|
|
Post by DigDug on Oct 9, 2007 10:10:49 GMT -5
Would this be considered more an agate or a chalcedony...even thought they are about the same.  |
|
|
|
Post by genchaos on Oct 9, 2007 16:40:15 GMT -5
Chalcedony is a general catch-all classification including any varieties of monoclinic cryptocrystalline silica. Types include carnelian, chrysoprase, flint, and agate, as well as many others.
Agate is any chalcedony with concentric banding. Most of the material patagonia puts on here is a great example.
The piece you have there might apply, but technically would more likely be a quartz-included chalcedony nodule. Either way, any agate is also properly called chalcedony.
The only reason I know this is because I had to look it up last month. I've always classified various things as "agates" i.e. carnelian agate, moss agate, dendritic agate, fire agate, etc. when actually none of those are actually "agate". They are just other types of chalcedony.
|
|
|
|
Post by DigDug on Oct 9, 2007 17:10:52 GMT -5
Thanks a bunch! I have a habit of calling everything agate or chalcedony as well...but sometimes with a really interesting sample, I like to be as specific as possible. Did you get that huge hunk of 'lol' savannah agate cut yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by genchaos on Oct 10, 2007 3:44:01 GMT -5
I have a guy with an 18" saw working on it. I'll check with him in a week or two to see if he got it cut. I'm looking forward to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by claycat on Oct 10, 2007 7:04:53 GMT -5
Agate or chalcedony either way, I really like that specimen! It is very sculptural.
|
|
