Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
Greetings, Interesting discussion on meteorite thickness, weight, value and slices etc. and so on. My problem with cutting slices too thin are many. While you get a great looking slice with good surface area there are trade offs. Number one is there is more breakage when trying to cut ultra thin slices. Breakage should cause the price of the material to rise, if you have a truly limited amount of that material in the first place. Two. Thin slices that are made without breakage are also prone to breaking later on. It could break during shipping to the buyer. Breaking a full slice can reduce the value of that slice, especially if there are only a couple of full slices in the world of that material. Even if you don't break it if you sell it later there is a chance it could break in shipping. You can always sell the two half slices and the multiple crumbs then. Three. Another consideration is if the surface of the slice needs refinishing at some point (even if it is not in your lifetime) the odds again are higher that it will break while being worked on. A thicker slice can be resurfaced multiple times assuring it survives being studied, viewed and appreciated in the future. Four. Cutting specimens ultra thin causes waste of material. First you get more slices but at the lost of more material. One commenter mentioned 60% which sound right to me when cutting ultra thin. Again if the material is truly very limited, scientifically valuable material could be lost. I can appreciate cutting material where there is lots of that material and to cut ultra thin as there will be multiple kilos of it for sometime. For those who collect thin slices I am not picking on you but just posting my thoughts of these ultra thin cut slices and the pros and cons. Please don't take it personal. I do have some ultra thin slices in my collection. I coined the phrase that I am the current caretaker of the meteorite specimens I currently posses which will be past on to future generations. It is my job with that collection to try to preserve it best I can. --AL Mitterling Mitterling Meteorites __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
The answer is simple: if weight is important to you don't bid. Michael On 3/7/11 6:19 PM, "Adam Hupe" wrote: > Michael made the Comment: > > *** > If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent > Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take > The Ribeye every stinking time. > > > But if you are starving and have to feed multiple people in this poor economy, > most would opt for the ground beef. That is the problem, most are not willing > or cannot afford to pay twice as much for a 1mm slice for example. This leaves > the preparer with a tough decision. They have to balance the needs of the > collector with the issue of cutting/polishing loss when a buyer is not willing > or able to pay twice as much. In this poor economy, most are looking at the > price per gram. Michael, you illustrated this perfectly by comparing a > commodity > like beef with meteorites. Same for the guy running the auction, if you want > cheese he states "go to a deli." I do not agree at all with the guy running > the > auctions without weights listed. This is pertinent information as with > diamonds > where the weight is very important. And... Diamonds are a commodity > > Best Regards, > > Adam > > > > > > > - Original Message ---- > From: John L > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > Sent: Mon, March 7, 2011 5:33:14 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)? > > > Michael and All, > > A 2mm Ribeye, draped over a 100 watt light bulb for 43 seconds turns out > perfect. > Micheal's words "habitual ways of thinking" may just boil down to (in my > opinion only) a natural transition from a new collector to a more seasoned > collector. When someone decides to begin collecting meteorites, for whatever > reason, and is trying to explain to family and friends about his/her new > venture--it just wouldn't work to show them your newest .006gm micro (this > is an extreme example) and expect them to look at it for more than 20 > seconds but when you hand them any iron and EVERY single time they exclaim > "wow that's heavy for it's size"--now you have their interest and they want > to see more and most important they're more prone to listening to you about > your new hobby. > > In my circles, i'm trying to get everyone i know to buy the biggest Campo > they can afford and learn & educate yourself. Hopefuly, one of them will, > one day, have the knowledge that you guys/gals have. Everyone starts > somewhere. > > Personally, i'm on the side of as aesthetics and given the choice of a 4mm > vs a 2mm, i would probably take the 2mm-if it was a more revealing piece. > My true love is TS's and i have about another 40+ to post to the Eom. To me > it's like looking into the sole of the universe. > > And that's my 3 oz's of Ribeye fat > > - Original Message - > From: "Michael Blood" > To: "Adam Hupe" ; "Meteorite List" > > Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:58 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice > thickness)? > > >> Good points, Adam, >>However, the collectors who are blind to any pricing >> Elements but weight are NOT getting the best deals at all. >>I sell the same way I collect Good is good and to me >> How a specimen looks if far more important than mass. >>Do I prefer a bigger specimen over a smaller specimen? >> Of course, but I do not prefer a thicker slice over a thinner >> Slice at all. If one is 4g and the other is 1.2g and the surface >> Area is larger on the 1.2g and the price is the same, I will take >> The 1.2 thinner slice with more surface area every stinking time. >>If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent >> Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take >> The Ribeye every stinking time. >>I believe collectors are STARTING to get the point that >> It is NOT the weight that is most important, but the visual >> Quality that matters. Every Tucson Show for the last several >> Years I have seen some screaming specimens sold for 4, 10 or >> 100 times the "normal" price per gram. I have bought some of >> Them, myself. >>I am always amazed that though I am certain the average >> Meteorite collector has a substantially higher IQ than the >> Public norm,
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
And to Capt'n Blood's point, reviewing some of my early purchases, cube-form non-end-cut, I wonder what I was thinking then...and then I remember, I was learning about each class, wanting to see each from a 3-D angle. Things are different now (but the intrinsic value of that perspective rings true, still.) So there is validity to each presentation, depending upon from where we all are viewing. Kind of like E theory, eh? !!! -Richard M - Original Message - From: "Michael Blood" To: "Adam Hupe" ; "Meteorite List" Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)? Good points, Adam, However, the collectors who are blind to any pricing Elements but weight are NOT getting the best deals at all. I sell the same way I collect Good is good and to me How a specimen looks if far more important than mass. Do I prefer a bigger specimen over a smaller specimen? Of course, but I do not prefer a thicker slice over a thinner Slice at all. If one is 4g and the other is 1.2g and the surface Area is larger on the 1.2g and the price is the same, I will take The 1.2 thinner slice with more surface area every stinking time. If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take The Ribeye every stinking time. I believe collectors are STARTING to get the point that It is NOT the weight that is most important, but the visual Quality that matters. Every Tucson Show for the last several Years I have seen some screaming specimens sold for 4, 10 or 100 times the "normal" price per gram. I have bought some of Them, myself. I am always amazed that though I am certain the average Meteorite collector has a substantially higher IQ than the Public norm, so many of them are attached to narrow ways of Thinking. However, any smart individual will eventually overcome Habitual ways of thinking when repeatedly exposed to the logical advantages of other ways of looking at things. Michael On 3/7/11 3:38 PM, "Adam Hupe" wrote: Most collectors go by the price per gram first so dealers who cut ultra-thin will take a loss when weight is the main consideration. I know that the weight-to-surface area ratio is a secondary consideration for most collectors due to experience. There are other factors like a decent polish being applied, proper preparation and specimen status including provenance that can affect price. Best Regards, Adam __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
Michael made the Comment: *** If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take The Ribeye every stinking time. But if you are starving and have to feed multiple people in this poor economy, most would opt for the ground beef. That is the problem, most are not willing or cannot afford to pay twice as much for a 1mm slice for example. This leaves the preparer with a tough decision. They have to balance the needs of the collector with the issue of cutting/polishing loss when a buyer is not willing or able to pay twice as much. In this poor economy, most are looking at the price per gram. Michael, you illustrated this perfectly by comparing a commodity like beef with meteorites. Same for the guy running the auction, if you want cheese he states "go to a deli." I do not agree at all with the guy running the auctions without weights listed. This is pertinent information as with diamonds where the weight is very important. And... Diamonds are a commodity Best Regards, Adam - Original Message From: John L To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Mon, March 7, 2011 5:33:14 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)? Michael and All, A 2mm Ribeye, draped over a 100 watt light bulb for 43 seconds turns out perfect. Micheal's words "habitual ways of thinking" may just boil down to (in my opinion only) a natural transition from a new collector to a more seasoned collector. When someone decides to begin collecting meteorites, for whatever reason, and is trying to explain to family and friends about his/her new venture--it just wouldn't work to show them your newest .006gm micro (this is an extreme example) and expect them to look at it for more than 20 seconds but when you hand them any iron and EVERY single time they exclaim "wow that's heavy for it's size"--now you have their interest and they want to see more and most important they're more prone to listening to you about your new hobby. In my circles, i'm trying to get everyone i know to buy the biggest Campo they can afford and learn & educate yourself. Hopefuly, one of them will, one day, have the knowledge that you guys/gals have. Everyone starts somewhere. Personally, i'm on the side of as aesthetics and given the choice of a 4mm vs a 2mm, i would probably take the 2mm-if it was a more revealing piece. My true love is TS's and i have about another 40+ to post to the Eom. To me it's like looking into the sole of the universe. And that's my 3 oz's of Ribeye fat - Original Message - From: "Michael Blood" To: "Adam Hupe" ; "Meteorite List" Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:58 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)? > Good points, Adam, >However, the collectors who are blind to any pricing > Elements but weight are NOT getting the best deals at all. >I sell the same way I collect Good is good and to me > How a specimen looks if far more important than mass. >Do I prefer a bigger specimen over a smaller specimen? > Of course, but I do not prefer a thicker slice over a thinner > Slice at all. If one is 4g and the other is 1.2g and the surface > Area is larger on the 1.2g and the price is the same, I will take > The 1.2 thinner slice with more surface area every stinking time. >If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent > Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take > The Ribeye every stinking time. >I believe collectors are STARTING to get the point that > It is NOT the weight that is most important, but the visual > Quality that matters. Every Tucson Show for the last several > Years I have seen some screaming specimens sold for 4, 10 or > 100 times the "normal" price per gram. I have bought some of > Them, myself. >I am always amazed that though I am certain the average > Meteorite collector has a substantially higher IQ than the > Public norm, so many of them are attached to narrow ways of > Thinking. However, any smart individual will eventually overcome > Habitual ways of thinking when repeatedly exposed to the logical > advantages of other ways of looking at things. >Michael > > On 3/7/11 3:38 PM, "Adam Hupe" wrote: > >> Most collectors go by the price per gram first so dealers who cut >> ultra-thin >> will take a loss when weight is the main consideration. I know that the >> weight-to-surface area ratio is
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
Michael and All, A 2mm Ribeye, draped over a 100 watt light bulb for 43 seconds turns out perfect. Micheal's words "habitual ways of thinking" may just boil down to (in my opinion only) a natural transition from a new collector to a more seasoned collector. When someone decides to begin collecting meteorites, for whatever reason, and is trying to explain to family and friends about his/her new venture--it just wouldn't work to show them your newest .006gm micro (this is an extreme example) and expect them to look at it for more than 20 seconds but when you hand them any iron and EVERY single time they exclaim "wow that's heavy for it's size"--now you have their interest and they want to see more and most important they're more prone to listening to you about your new hobby. In my circles, i'm trying to get everyone i know to buy the biggest Campo they can afford and learn & educate yourself. Hopefuly, one of them will, one day, have the knowledge that you guys/gals have. Everyone starts somewhere. Personally, i'm on the side of as aesthetics and given the choice of a 4mm vs a 2mm, i would probably take the 2mm-if it was a more revealing piece. My true love is TS's and i have about another 40+ to post to the Eom. To me it's like looking into the sole of the universe. And that's my 3 oz's of Ribeye fat - Original Message - From: "Michael Blood" To: "Adam Hupe" ; "Meteorite List" Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:58 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)? Good points, Adam, However, the collectors who are blind to any pricing Elements but weight are NOT getting the best deals at all. I sell the same way I collect Good is good and to me How a specimen looks if far more important than mass. Do I prefer a bigger specimen over a smaller specimen? Of course, but I do not prefer a thicker slice over a thinner Slice at all. If one is 4g and the other is 1.2g and the surface Area is larger on the 1.2g and the price is the same, I will take The 1.2 thinner slice with more surface area every stinking time. If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take The Ribeye every stinking time. I believe collectors are STARTING to get the point that It is NOT the weight that is most important, but the visual Quality that matters. Every Tucson Show for the last several Years I have seen some screaming specimens sold for 4, 10 or 100 times the "normal" price per gram. I have bought some of Them, myself. I am always amazed that though I am certain the average Meteorite collector has a substantially higher IQ than the Public norm, so many of them are attached to narrow ways of Thinking. However, any smart individual will eventually overcome Habitual ways of thinking when repeatedly exposed to the logical advantages of other ways of looking at things. Michael On 3/7/11 3:38 PM, "Adam Hupe" wrote: Most collectors go by the price per gram first so dealers who cut ultra-thin will take a loss when weight is the main consideration. I know that the weight-to-surface area ratio is a secondary consideration for most collectors due to experience. There are other factors like a decent polish being applied, proper preparation and specimen status including provenance that can affect price. Best Regards, Adam __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
Hi Micheal and List, The first question I am always asked is "what is your price per gram?", not "what is the surface-to-weight ratio or the dimensions", for that matter. The dimensions are only asked for after the price per gram question 99 percent of the time. I will always choose the most attractive piece that was well prepared over some block-cut monstrosity without any polish any day. The problem is that a lot of dealers/collectors trade meteorites like they are commodities, not the true rarities that they really are. The rules have changed the last few years making the price per gram the number one issue when shopping around. The key is learning a balance which is different for each and every meteorite. I am still learning this balance after preparing well over 35,000 specimens. Best Regards, Adam - Original Message From: Michael Blood To: Adam Hupe ; Meteorite List Sent: Mon, March 7, 2011 3:58:23 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)? Good points, Adam, However, the collectors who are blind to any pricing Elements but weight are NOT getting the best deals at all. I sell the same way I collect Good is good and to me How a specimen looks if far more important than mass. Do I prefer a bigger specimen over a smaller specimen? Of course, but I do not prefer a thicker slice over a thinner Slice at all. If one is 4g and the other is 1.2g and the surface Area is larger on the 1.2g and the price is the same, I will take The 1.2 thinner slice with more surface area every stinking time. If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take The Ribeye every stinking time. I believe collectors are STARTING to get the point that It is NOT the weight that is most important, but the visual Quality that matters. Every Tucson Show for the last several Years I have seen some screaming specimens sold for 4, 10 or 100 times the "normal" price per gram. I have bought some of Them, myself. I am always amazed that though I am certain the average Meteorite collector has a substantially higher IQ than the Public norm, so many of them are attached to narrow ways of Thinking. However, any smart individual will eventually overcome Habitual ways of thinking when repeatedly exposed to the logical advantages of other ways of looking at things. Michael On 3/7/11 3:38 PM, "Adam Hupe" wrote: > Most collectors go by the price per gram first so dealers who cut ultra-thin > will take a loss when weight is the main consideration. I know that the > weight-to-surface area ratio is a secondary consideration for most collectors > due to experience. > > There are other factors like a decent polish being applied, proper preparation > and specimen status including provenance that can affect price. > > > Best Regards, > > Adam __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
Good points, Adam, However, the collectors who are blind to any pricing Elements but weight are NOT getting the best deals at all. I sell the same way I collect Good is good and to me How a specimen looks if far more important than mass. Do I prefer a bigger specimen over a smaller specimen? Of course, but I do not prefer a thicker slice over a thinner Slice at all. If one is 4g and the other is 1.2g and the surface Area is larger on the 1.2g and the price is the same, I will take The 1.2 thinner slice with more surface area every stinking time. If you can buy high fat ground beef for $2/lb or excellent Ribeye stakes for $4/lb, which are YOU going to buy? I'll take The Ribeye every stinking time. I believe collectors are STARTING to get the point that It is NOT the weight that is most important, but the visual Quality that matters. Every Tucson Show for the last several Years I have seen some screaming specimens sold for 4, 10 or 100 times the "normal" price per gram. I have bought some of Them, myself. I am always amazed that though I am certain the average Meteorite collector has a substantially higher IQ than the Public norm, so many of them are attached to narrow ways of Thinking. However, any smart individual will eventually overcome Habitual ways of thinking when repeatedly exposed to the logical advantages of other ways of looking at things. Michael On 3/7/11 3:38 PM, "Adam Hupe" wrote: > Most collectors go by the price per gram first so dealers who cut ultra-thin > will take a loss when weight is the main consideration. I know that the > weight-to-surface area ratio is a secondary consideration for most collectors > due to experience. > > There are other factors like a decent polish being applied, proper preparation > and specimen status including provenance that can affect price. > > > Best Regards, > > Adam __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
I know many collectors, who prefer thicker slices, to have a little more an impression of the exterior of the stone, ..and in fact, whenever they could afford, they will choose endcuts, because there you have something in the hand, you see how the stone originally looked from outside and - especially compared to ultrathin slices - an endcut is made for eternity. And there are the problems, if you cut a stone slice too thin, you can't grind and polish it anymore. Perhaps you know these wire cut ultrathin stone slices, they have a huge surface/weight-ration but often they have that wavy relief from cutting, which you can't remove anymore, because the slice would break into pieces, if you'd try to grind it. And if you have a too thin iron slice and you'll get problems with rust, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to refinish and to re-etch it. Nja well, Mike, from which thickness/cut loss on a slice becomes more expensive per weight, that is in practice alone the problem of the preparator :-) - because in the end the collector decides, whether he would be willing to pay a higher price per gram. (And I tell you, most won't). Best! Martin __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
There is a point that a specimen will easily break if cut too thin. Some material can be cut to 1mm thick but cutting losses can mount up to over 60% even when using a wire saw after applying a polish. We had over 50% cutting loss on Martian meteorite NWA 1195 which was cut on a diamond wafer saw and then diamond lapped on both sides. I think a 2 to 2.5mm cut is reasonable on most ultra rare material if polished on both sides. The thickness has to be greater on friable material like Nakhlites otherwise you will receive a pile of crumbs. It also has to be thicker on large specimens to support the weight on a display easel. Most collectors go by the price per gram first so dealers who cut ultra-thin will take a loss when weight is the main consideration. I know that the weight-to-surface area ratio is a secondary consideration for most collectors due to experience. There are other factors like a decent polish being applied, proper preparation and specimen status including provenance that can affect price. Best Regards, Adam - Original Message From: Richard Kowalski To: meteorite list Sent: Mon, March 7, 2011 3:08:41 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)? These discussions about aesthetics of specimens vs their weight is rather interesting, but it seems the lines of the subject are a bit blurred. It seems the subject has come to comparing fragments to slices. I'm not sure this is a fair comparison, but I understand it. I am wondering what others think represents a point of diminishing returns in making a slice paper thin. IOW at what point does cutting losses become too great to make the aesthetic function of the prep & price excessive? I guess I don't understand the desire for some ultra-thin prepped specimens. For example, if a ultra-thin 1mm thick slice is being sold for the equivalent $80 per gram, and a slice of the exact same material, the exact same size, but 4 times the weight (4mm thick) is being offered at the exact same price, I'd be inclined to purchase the latter. I understand the appeal of of thinner specimens and of course you can polish a slice so finely it becomes a thin section, but is there some point where the prep becomes so costly that is is in fact "too thin" for the buyer? Thanks -- Richard Kowalski Full Moon Photography IMCA #1081 __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Point of Diminishing returns (Slice thickness)?
Hi Richard, I lack the skills and equipment to produce paper thin slices. I have only seen a few slices less than 1mm thick that were not too fragile to handle. As a collector, my preference for thick versus thin varies from specimen to specimen and type to type. Some types I would prefer a thin slice that shows lots of surface features - like an expensive brecciated fall or a pallasite. Other times, I would want a thick slice with a complete rim of fusion crust along the edge. So I don't have a strong preference one way or the other. A while back, I purchased a thin slice of a Martian. It was paper thin and certainly less than 1mm, and it was almost transparent. In a membrane box, I could hold it up to a bright light, and it would glow beautifully. As a cutter, if I am using a super-thin .006" blade, the amount of cutting loss is negligible to start with, so making thin slices is not so much a matter of loss as it is labor and precision. Super-thin slices tend to break easily, either during cutting or during polishing afterwards. The vast majority of my slices are 1mm or thicker - I have a poor track record with trying to make the very thin cuts. Best regards, MikeG -- Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone News Feed - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone EOM - http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/collection.aspx?id=1564 --- On 3/7/11, Richard Kowalski wrote: > These discussions about aesthetics of specimens vs their weight is rather > interesting, but it seems the lines of the subject are a bit blurred. > > It seems the subject has come to comparing fragments to slices. I'm not sure > this is a fair comparison, but I understand it. > > I am wondering what others think represents a point of diminishing returns > in making a slice paper thin. IOW at what point does cutting losses become > too great to make the aesthetic function of the prep & price excessive? > > I guess I don't understand the desire for some ultra-thin prepped specimens. > For example, if a ultra-thin 1mm thick slice is being sold for the > equivalent $80 per gram, and a slice of the exact same material, the exact > same size, but 4 times the weight (4mm thick) is being offered at the exact > same price, I'd be inclined to purchase the latter. > > I understand the appeal of of thinner specimens and of course you can polish > a slice so finely it becomes a thin section, but is there some point where > the prep becomes so costly that is is in fact "too thin" for the buyer? > > Thanks > > > -- > Richard Kowalski > Full Moon Photography > IMCA #1081 > > > > __ > Visit the Archives at > http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > -- __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
