Some up close and personal demantoid inclusion shots

[ooo~Shiney!]

If deMANtoids have sperm, are there dewomantoids to mate with?

Absolutely, I'm sure of it (of course, I have no proof) But I'd love to own one of their offspring!

The debabytoids would be more or less saturated?
If they are quite saturated, then wouldn't they stand to be confused with the ubiquitous Urinite?

 

[m76steve]

with all this talk of sperm & mating demantoid/womantoid garnets im getting my demantoids fixed but until they are safe around other stones they will be kept in propolac, propulitic, i mean rubbers to keep them unto themselves-i mean whats a guy to do for keeping stones good!-steve...

 

[cellentani]

Hi Colorluvr - the photo you've linked is a horsetail inclusion. It's often a way to distinguish between Russian and other locations (although I believe that it is also now being seen in some Namibians). I think that there have been some photos of those on this forum before. I haven't got time to find them now but will do so and link you to them as they're fascinating. Thanks for the link.

Your photos are great btw - when I use my microscope to take photos it wipes out the colour of the gem so they all look pale but yours seem to retain the colour.

I've also read that horsetails have been seen in demantoids from Pakistan, but the fibers tend to be more scattered and random.

 

[Arkteia]

If deMANtoids have sperm, are there dewomantoids to mate with?

OK, I think DAMENtoids in German, DAMEtoids or DAMSELtoids in English is very appropriate. (I also hope they'd find new mines there or anywhere else...)

I have a Russian 2.34 demantoid with beautiful horsetail inclusions but do not have either technology or talent to make good photos. I shalll ask my appraiser, when I see him, to take good photos under his super-microscope with a screen.

 

[m76steve]

seeing these post makes me realize that the fotos can be important when trying to id a stone to the panel-as with the some of use guys i am in the process of improving pic quality so to convey my junk to ur eyes-steve...

 

[colorluvr]

Hi Colorluvr - the photo you've linked is a horsetail inclusion. It's often a way to distinguish between Russian and other locations (although I believe that it is also now being seen in some Namibians). I think that there have been some photos of those on this forum before. I haven't got time to find them now but will do so and link you to them as they're fascinating. Thanks for the link.

Your photos are great btw - when I use my microscope to take photos it wipes out the colour of the gem so they all look pale but yours seem to retain the colour.

Yes LD, that photo and the one on the Palagems website are gorgeous horsetails. I wish mine had one like that, but if it had, I probably wouldn't have been able to afford the stone, so I'm happy with what I have.

What kind of lighting do you use? I usually use a combo of a dark field condenser on my microscope (didn't come with one, so I bought one off of ebay) and a tungsten light that you can control the voltage and aperture of the light and from there on it's just hit and miss (mostly miss) experiments.

After you mentioned the tadpoles that occur in synthetic Alexandrite stones, I remembered that I had one (thank goodness it was given to me as a learning tool and I didn't spend money on it ) and so I dug through my "learning box" and pulled it out. I have attempted to do some comparison shots between it and the demantoid - the first through flipped lens and the second through a microscope at 30x. It was difficult to get a clear shot of the Alex through the microscope, but here they are. I know we aren't supposed to post photos of synthetic stones, but I assume it's ok as a comparison learning tool.

 

[LD]

Hi Colorluvr - the photo you've linked is a horsetail inclusion. It's often a way to distinguish between Russian and other locations (although I believe that it is also now being seen in some Namibians). I think that there have been some photos of those on this forum before. I haven't got time to find them now but will do so and link you to them as they're fascinating. Thanks for the link.

Your photos are great btw - when I use my microscope to take photos it wipes out the colour of the gem so they all look pale but yours seem to retain the colour.

Yes LD, that photo and the one on the Palagems website are gorgeous horsetails. I wish mine had one like that, but if it had, I probably wouldn't have been able to afford the stone, so I'm happy with what I have.

What kind of lighting do you use? I usually use a combo of a dark field condenser on my microscope (didn't come with one, so I bought one off of ebay) and a tungsten light that you can control the voltage and aperture of the light and from there on it's just hit and miss (mostly miss) experiments.

After you mentioned the tadpoles that occur in synthetic Alexandrite stones, I remembered that I had one (thank goodness it was given to me as a learning tool and I didn't spend money on it ) and so I dug through my "learning box" and pulled it out. I have attempted to do some comparison shots between it and the demantoid - the first through flipped lens and the second through a microscope at 30x. It was difficult to get a clear shot of the Alex through the microscope, but here they are. I know we aren't supposed to post photos of synthetic stones, but I assume it's ok as a comparison learning tool.

Again great photos! The Alex you have is showing the "dust type look" that you see in synthetics. It looks like you should be able to blow it away doesn't it? That's not the same as the tadpoles unfortunately. Let me see if I can find some photos of tadpoles (inclusions not frogs!).

I'm afraid that my microscope camera comes with its own built in LED light source that you can't switch off that I think is responsible for the colour alteration when you take photos. It gets very up close and personal with gems/inclusions and I've taken some superb photos with it but just wish the lighting was better (but then the camera wouldn't work on it I suspect). I may play around with trying to take photos with it using more/different lights to see if I can get anything better.

Edit: Have just tried to find a photo of a tadpole but can only find pen drawings. Will continue but found this and it has some fascinating photos!

http://www.apsara.co.uk/content/view/12/27/

 

[Arkteia]

amazing! thank you for this link, LD!

 

[LD]

I've just found the most amazing photos of inclusions - I'm going to put them in a separate link so it can be found easily in future.

 

[colorluvr]

I've just found the most amazing photos of inclusions - I'm going to put them in a separate link so it can be found easily in future.

Great, and I'll add a few links I have it you didn't already link them.

 

[Arcadian]

very cool! I wish I could get some better pics of my stones this way. I tend to shake too much and get blobby blurry pics)

-A

 

[colorluvr]

very cool! I wish I could get some better pics of my stones this way. I tend to shake too much and get blobby blurry pics)

-A

I could never manage decent photos without a tripod, and I use a "homemade" lens holder to hold my point and click camera up to the microscope eyepiece. My "free hand" shots are always blurry. I even use the tripod for my outside photos (on the rare occasions that I have sun), otherwise, they are just a blurr.