Why isn't my edit and/or photo listed?

It cuts quartz very easily. It is very small so I didn't want to do too much messing with it. I don't think the system will let me upload the photo again because it's already in my collection of photos. I may have missed it, but I didn't see any response from the editorial board. It was part of several dozen photos that I uploaded on the same day, so I may have overlooked an email. It's the only graphite photo in my mindat photo collection. I'll edit the photo and upload it again (so it won't trigger the duplicate photo error trap) if that would be more convenient.

Aloha,
Jesse

Well, uh... I guess there's no reason I can't upload it here. Duh!

Here's the photo. The width of field is 0.25 mm taken with a Bausch and Lomb Microscope using differential interference optics.

Aloha,
Jesse

I remember that photo and that either me or someone else has sent a complaint on it.
Graphite is black and the centre shows a brown phase.
If this is not analysed, please don't upload it.

I can see how this (graphite ps. diamond) would be a tough call, as indeed many pseudomorphs would be. I didn't think graphite after diamond was very likely, but from googling around I see some technical papers suggesting that it is indeed at least possible (I didn't see any from South Africa, though). And it sounded like the jury was still out on whether the specimens examined were really psedomorphs after diamonds (on some specimens the graphite appeared to be a thin coating on diamond crystals). I'm not making a judgement myself on this specimen. I'm not qualified to do so anyway. I have a very interesting specimen, that I've wanted to upload, that was labeled as opal ps.after quartz. It's a sharp one-inch quartz crystal (from Brazil) that appears to have been completely opalized or replaced by opal. I will post a picture sometime. But some folks I've shown it to say it's just a hydrated quartz crystal. Opal is not a true mineral, so I guess it's probably not really a pseudomorph anyway. Come to think of it, wouldn't graphite after diamond actually be a polymorph?

The minerals graphite and diamond are polymorphs (same chemistry, different crystallography). Pseodomorphs refer mainly to the process of replacing one mineral by another. They are commonly have different chemistries, but when one has polymorph minerals, if the conditions are proper, you can get pseudomorphs. The reaction rate for the diamond to graphite transformation is slow at low temperatures, but can occur at higher temperatures. One of the reasons that you can find diamonds at the surface is because their host rocks cooled at (geologically) very fast rates. When this cooling is much slower (as you get where rocks are exposed by erosion rather than in eruptive forces), you will stay long enough at temperatures where the diamond to graphite transition can occur.

Well, here's the thing, the photo was taken using differential interference contrast optics, and the colors are not representative of the actual colors of the specimen. Differential Interference contrast is a false color technique. The graphite in the center is black as black can be. Would it help if I also include a photo using conventional microscopy for comparison?The hardness is right and it's isometric as evidenced by the fact that between crossed polarizers it remains dark for 360 degrees of rotation, so I'm pretty confident that it's diamond with a graphite inclusion. As to how such an inclusion might come to be, I'll leave that to people better educated in the science. I just thought it was an interesting picture and that others might think so too.

Aloha,
Jesse

This is embarrassing. Pseudomorph, polymorph, would you believe optical illusion? Closer examination shows that the graphite is much deeper within the crystal than the surface features, causing the graphite to appear to take on the form of the diamond. Puzzle solved. Oh well, it's probably not the last time I'll make a fool of myself. Sorry about that.

Aloha,
Jesse

I have another question for this thread. Photo number 172755 is also one I uploaded as one of several dozen in one day. It's in my personal collection but doesn't show up as one of the fiedlerite photos. I haven't received a notification of any problem. Is there a question about it?

Aloha,
Jesse

172755 is a user-only photo.

Please accept my profoundest apologies if I said something to offend. It was not my intention. I'll shut up now.

Aloha,
Jesse

No worries, Jesse - you said nothing at all that would offend anyone.
In fact, I would be glad if everyone would give such detailed description and explanations for photos that had complaints.
Lots of photos of other users are user-only photos.

Hi,

I noticed something strange.

I loaded a few months ago a specimen of Kasolite from Shinkolobwe : [www.mindat.org].

I find it back in my gallery, the Shinkolobwe gallery but when I look under Katanga, the site brings me to the list of all the places in Katanga. When I choose to view all the photo's ( 1485 or something ), it does not appear.

Could you check this please.

Thank you in advance.

Take care and best regards.
Paul.

A program bug?


[www.mindat.org]

"We have only shown a small selection of photos on this page to make this page easier to browse.
Click here to see all photos of Kasolite from Musonoi Mine, Kolwezi, Western area, Katanga Copper Crescent, Katanga, Democratic Republic of Congo ."

Usually, if you would click on this text, you would see your photo (among others). However, I also can't find it.

The mineral/locality gallery is not set up to look at sub-localities.

Hi Uwe and David,

Good to hear from you.

There must be a bug because the specimen I posted is from Shinkolobwe and not from Musonoï.
I checked and non of the Shinko Kasolites is shown.

Best regards.

Paul

When there are more than 10 photos of a mineral, the 10 highest rated ones are shown. This is what is happening in the Katanga gallery.

I posted Photo ID: 216172 (Parent), Photo ID: 216173 (Child), Photo ID: 216174 (child), Photo ID: 216175 (Child) and the photos do not show up in Apophyllite (KF) photo section. I did not see anything like it posted already and I try hard not to just post pictures of my collection, but to add photos of minerals that are different then what others have posted already. My goal is to try and share back with the mindat community for all the wonderful information and photos I have used as a learning tool to expand my knowledge of minerals.

Also when you select the parent photo in my home page Photo ID: 216173 (Child) does not appear (the other two do), but it does show up if I go to the edit this photo section of the parent.

Please let me know if I posted something incorrectly and thank you for the great site.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/2009 05:46PM by Richard Felicioni.

Paul De Bondt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi,
>
> I noticed something strange.
>
> I loaded a few months ago a specimen of Kasolite
> from Shinkolobwe :
> [www.mindat.org].
>
> I find it back in my gallery, the Shinkolobwe
> gallery but when I look under Katanga, the site
> brings me to the list of all the places in
> Katanga. When I choose to view all the photo's (
> 1485 or something ), it does not appear.
>
> Could you check this please.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> Take care and best regards.
> Paul.

This phenomenon (or feature?) seems to be a general one. E.g. if I look after fluorite pictures in the photo gallery of the Freiberg district . There will be a lot of photos from specimens from the "Beihilfe Mine" (a sublocality). After the last shown picture the well-known text "We have only shown a small selection of photos on this page to make this page easier to browse. Click here to see all photos of Fluorite from Beihilfe Mine, Halsbrücke, Freiberg District, Erzgebirge, Saxony, Germany." appears. This link leads only to pictures from this sublocality. In the main picture table, the next picture of the next mineral is listed, not the next picture of fluorite from a different sublocality, e.g. from Gersdorf .

This means, I am not able, to see all fluorite photos from freiberg district in the Freiberg district picture table, even if I click to see the additional photos. Am I right?

Could there be a way, to include in the link for additional photos all other sublocalities, e.g. this way:

"We have only shown a small selection of photos on this page to make this page easier to browse. Click here to see all photos of Fluorite from Freiberg District, Erzgebirge, Saxony, Germany." ?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/02/2009 07:01AM by Thomas Uhlig.

"This phenomenon (or feature?) seems to be a general one."

Yes. A known bug in the photo display routines. Unfortunately not easily fixed, but we're working on it.

Richard Felicioni Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I posted Photo ID: 216172 (Parent), Photo ID:
> 216173 (Child), Photo ID: 216174 (child), Photo
> ID: 216175 (Child) and the photos do not show up
> in Apophyllite (KF) photo section. I did not see
> anything like it posted already and I try hard not
> to just post pictures of my collection, but to add
> photos of minerals that are different then what
> others have posted already. My goal is to try and
> share back with the mindat community for all the
> wonderful information and photos I have used as a
> learning tool to expand my knowledge of minerals.
>
> Also when you select the parent photo in my home
> page Photo ID: 216173 (Child) does not appear (the
> other two do), but it does show up if I go to the
> edit this photo section of the parent.
>
> Please let me know if I posted something
> incorrectly and thank you for the great site.

It's been a couple of weeks and I have not received a reply. I have also tried to PM Jolyon Ralph but have not received an answer. I would appreciate some type of reply, thank you.