FMF - Friends of Minerals Forum, discussion and message board

[chris]

Hello,

My own little stone : I do as Sundog.

[Carles Curto]

We too much discuss about the verb to use, but the real point of all the differences is the "self" not the used verb (collected, dug, mined...). Then, simply change "self" by another, better indicate, word, as (for example) "personally".

The result: "personally collected" or "personally collected by ......."

[John S. White]

Bingo, I think Carles has got it! I like "personally collected" best of all, so far.

Up to that point I was leaning toward "self-mined" and I have no problem with the word mined because mining can take many forms and does not necessarily involve tunnelling into rocks (as in placer mining, for example).

[MARION Claude]

Sorry for my bad English... But "to collect"do not mean that you dug, mined, gathered the mineral from the rock. You may get the mineral from a dealer and you personaly collected him.
Perhaps personaly mined?
Claude MARION

[Tracy]

Two things need to be emphasized - 1) that it was not acquired from a store and 2) that the collector expended energy to acquire it.

"field-collected" is the least ambiguous within one's own catalog, but as a descriptor to others, perhaps "personally field-collected" would be a better fit?

[James Catmur]

Now you have got me thinking. On my labels I always say 'collected', 'exchanged' or 'bought', with the first meaning found by me in the field. Anyone who picks up my labels in the future might find 'collected' confusing so maybe I should change.

We could go for something a bit more interesting (auto-collected?) but often we end up back with 'self' or similar. I like 'personally collected', and wonder if we could even find a nice greek or latin version that we could use!!

James

[Jordi Fabre]

OK, at this point we have two choices, both attractive: "personally collected" that it seems to me to be the English speaker's favorite, and "field collected" that it seems to please also some people like Chris, me and maybe some others. This second choice sounds more musical and descriptive to my European ear.

Considering that freedom is something great, why we don't leave this two suggestions run alone a we wait what happens on the future? In fact the leitmotiv of this topic is to find something to replace self-collected, and to do this, we need that the people use it.

I will use in the future "field collected", just because I like it more than other options. I suppose that people liking "personally collected" will use it too in the future, so I think that the best to do is just wait and see what happens during one year. Unfortunately probably self-collected will stay because it is not easy change people's minds, but maybe one (or both) of our suggestions will have some success.

I promise to talk again about it on August next year, we could do then a balance of the success (or not) of our suggestions.

Jordi

[John S. White]

The only problem with "field collected" is that it doesn't indicate who the field collector is. The vast majority of minerals in collections and in dealers' inventories are or were field collected. Perhaps TAKs "personally field collected" says it best. We can abbreviate that by using PFC.

[Brokenstone]

Good morning for everybody.
My personal opinion about "personally field collected" or PFC, this topic in spanishs labels change at "personalmente recogido del campo" or PRC. Too much large I think. An probably confused for the spanishs people, stones arent cereals.
Why not "extracted personally" or EP ?, in spanish "extraido personalmente" EP. Same topic for all the labels, english or spanish, one easy EP.
Greetings from Spain.
Pablo

[jewelheart]

Hello Everyone,
I have been reading your posts for quite sometime and have really appreciated the wisdom and knowledge gained. I recognize that I am not coming from your level of expertise and ratherI have a foot lightly planted in two worlds: yours and the "new age" crystal world. I am a collecter but with respect to the geologists and collectors I appreciate the true wisdom of the catagories given to the specimans and do not seek to name every new peice I get after the latest star or galaxy discovery.
So having said that I could not help but wanting to chime in and suggest the phrase "self birthed". Afterall the beautiful gems specimens are being "birthed" from our earth. I do not think anyone will look at you and say the child does not look like the parent. Hope you had a laugh.
Be Blessed and many thanks Jordie and John and all the other wise contirbutors,
Dawn Silver

[Carles Millan]

Hi!

Although I had been suggesting other terms, I'm convinced now the best of all is 'personally field collected', proposed by 'TAK from NJ'.

However, it might not be the ideal yet, but I can't figure out another that is more precise. 'Personally field collected' (or PFC for short) will become ambiguous when the specimen goes to other hands and the term is to be transferred from one record to another. To whom refers 'personally' then? To the current owner or to the former? Should the new owner leave PFC unchanged? I think he/she shouldn't. After all, any specimen has been PFC at the very beginning of its outside life.

Carles M.

[Carles Curto]

Independly on the form you record the act, the most important is to know who, when and how, a specimen was collected (and if it was collected with other similar or different species). Those ans further notes incorporated to this single sample record will be more or less important depending on the credibility of the first collector/owner. If notes on the label, card, data-base, etc., are clear, the way they are registered is really not important.

[Pete Modreski]

I've been reading all the discussion of this, thanks to Marie Huizing having referred me to it.

I'm very much inclined to stick with John's observation from his earlier post,

"...in the absence of a better term and since self-collected is so firmly planted in the jargon of the hobby, I believe that we have little choice but to live with it,
[...unless someone comes up with a better phrase.]"

I just don't think any of the other suggestions are going to catch on in common informal usage. "Personally collected" (by purchase from a dealer?), "Field collected" (by whom?) can be ambiguous, and "Personally field collected" and some of the other suggestions become just too cumbersome. I think by default people will continue to accept the common and shortest term, which causes no confusion because everyone uses it in its intended sense, and just "let it go" that it causes strict grammarians to wince a bit.

But if one were using the phrase in a formal article, I think it would be proper to use the best and most correct wording, such as "personally field collected" or "field collected by ______ _______".

Cheers, Pete Modreski

[lluis]

Good afternoon.
I am not english native speaker, so perhaps what i say is dumm, but I always understood the "self-collected" as "collected by myself".
I am chemist, so, again, not completely sure, but I have something flying in the rims of my mind that it is a form of literature license, like a metafora or any of those figures that are used by the ones that really know how to make good writtings....

Anyway, having nothing that merits to be placed in a tray collected by myself, I still place the "encontrado por........" in my labels.....(if I know the finder, like a piece collected by the late Mr. Shannon or by the late Mr. Kosnar)

With best wishes


Lluís

[ike wilson]

I would have thought that reading ..self collected ...would mean what it says , and if thats confusing God Help Us one and all.
All my specimens have labels and a card file. the card gives all known knowledge about the specimen etc.... self collected ...bought from....exchanged with ??? so no confusion to the person who ends up with the specimen at a later date.
I think it is simple and not confusing