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

Techniques for CollectorsTransatlantic Micromounting

12th May 2009 12:46 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager

Robert Miller had a point when he stated that the micro section of the forum could use more posts, so here I go!

First of all I would like to ask micro collectors on both sides of the Atlantic (or down under!) what your definition of a micromount is? Talking and chatting to our American friends here on mindat makes me believe there is a distinct difference between how Americans and Europeans collect. I get the feeling that the 'mounting' part is still very important in the USA, and also that there are still strict limits on the size of a micromount. A micro HAS to fit in one of those micro boxes (the dimensions escape me here). If a specimen is to big, it will get trimmed until it fits. Also Americans line the boxes with black paper or paint the inside black. And of course, Americans still 'mount', they glue the specimens on a pedestal. A cork or a toothpick or a cactusneedle even...

The Europeans, I think, have a wider definition of a 'micro'. As long as you need a (stereo)microscope to fully enjoy or study a specimen, it is a micro. I for one do not mind if the matrix of a specimen is 2 inches, covered with 1 mm chrystals. I even prefer it, I would never trim it down further.

(surplus matrix will go, of course...) Also we Europeans do not mount a lot. We usually just fix the specimen in a box with tack, or sometimes use a gluegun. Only small grains of very rare minerals will get mounted.

Well, that is how I experience it. B) So tell me if you agree or not! Are there Europeans that collect 'the American way'? Or the other way around?

If you do not show your flag, please state where you are from!

12th May 2009 13:08 UTCRock Currier Expert

You can collect any size specimen you want and call it micromaterial. The name micromount itself implies that the stuff has been broken down and mounted and here in the USA that mostly means in little plastic boxes. Milton Speckles, Neil Yedlan and Fred Devito didn't like to break their oversize micro material into little pieces if they had a somewhat larger fine specimen. I think many people would agree that you don't have to munch them all down into bits for little plastic boxes. However, I would contend that for the long term preservation of the specimens I think it is imperative that this be done. Providing

1. That the mounting is carefully done and considerable care is taken with the labeling that is placed on/in the boxes.

2. That they are neatly arranged in a good quality custom made hard wood cabinet.

3. The quality of the micro material in the boxes is high.

These three conditions will give your collection a much better chance of being kept intact past your death and possibly intact for a long time (100+years)

If the mounting is beautifully done and the labeling very neat and fine, it makes the collection look important, and this is important when and if it falls into the hands of people that don't know what it is. If it looks important, then they will be less inclined to throw the stuff away.

If they are in a custom made hard wood cabinet, the specimens will be less likely be thrown out because what in the heck could you use a screwie sized cabinet for anyway.

If the quality of the micros is high, then a discriminating collector will recognize them as such and be less likely to sell them or trade them away. them.

Also if you don't put them in little boxes they will be little nondescript looking specimens that will over the years get dirty and who cares about little specimens of strange looking rocks? If they are in little micro boxes, they will be kept a lot cleaner and better protected from breakage.

Thats my opinion for what it is worth.

12th May 2009 16:39 UTCHenry Barwood

Eddy,

I'm a student of the "put it in a box with a label" and the heck with "art" school of mounting. Fact is that there are as many styles of mounting as there are individuals. I prefer to keep as much of the associated rock/minerals together as possible, as long as the mineral of interest is visible and and you can photograph it.

Henry (in Alabama, USA)

12th May 2009 18:36 UTCDonald Peck

Eddy, I don't tbelieve. there is as much difference between European and American micromounters as you think, If magnification is needed to see and appreciate the specimen, it is a micro. It is true that most of us in the US mount our micros in small plastic boxes, but the variety of approaches is significantly large. I tend to use 23 x 23 x 20mm black plastic boxes with clear tops. Like Rock, I like to be able to look through the lid to see the specimen. I don't use liners and I don't paint the box. I usually mount the specimen on a black balsa wood peg, so the speciman appears to "float" at the top of the box (without the lid). The mount can be tilted to get almost any angle of view under the microscope.

Most of us here in New Jersey have made turntables for showing our micros. With the crystals of interest level with the top of the micro boxes, all specimens on a turntable are essentially in focus as the table is turned. We make our turntables from large diameter PVC pipe (sewer pipe). Depending on the diameter and the style, the turntables can hold from eight to twenty four mounts and would be viewers are often waiting in line at shows for their chance at the scopes.

12th May 2009 19:09 UTCBill Lechner Expert

I am not really a micro mounter, but a mineral collector who likes rarities, and most rarities only occur at the micro level. So, I guess I'm a micro sticker, that is to say that most of my micro specimens are housed in small boxes and affixed by sticky tac. I do quite a bit of trading with other collectors of a similar persuasion. I find that many other micro stickers use a sticky tac which has a very high content of fatty and oily substances. If held down with such a tac for an extended period of time, the oily material with "crawl" over the entire specimen - clearly an undesirable effect. So, when I receive specimens affixed with sticky tac, I do an odour test and it it smells oily and "organic", I like to replace it with a relatively oil free tac. I would not destroy a specimen to squeeze it into an officially sanctioned micro box. If the specimen is too big for the box, find a bigger box - some famous micro mounter said this and I agree with it whole heartedly.

Bill

12th May 2009 20:43 UTCRobert Meyer Manager

Hi Eddy,

As the others above have alluded to, especially Rock, I would distinguish between a micro specimen and a micromount. A micro specimen is one that is best appreciated with magnification. I have micro specimens of a size that will barely fit under my microscope. I do have smaller specimens, and some are "mounted," but most of those came mounted already through trade or purchase. I will occasionally tack a piece down in a thumbnail (my preference) or micro box, if it is appropriately sized.

Although I can appreciate the "craft" involved in producing a fine mount with paper liner and so forth, I find the task of curating my (out of control) collection to already be so daunting in terms of time that I have given up the idea of doing much of that myself. Despite that, I consider myself to be a serious micro mineral collector; it is an area of true passion for me. I would go even further, and tell those who state, "I don't do micros," that they are missing out on an important dimension in being a mineral collector. I do not feel you can adequately study mineral specimens without having and using a stereoscopic microscope.

Bob Meyer

Maple Valley, Washington, USA

12th May 2009 21:12 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager

Rock,

of course specimens need to be kept in boxes! I hope you did not think that I was saying they should not!

See picture for my way of storing. Obviously I put all my 'micros' in boxes, and they are very accurately

labeled. I only do not use the 23*23 mm boxes a lot. As you can see, my 'standard' box is a Jousi box

of 4x3 cm. I guess you could say I prefer my chrystals to be micro on a 'thumbnail' matrix!

And I am with you, Bill. I also did not start out as a micro man! I have always collected thumbnails and miniatures,

but after evolving into a phosphates and arsenates collector, I automatically ended up as a micro collector

as well. Especially after getting into the Clara Mine in the Black Forest, Germany. As you say, many species

only exist as micro...

12th May 2009 21:44 UTCChristian Auer 🌟 Expert

I like the expression of Bill - a micro sticker. Yes this would be my description for me too.

I like to cut material, like to check under the scope, like even clean the goodies, but I hate to mount and label them.

Its necessary of course so I`ll do it, but I dont like it. So as as quick as possible. A bit of tag and stick, tag and stick, tag and stick ...

30% time for cutting, 50% time for checking under scope and the rest is bureaucracy.

12th May 2009 21:48 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager

Robert, I could not agree with you more!

I guess the users of this part of the forum do not need to be pursuaded that

the micro world holds a lot more beauty and wonders than the macro world!

Sadly enough, it is getting harder in europe to purchase micros... the dealers

have to pay a lot for tablespace and finding it hard to make money on micros!

Micro symposiums exist, but are very rare here.

12th May 2009 22:09 UTCKnut Eldjarn 🌟 Manager

I seem to remember the late Neal Yedlin who wrote about micromounting in the Mineralogical Record once stating that he collected minerals and not sizes. With some years of experience most collectors will come to realize that there are well balanced and aesthetic mineral specimens of all sizes. Trimming may improve the aesthetics of small or large specimens and still retain a representative part of the matrix and associated minerals. But to trim a specimen to fit an arbitrary size or a defined box can easily ruin nice specimens. As stated by many of you the complex wonders of the mineral kingdom kan only be fully appreciated and enjoyed if you are also willing to study specimens using a microscope. I personally prefer a good sized ( min to cab.) specimen with a rich coverage of micro crystals - when available. But for many species smaller specimens may be the only ones available. I have specimens of all sizes in the collection even if the majority are min to cab.sized and I use different sizes of boxes to protect some of the specimens letting the size of the specimen decide the size of the box rather than the opposite. As stated by Rock, this may not be the most sensible approach for keeping the collection intact past my time. But to be honest, my mineral collection is for me to enjoy and study as long as I can do so, and that is more important than what the fate of the specimens may be when I am gone.

12th May 2009 23:29 UTCHarjo Neutkens Manager

Somehow my micros end up on a pile or get stuffed in a multitude of disorderly arranged cardboard boxes and drawers, this is why: I spend days gazing through the microscope looking for an eenyweeny that would make a good photograph, after that exercise has been completed successfully the photo is added to my photo collection (quite ordered if I might say so...) Somehow that's it for me, satisfaction is there and the dearly beloved micro ends up on a pile next to the microscope or in one of the boxes or disorderly arranged drawers.....this implies that I quite (if not very) often have to go trough all the rubble searching for an eenyweeny that I would like to see once more (order, order!) but the good thing is that I find eenyweenies again that I completely forgot about, collecting in ones own study, how 'bout that (:P)

Every now and then I buy a load of perky boxes and put them buggers in them but within weeks the piles start growing again.........

Cheers

Harjo

p.s. Eddy, je kast, proper, zeer proper B)-

13th May 2009 00:31 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

As far as I'm concerned, a micromount mineral is any mineralogical specimen that has to be mounted in some way in order to be studied under a microscope.

So, for me, that occasionally includes microscope slides with tiny crystals or rock dissections mounted on them. Mostly, it's just small specimens in boxes. Oh, and I tend to mount them so that they are more-or-less par-focal for my scope.

13th May 2009 04:28 UTCDarren Court

Eddy, et al -

I can certainly appreciate those who go so far as to mount a single crystal exactly XX mm. above the base of a paper lined box - but that ain't for me! (though they are quite stunning!) I'm more of the euro micro collector. I find a box to fit the specimen and mount with tac (non-greasy!) or whatever will hold the specimen so that the best view of the crystals can be seen. Name and brief location go on the top, with name, more specific location, collection number and date collected on the bottom of the box. Then again, if you count the flat after flat of unmounted stuff with torn paper labels - all bets are off!!! Seriously though, I understand how the mounting in the US came about, but for me and my personal collection, simple is best. Besides, with four little kids, it is much easier and quicker to get the pieces into a box with a label without having to deal with all of the mounting accoutrements, waiting for the paint to dry, having to insert liners, cutting balsa or toothpicks, "blackening" stuff, etc. As long as the minerals are clearly seen and correctly labeled and cataloged, I'm happy. I have "micros" in the collection that are 10 to 15 cm across!

Just my 2 pesos from just north of the Mexican border here!

Darren in New Mexico, USA

13th May 2009 12:16 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Hi Eddy

Downunder, there would be a mix. Some that find the time and have the skill and patience to 'properly' mount their specimens, and others that don't.

I'm one of the latter. My collection is mixed. I do have a large number of micro specimens in micro boxes, mounted on tack, but also lots of specimens in larger boxes, or flats waiting to be sorted and catalogued.

Oh, and I have soooo many things on, I don't have time to 'properly' mount.

But I really do enjoy my minerals!

Regards

Steve

13th May 2009 13:16 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager

Hi Steve! Thanks for letting us know from down under!

I guess the final result is indeed somewhere in the middle, and nobody solely does one thing or antother.

Nice to hear, because one of the reasons I asked, is I always wonder if I am sending the right kind of

stuff in an exchange...

13th May 2009 14:36 UTCRobert Miller

Eddy,

Thanks for the mention and the new topic!

Since I'm fairly new at this (around 3 years and counting!), I've gathered all of the books, magazine articles, and personal interviews that I can find to see where I wanted to go with my micromounting efforts. I've tried several methods and looked at as many different mounting styles that I can find, and it really boils down to a few key points for me:

1. Whatever you collect in whatever size makes you happy, that's what you should do. I can certainly store more smaller specimens, but I do have a few small cabinet to cabinet sized specimens because I like what they show.

2. Exceptional looking specimens in all different sizes are labeled as "micromounts". I seriously appreciate the care and artistry that some micromounters put into their specimens, and I'm working on being able to do that myself someday. However, I also enjoy looking through my microscope at the excellent specimens that are simply mounted in a plastic box with mineral tac (maybe someday I'll remount them, but right now there are more important things to do). I also have a small collection of antique "micromounts" that are in many different sizes and shapes of containers.

3. I would try not to worry over labels such as "micromounts" or "thumbnails" unless you're going to enter into competitions. As I understand it, the U.S. size for micromounts became standard due to rules for competions. Even Neal Yedlin, "Mr. Micromounter", stated that you should fit the box to the specimen and not vice versa.

4. For trading, I simply tell the other person the dimensions of the box my specimen is in and ask for the dimensions of the box that theirs is in. Less confusion that way.

5. For Americans, there seems to be a distinction between a "micromounter" and a "microcollector". Most of the people I've met that consider themselves true "micromounters" are very much into the aesthetics of their work, and I have a deep appreciation for that. Many of the European collectors that I've conversed with appear to be more "microcollectors" and aren't quite as concerned about the aesthetics of the mount as they are with the aesthetics of the specimen itself. It's kind of like painters and art collectors - most collectors don't paint themselves, but they do have a fine appreciation for the artwork they buy.

6. When in doubt, refer to key point number 1 - collect what you enjoy!

Hope this helps and thanks again for starting this topic!

13th May 2009 16:55 UTCDonald Peck

I am both a "micromounter" and a "microcollector" . . . my micromounts are stuck on pegs in boxes (mostly, but not entirely the same size). My micro collection includes the micromounts, but mostly it is the mountain of micros that occupies half my work bench. No way in my life time will I work my way through it!

While it is true that the American Federation of Mineral Societies uses uniform rules for competitive displays, I don't know any micromounters that compete in their shows. I don't believe they are any kind of force in defining what is a micromount. Most of us here in the US have observed what our friends have done and either copy or adapt what we like. The plastic boxes have kind of evolved to fit a need and the dimensions have changed over time; becoming larger. If possible, I try to use the same size always, because the uniformity looks nice and they fit the drawers in my storage cabinets.

13th May 2009 20:23 UTCVolker Betz 🌟 Expert

Hello,

I collect microcrystals also. I admire the work of Micro Mounts, but I prefer larger specimens, typically 4x4to6x6 cm.

I dont say no to smaller, but I never mount it, this would not be practical for my photography work. Also any kind of organic could affect my zeolites.

On the other hand I have (had) difficulties to pick a specific sample from my collection, which contains many variations of the same species e.g. Faujasite. So i started to put picture labels on it, this helps. Se attached Picture.

Concerning competitions: This is not so famous in Europe. I like to prepare presentations and papers, but I never would accept regulations of a competition. Also I would rather go and use my hammer than mount, photography is enough homework!

;)

Volker

13th May 2009 20:41 UTCSteve Rust Manager

Thats a really excelent idea Volker.

My micromineral collecting, is if it can be cut to fit any size of box with out loss of crystals then thats as far as it gose. I gave up putting rocks on sticks years ago, just dont have the time.

Steve Rust

13th May 2009 20:41 UTCDominik Schläfli Expert

Wow!

13th May 2009 21:26 UTCHarjo Neutkens Manager

Volker, that's a work of art in its own right! Fantastic!!

14th May 2009 06:25 UTCMalcolm Southwood 🌟 Expert

One of the biggest regrets I have with my collecting is that, when I started collecting seriously in the early 1980s, I effectively created two collections - micromounts, and everything else! Two separate catalogues (at that time) later became two separate databases in the early days of personal computers, and so they remain. Later on my collection became very locality orientated, and the two separate cataloguing and numbering regimes has become a real bugbear!

Some of my favourite micros still get properly mounted; some stay on tac. Some of the items in my "micro" collection fit a standard European micro box; many do not. These issues don't bother me, but the inconvenience of having to search two databases is a serious problem, so if I was starting again there would certainly be no size distinction in my cataloguing or databasing.

Cheers

mal

14th May 2009 11:29 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Volker - Wow!

14th May 2009 12:33 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager

Looks great, Volker!

15th May 2009 12:42 UTCVolker Betz 🌟 Expert

Hello,

just for fun, :P, attached my "biggest and haviest" micro mineral specimen. Its 7,5 kg an I dont "hold" it in the picture. It also does not fit into small box, B).

Volker

15th May 2009 13:13 UTCSteve Sorrell Expert

Nice one Volker. How about this one? Micro sulphur crystals. Matrix is White Island off the north coast of the North Island, New Zealand and is approx 2km in diameter!

Regards

Steve

16th May 2009 13:02 UTCMalcolm Southwood 🌟 Expert

Steve,

We visited White Island in July 2007 while on a family holiday in NZ. We chartered a small helicopter from Rotorua and flew in, which cost an arm and a leg but it was worth every cent! The views were fantastic and we spent about two hours on the island walking among the fumaroles and looking into the steaming crater.

I...um...did find a rock or two in my bag when we got back...just small ones your honour! And your photo inspired me to do a bit of trimming just now and recover a few reasonable micros - small crystals, and mainly subhedral and intergrown aggregates - but not too bad at all. And - back to the subject of this thread - these did get the proper mounting treatment given what a great experience it was to land on the island and collect them.

Cheers

mal

16th May 2009 16:40 UTCDonald Peck

WOW! is an understatement. What a fantastic way to store/label your micros. Volker, you must have a super fast way of photographing each one. Do you use a scope with a photo tube?

16th May 2009 19:55 UTCDieter Obrecht

I'm a European systematic micromount collector myself with 1.800+ mineral names and 3.000+ specimen (and still a huge heap of unprocessed material from field trips). Once I found the right oranisation for my collection and restricted it to pieces of max. the size of the small display boxes - and I stick with this all the way through. If I don't have the right size I wait until it comes along. Or, I'm trying to format an ugly looking or damaged whole piece to recover a nice micro. All my miniatures and small cabinet sized ones had once been thrown out. My wife keeps some larger specimen around her work space to enjoy them without bino. The reason I'm collecting "micros only" and this way is that I indulge myself with the view through a bino - a whole new world appears. Mounting them on little balsa pedestals, thootbrush hairs, or cuttings from clear plastic curtain rods was an idea way back when I had more time - now passed the 60's my clock is ticking away and I had given up on this idea because of the amount of time involved to do so.

Space was also the main idea behind collecting "micros only", and to go for a systematic collection. Imagine a nice Perovskite "grid" or "tree" ..... have you ever seen one as cabinet sized specimen? Magnification is the magic word! - have you ever seen a serious collector without a lens? So, a tiny piece is enough for me.

I put the best small specimen I can find on a little tack and put it into 28x28x21 mm boxes with black base and clear lid from the European slip-fit type. Some single crystals resting in gel capsules mounted on tack in the same box size. This way I can appreciate the minerals in my collection all the way allround under the bino without touching them. Keeping them in boxes avoids collecting dust, prevents the accidental breakage of very fine features; critical ones are airtight sealed with clear celotape around the base - which means I do not open them if not absolut neccessary.

In the back of the box behind the mineral is a neat printed label (slightly larger as the box to keep it under pressure in place without any sort of glue) which has all the important informations (for me) on it like: name of the main mineral in bold letters, important additional ones (if there are any); when neccessary I add a special growth habit or similar into the 2nd line. Next is a very thin line and underneath it is the exact location in smaller letters. The "collecting-year-thing" I gave up when my collection had grown behind 1.000+ and I purchased more and more micros which I could not find myself, or being sure of without having a sophisticated lab at hand.

If I have tiny single crystals (after breaking bigger rocks) from the same mineral but with different growth habits I put them together in one box on little pieces of safe tack.

A database of the collection is the most important thing of my collection. It holds all additional information like: name, location, colour, growth habit, weblinks to mindat, webmineral, etc. to have with one click all other infos about the mineral at hand. Also from the database runs a link to a photo of the mineral which shows in the database as a tiny thumbnail. The photos are stored on my harddisc. Database and photos are constantly backed up. With my database I can quickly sort any important information like: locations, Strunz classifications, mineral families, etc. On mineral faires I have a tiny PDA in my pocket with a copy of the database. The gadget is GPS aided and has internet access which comes handy if I'm not sure aboute the piece to purchase (or about the dealer ....) ;))

The only thing now is a nice display system to have all boxes in one view - and which can grow with the collection. At the moment all boxes are alphabetically sorted in flat cardboard boxes as one layer and stored in a shelve system.

Finally I would never collect other sizes than micros. It's all about the fine details and the time which I enjoy with them under the bino - each box is representing a world on its own. Leaving room for the imagination how this little world infront of you came to existence in the first place. But most important, I'm collecting for myself - not to show off at ruled competitions - therefore my system is perfect for me. And I admit that I still love the stick-mounted ones which I had seen years back.

16th May 2009 19:58 UTCVolker Betz 🌟 Expert

Hi Donald,

well, making a picture with all processing takes about 15 minutes. Then the point of quality control comes. (tu) when its OK then a label can be printed. ( and (td) and if it fails. I confess I started that not primary for aesthetic reasons, more for a fast way to find it again. I spent an awful lot of time to find again a special Faujasite-twin.

I use a stereo to view at specimens, but a macroscope setup with Maco lenses, bellows or microscope setup and DSRL to make pictures. Including multilayer technique.

Stereo microscopes suitable for good photography with a plan apo lens are just very expensive.

Volker B)

17th May 2009 18:06 UTCDonald Peck

Volker,

Thanks for the reply. I agree that triple tube microscopes are terribly expensive. I don't have one eithr (but I dream about a Meijii)

In any case your photo labels are great!

Don

2nd Jul 2009 13:07 UTCSebastian Möller Expert

Hello,

I do mostly collecting Micro Specimen, fitting in either clear 2,8x2,8 cm boxes (German Micromount Boxes) or 4x3 cm Jousi boxes. But there are also some bigger ones, as I'm a regional collector. I do not mount my specimen normally, only tack is used to fix them. I use a white label at the bottom (using 23x32 mm labels sold in Germany with about 500 labels in a package). I write main specimen on top, then other important ones or important questionable ones (with ?), then horizontal line, then location, date of finding and value at the bottom. A small part of the label would overlap, so I cut it and put it at the top of the box. There I do write the main specimen's name.

Regards,

Sebastian Möller

2nd Jul 2009 14:21 UTCLuca Baralis Expert

Dieter Obrecht Wrote:

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

> On mineral faires I have a tiny PDA

> in my pocket with a copy of the database. The

> gadget is GPS aided and has internet access which

> comes handy if I'm not sure aboute the piece to

> purchase (or about the dealer ....) ;))

The same I do, but I have to export my database in Mobile Excel format to be copied on a PDA. Problems comes from the little screen of the PDA sometimes it is hard to navigate and read data!

What kind of database do you use on PDA and PC?

Luca

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 11:55:15

Go to top of page