerals and specifically, Upper Michigan. I have recently begun to acquire specimens from other areas such as Scotland (my family heritage), Norway (my wife’s family heritage), and now just recently, fluorescent minerals. I realise that for some, what they collect also will depend on how much space they have to display and store their minerals. An apartment setting doesn’t really lend itself to collect large items!

I believe Dale has the right idea; specialising in one or a couple items will be more satisfying in the end than just collecting pretty minerals.

11th Jun 2015 16:31 UTCcascaillou

Benefits of thematic collecting:

-lots of mineralogical knowledge is acquired

-as a consequence, selection of specimens gets wiser and more rigorous

-the collection can get very interesting as a whole (rather than as an accumulation of specimens): the whole gets greater than the sum of the parts.

The drawback is that it might get harder to find specimens that match your criterias.

Beginners usually start collecting a bit of everything, which is a good way to discover the vast world of minerals. With experience and knowledge, some collectors might find it more rewarding to specialize in a specific field of collecting (by locality, by specie, by chemistry, by properties such as fluorescence, whatever...). Sometimes running several different thematic collections at the same time, or running both a thematic and an heterogeneous collection at the same time. Of course, running a thematic collection shouldn't prevent some occasional impulse buy of a specimen that is out of your field of collecting. Indeed whatever is you way of collecting, there needs to be some fun! Locality themed collections are very popular as they allow a lot more fun through self-collecting (rather than just buying specimens).

11th Jun 2015 16:39 UTCTimothy Greenland

I don't think I can honestly subscribe to Bob's point of view. Specialization is sometimes a necessary step to greater understanding of the finer points of a subject, but a more general view can provide a contextual framework that is also useful. We sometimes used to say in the laboratory where I worked (before I went past my use-by date) that to become a specialist (or 'expert') one should study an ever more delimited subject to greater and greater depth... The true Expert or specialist is then, by extrapolation, someone who knows everything - about nothing.

I am not a really indiscriminate collector, however and I do not confine myself to "pretty minerals". To me the focus, if such it be, is on "Interesting minerals". The interest may spring from many different sources; those I have collected myself are always interesting, even if not rare or pretty. Others make the grade for their composition; interesting chemical elements or combinations of elements in the composition. For example, I find sulphites and selenates interesting because I am intrigued that we have mostly sulphates and selenites. I can also 'fall' for an exotic name ('Yuksporite' is irresistable to me) and an unusual combination of mineral species or paragenesis will often get my curiosity aroused. My collection is therefore rather eclectic and personnal, but then I have amassed it for my own pleasure and instruction and I am not trying to build a 'classic' or valuable hoard. After my death, it will certainly go to some dealer who will recirculate any bits that interest others in their turn. I would not want it to be a monument (=burden) on those remaining...

Sorry Bob and the other serious people - I shall remain an unfocussed dilettante with a collection that is fun to me. Each to his or her own taste, I suppose!

Happy hunting (and hoarding)

Tim

11th Jun 2015 16:43 UTCTimothy Greenland

P.S.

Perhaps the most interesting point is the story that the specimens tell about their origins and transformations - and also the human tales encapsulated in their names and the memories of their discovery and collection - so please everyone keep records of your trips and label, label, label...

T

11th Jun 2015 16:48 UTCMichael Hatskel

I am using the 80-20 rule: 80% focused collecting and 20% left for occasional "urges", sidetracks, interesting opportunities.

Collecting is not a business for me, so having some unregulated fun from time to time is important. Just like in dieting... :-)

11th Jun 2015 16:52 UTCcascaillou

80% focused collecting and 20% left for occasional "urges", sidetracks, interesting opportunities.

Sounds good :-)

11th Jun 2015 18:48 UTCEd Clopton 🌟 Expert

Focus is inevitable (if not always intentional or explicitly stated) as your experience grows and you gravitate toward what interests you and away from what doesn't. Your focus may be easily definable (calcite, pseudomorphs, local or regional pieces, gem crystals >$10,000, etc.) or it may be more nebulous (rocks that I think are cool). If a little structure (or a lot) serves to enhance the satisfaction you derive from collecting rocks & minerals, then go for it.

If you find some self-imposed "focus" getting in the way of where your interests are leading ("Wow! Great specimen--I've wanted one of these for years--but it won't fit into a Perky box, so I can't buy it.") it's time to relax and reassess. This is a hobby, after all, something we do for enjoyment, so it shouldn't be unduly frustrating or burdensome. Make and break your own rules to the degree you find necessary and helpful.

11th Jun 2015 19:40 UTCMichael Sommers

To me, the only person who is not a "serious" collector is one who acquires for the sole purpose of impressing (or trying to) others. Anyone else who possesses a genuine appreciation for whatever subject of geology/mineralogy/crystallography, to me is "serious." Now I realize that, semantics being what they are, perhaps "serious" for the purpose of this thread is meant as synonymous to a person's level or depth of involvement (beginner/casual to experienced/expert, etc). As has already been noted by others, a natural progression with experience is to realize you can't have it all because where would you put it, thus the tendency to narrow down the collecting efforts to one or a few subjective criterion(a), but that is not universal. Some people enjoy knowing a little about a lot, rather than knowing "everything" about one thing. Some people don't have a lot, but still know about what they have. To me, both are still "serious."

On the flip side let me throw this back out: how can one justify calling him/herself "serious" if he/she doesn't appreciate all aspects of the field or hobby? So one knows "everything" on one grouping of minerals, but is deliberately ignorant/unappreciative of everything else - can that be defended that as "serious?"

I think the subjects of "silver picking" and "display aesthetics" probably should have been treated separately and are whole buckets of worms in themselves...

11th Jun 2015 21:14 UTCJamison K. Brizendine 🌟 Expert

One thing that nobody pointed out is that some collectors may have chosen a specific focus (either mineral species or a specific locality) because at that time quality specimens were inexpensive. I don’t remember which edition of “What’s Hot in Tucson” it was, but two collectors who had an outstanding case of fluorites were interviewed. During the interview, the collectors stated they collected fluorite because at that time it was easy to get outstanding specimens at prices they could afford.

12th Jun 2015 07:30 UTCDale Foster Manager

Michael Hatskel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

I am using the 80-20 rule: 80% focused collecting and 20% left for occasional "urges", sidetracks, interesting opportunities.

Good philosophy.

Whilst my primary focus is tin/tungsten minerals, when I am out field collecting, if something else interesting crops up it will go home with me as well. Sometimes to be kept if I just happen to like it or to be used to trade with other collectors for examples of my primary interest.

I would say at this point in time my collection is about 95% 'on topic' to my primary theme and 5% 'off topic' specimens that have snagged my interest.

One of the beauties of mineral collecting is there is sufficient diversity in the subject to cover all levels of interest.

12th Jun 2015 07:49 UTCDale Foster Manager

Michael Sommers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

On the flip side let me throw this back out: how can one justify calling him/herself "serious" if he/she doesn't appreciate all aspects of the field or hobby? So one knows "everything" on one grouping of minerals, but is deliberately ignorant/unappreciative of everything else - can that be defended that as "serious?"

OK, I specialise in a certain aspect.

However this does not mean that I am either ignorant or unappreciative of other elements of the field. I am happy to learn and understand about all minerals.

I just choose to specialise in a certain area for my personal collection.

Just to throw something back at you - would you consider a brain surgeon to be 'not serious' because he doesn't fully appreciate say plastic surgery?

12th Jun 2015 14:44 UTCReinhardt van Vuuren

I get past the issue of focusing by having multiple collections, as a micromounter space is not an issue so my main collection is local minerals (Eastern Cape all self collected) my second collection is the rest of South Africa and immediate area such as Namibia ect and then the last and well least collection is the Oh its a pretty mineral but it has no location information it helps me cover those amazing minerals that have sadly lost where they are from but they are too pretty to just discard. I have contemplated starting a fourth collection being and international collection but that may have to wait a little.

13th Jun 2015 02:58 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

I tried to focus on British minerals.

Then i discovered I was really focusing on Devon and Cornish minerals...

Then, I realised that Cassiterite didn't really excite me much and I was only really interested in copper secondary minerals from Cornwall.

Finally... I decided what I really wanted to specialise in was cuprite from cornwall. I have some fantastic pieces, and a great number of interesting reference pieces from a number of Cornish mines.

But after a while I realised that I wasn't really enjoying this. I was deliberately avoiding things that really impressed me mineralogically and aesthetically simply because they fell outside of my narrow band of interest. So I gave in, and started collecting worldwide minerals again.

I have absolutely no regrets. I have some great pieces from every period of my 'specialisation', and some equally great worldwide pieces all mixed up together in my cabinets (along with some polished slices, for those who read the other thread!).

Jolyon

19th Jun 2015 08:19 UTCDale Foster Manager

As pointed out previously, that is one of the nice things about mineral collecting - there is scope for all types of interest within the hobby.

Whether specialised collector or general just enjoy what you are doing.

Cornwall based mineral dealer Nick Carruth said to me some years back - it doesn't really matter what you collect as long as you enjoy it.

19th Jun 2015 08:42 UTCBecky Coulson 🌟 Expert

Dale, we may not agree about labels, but I agree 100% with you here - we should just enjoy what we are doing! Best wishes, Becky

23rd Jun 2015 07:18 UTCChristian Auer 🌟 Expert

Some of my specific interests will never change like the size of specimen I like (90% micromount, 10% thumbnails), the region they are comming from (Austria 90%, 10% rest) and selfcollected.

But within this interests my focus changes once in a while. Some will still know me as the wulfenite guy who discovered the type locality of wulfenite again and owned the website wulfenite.com. Then I focused on phosphate pegmatites! Great working field and a lot to find here! The last years I was focused on old arsen mines. Again a huge working field and a life time isn`t enough to prospect all of them ...

I think that`s the secret that I`m still interested in minerals - the changes I made.

Like Jolyon wrote, when he still had been continuing collecting cassiterite, the chances are high that he would have a completely different hobby nowadays.

By the way this is also the best way for self education!

25th Jun 2015 08:14 UTCRon Austin Rushman

I think as a general rule, that we have what is known to psychologists as a "collector's mentality", that is we are what they call the "Observer" on the Aneaogram.

We are driven to collect, investigate,and describe the world around us.

I started by collecting in my father's driveway, gravel , then stargazing, paleo, entomology, and all things science...

27th Jun 2015 02:04 UTCNiels Brouwer

I think that every collector should specialize as much as possible and focus his/her collection on one just single type of minerals - the ones that excite them. Whether it's a single species or location that interests you or a wide variety of different ones, the specialization should be that you enjoy each and every one. Only when you are passionate about it does it become more than just a series of pretty rocks, it becomes a personal story.

27th Jun 2015 03:45 UTCKeith Compton 🌟 Manager

Hi guys

I don't have any particular theme/specialisation and collect thumbnails to cabinet and now going to embark on micros and I basically collect whatever I like both visually and of course can afford or swap.

But what I tend to do is pick a mineral and "adopt" it for a year and try and get a few "nice" pieces during that 12 months and then change the next year. It introduces a change and stops things getting boring (not that it could of course).

It doesn't stop me adding to those "themes" in future years, but somehow it does seem to improve the selection process in adding any of that species.

Just something odd that I do.

Cheers

27th Jun 2015 15:27 UTCGary Moldovany

Wow. Not much to say here that hasn't already been said. Great thread you started, Bob. My 'focus' is primarily the minerals of New Jersey. I started out with the Franklin/Sterling Hill fluorescent minerals, then moved on to get as many of the non-fluorescents as I could. I'm still working on that. My second area of NJ focus has been on the zeolites and associated traprock minerals. I have literally hundreds of specimens in this category. I also collect any other NJ mineral that interests me. I have been doing a lot of collecting in NY state recently and that has become my field collecting focus lately. I can justify it because the minerals are from the extension of the "Franklin Marble" belt that extends northerly into NY. I was on a worldwide mineral binge for several years and that has become the bulk of my dealership inventory. I also have a collection of micromounts and thumbnails from NJ and other worldwide localities. Like others have said, I see a lot of great specimens at mineral shows and pass them by because they don't fit into my "focus" unless I can get something that I can sell and make a profit on.

I have noted that when I first became interested in the Franklin minerals, there were a lot of collectors that specialized in Franklin and nothing else. There are still many of these folks around. That's fine if it makes you happy. It just wasn't enough for me.

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: April 26, 2024 16:34:40

Go to top of page