Pierce through beetles in collections?

Beautiful, of course, I don't say anything here...
Yes, I'm talking about sticking out of the box. IMHO very "traumatic". And it's also not very convenient to work in a box...

I am, in principle, quite satisfied with this (now fairly standard) mounting method.
Here, the bottom is clearly visible (of course, depending on the size of the die), and the instance is whole, and it is easy and simple to manipulate without special tools.

This post was edited by Fornax13-07.04.2009 00: 42

Pictures:

P4041625.jpg — (277.86к)

I moved away from the tattoo not only for aesthetic reasons. What matters to me is that the instance doesn't have any damage at all. In this sense, it doesn't matter what is pierced - the elytra or the chest. With all the advantages of your Musson_max method, beetles in the box should be placed more rarely, since there is a high risk of damage when rearranging instances. In addition, as you noted, this approach does not allow us to develop a single standard mount for insects of different sizes.

2Musson_max
is Super!
Just stop drinking ! And I'll probably turn out like you!!!

This post was edited by swerig - 07.04.2009 16: 27

Musson_max:
interesting idea. But I do not like it, in terms of the fact that it is not convenient to arrange and operate beetles..

the disadvantages of pasting are not correct.. When I glue the beetle, the bottom does not become closed, everything is visible.. Especially if the die is made triangular )
It is quite possible to rearrange it.. But straightening the data carefully is a little more difficult.

Still, the gluers didn't convince me. Well, no one has convincingly explained why a neatly impaled large beetle is a barbarically damaged specimen, and a hawk moth, a "crested" owl or a morpho with a broken off (from fattening) belly pierced through the chest is quite aesthetically pleasing, as are impaled diptera, eardrums, dragonflies, and erect wings... RippeR generally stated that for a butterfly in the collection, legs and antennae are not so important (?!). If you'll excuse me, but I'm a retrograde. I pricked large beetles, I prick them, and I will prick them to the end of my life. I would have stabbed the smaller ones, but not with my hand. That's why I glue them.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 10.04.2009 19: 27

First of all, it is not necessary to compare.. You do not judge that if one person commits a crime, then you can also? Similar to insects - impaled beetles are not aesthetically pleasing, not because impaled butterflies are not aesthetically pleasing..

Probably a bigger argument, in the root of aestheticism - the structure of beetles and other insects..
I do not like to prick bedbugs as well, as they are similar in structure. But I quite like the look of a tattooed butterfly.. Because the bodies of butterflies are more "soft", more hairy, because in butterflies the back is located in the middle, and the wings are mainly responsible for symmetry..

Also, in butterflies, the main thing is the wings, in the background the abdomen and antennae, and in the third the legs..
A butterfly without a mustache is not very pleasant, and without fringe, too. But without legs, which are not visible, and which in 90% or more do not serve to determine. Therefore, they can sometimes be neglected.. I.e. a butterfly without a pair of paws does not bother me much.. Although many people are confused by all sorts of nonsense, and even the absence of a pair of segments on the foot.

Secondly, for butterflies, oss, and many others, mounting in a different way is more interesting in terms of integrity, and in terms of aesthetics, is not acceptable. And yet, the same butterflies, probably can not be straightened without tattoos-again, the specifics of the structure. In addition, the beetle can be pasted on a tiny drop of PVA and spread out very simply, and if you stick a butterfly, it will simply lead to the loss of scales and hairs.

Sofka or morpho with a broken belly is not the most aesthetic thing you can imagine.. Most do not attract butterflies with a broken belly at all in aesthetic terms, except in scientific terms, BUT at the moment it is often simply not possible to resort to any other methods, and for the sake of science, you have to break the belly. I don't like it at all, but often there's just no choice.

I also wouldn't throw out a butterfly without a mustache. A mistake of course, but what can you do - if there is no alternative, then you will have to keep such a copy. You can also glue other people's sawyers to some butterflies for aesthetics, which will not hurt you in any way (only knowing that they are glued will hurt).

It is still difficult for you to understand what butterflies are, for example, because you do not collect them.. Maybe in aesthetic terms you are interested in them-like beautiful.. How difficult it is for me to understand what value grasshoppers carry, and how they would be more beautiful to prick or glue, how to straighten, etc. Therefore, I would not judge them, except for primitive representations at my level..

I can also say that before I thought beautiful not straightened beetles, and terribly straightened and not whole butterflies. But time is changing, I began to notice much more in them, began to make much more demands on my ability to straighten them, maintain them, maintain their integrity, notice small and large details, etc. Therefore, there are also more complaints about the quality of your collection, as well as about other collections, other ways of spreading and storing them. And that's not a bad thing.. This is the same as the attitude to dirty streets - it doesn't bother me, I'm not so weak to force my brain because something is not as I would like, for absolutely non-objective reasons, but I like to look at clean streets more. Therefore, I will not throw out the impaled but whole and well-straightened beetle, but if it is not valuable in any way, impaled and possibly has any other shortcomings, then I would prefer to replace it with something more useful.

I also have no complaints about many poorly straightened, impaled collections. I'm not interested in them as "pictures" to look at. And these collections are also valuable to me, but practically absolutely not valuable in terms of aesthetics..
Do not prick - my sincere choice, first of all FOR YOUR COLLECTION. But I often understand, looking at the perfect impaled others, that I would like them better in a non-impaled state. But this is not objective..
But what is objectively different is that a crookedly pricked beetle, a visible hole in the elytra, scutellum, or pronotum, a rusty pin, and the like, clearly spoil the beetle!
And also imagine that an old hole is not suitable for any reason - for example, a hole that is too big, from which the beetle is very loose, or a beetle that has been impaled on an ordinary pin or needle in the past, or a puncture in the wrong place, just look terrible.. 2 holes in a beetle it's just disgusting-it's better to crack the elytra

Do you probably prick in the area between the middle and hind legs? Why not the pronotum, or the head, or the abdomen? Because of the same aesthetic - you like it that way! And do you like a beetle impaled on a thick ordinary pin? Do you like the damaged beetle? While you can tear off half the body of a beetle, practically nothing will be lost in scientific terms, since almost all the signs will remain; in aesthetic terms, you will absolutely lose the desire to even think about such a beetle, no matter how rare it is. since there is always a desire that this ex would be at least a little bit whole.

And finally - a whole, symmetrically straightened, beautifully straightened beetle, is much better remembered, leaves a much greater impression, and gives a much greater "understanding" of what this species looks like. But even a crookedly straightened beetle is often difficult to recognize-who it really is (if you do not go into small signs), since it has some "non-characteristic" appearance.. Sometimes you look at a rather expressive crooked beetle, and you can't understand what it really is. (A little distracted, but the topics are close)

And about:
"I pricked large beetles, I prick them, and I will prick them until the end of my life. I would have stabbed the smaller ones, but not with my hand. That's why I glue them."
. The future does not exist ,and the present is constantly changing - and no one knows what the next moment of perception will be. Perhaps your opinion will change dramatically, and not only the tattoo will cease to be of interest, but also beetles at all, and will like, for example, flower mites ))
Maybe I'll get tired of gluing beetles, too.. But if this happens, it is not because of concern about how they look, but because of a loss of interest, for example, in their appearance.. but this is not better than what is now, but only what can be, not from a better life to put it mildly..

First of all, it is not necessary to compare.. You do not judge that if one person commits a crime, then you can also? Similar to insects - impaled beetles are not aesthetically pleasing, not because impaled butterflies are not aesthetically pleasing..

And why not compare it? The example of a crime is not relevant at all. Instance integrity is the principle. And the impaled hawk moth is a specimen with a hole in it, no matter what you say. By the way, I'm not against tattooing butterflies, just the opposite: it's you against the bug tattooing.

Also, in butterflies, the main thing is the wings, in the background the abdomen and antennae, and in the third the legs..
I also wouldn't throw out a butterfly without a mustache. A mistake of course, but what can you do - if there is no alternative, then you will have to keep such a copy. You can also glue other people's sawyers to some butterflies for aesthetics, which will not hurt you in any way (only knowing that they are glued will hurt).

Well, you know... You can even glue a monster together: whiskers-from one butterfly, wings - from another... And what is the value of such a "homemade" copy? In my opinion, this is generally heresy.

It is still difficult for you to understand what butterflies are, for example, because you do not collect them.

Well, about 30-35 years ago I also collected butterflies. It was only later that I became attached to the beetles with my heart. So, believe me, I know what butterflies are.

Do you probably prick in the area between the middle and hind legs? Why not the pronotum, or the head, or the abdomen? Because of the same aesthetic - you like it that way!

First of all, it's not about my taste. Pricking a beetle in the right elytra is a centuries-old tradition. I was taught this way, it is written in almost all the manuals that I have used since childhood, and I am faithful to these traditions.

And about:
"I pricked large beetles, I prick them, and I will prick them until the end of my life. I would have stabbed the smaller ones, but not with my hand. That's why I glue them."
. The future does not exist, and the present is constantly changing - and no one knows what the next moment of perception will be. Perhaps your opinion will change dramatically, and not only the tattoo will cease to be of interest, but also beetles at all, and will like, for example, flower mites ))
Maybe I'll get tired of gluing beetles, too.. But if this happens, it is not because of concern about how they look, but because of a loss of interest, for example, in their appearance.. but this is not better than what is now, but only what can be, not from a better life to put it mildly..

It's too late for me to change. If I have not changed my addiction to beetles for more than 40 years, in the remaining years of my life, meeting the sixth decade, I will not change for sure. Arguments that glue beetles should be in order to preserve their integrity, based on aesthetic considerations, I think unconvincing. And the fact that you can't see the beetle glued to the die from below (and this is exactly how many people glue it flat on a rectangle, unlike you - your method certainly wins), for me the main argument against the sticker. I just wonder who and when first came up with this idea - glue all the beetles in a row, regardless of size, confusing the entomological masses?

If you don't like the comparison with a crime, then I'll give you this..:
Holes in cheese and holes in the hood are completely different things.. And although beetles and butterflies are close in nature, they are still very different.. And integrity for a butterfly is mainly wings, dusting, abdomen, antennae, etc. And the puncture of a butterfly evenly in the middle does not bother anyone.. On the contrary, it is somehow beautiful..

You can glue a monster together, but no one talks about a monster.. You have the hood of the car, dupustim is distorted, and you take and put another hood in its place, tint it somewhere. In appearance, there will be a different car, but these minor changes will create a different impression of your car. And this is somewhat similar to gluing.. - like sometimes you can when you like this.. But I did not say that taking the front wheels from Ferrari, the rear wheels from Chevrolet, the body from 6-ki, the engine from Harley are completely different things, do not confuse, and argue in vain about this.

Well, about 3 years ago, I was engaged in ticks, in the narrow sense of the word.. Don't tell me now that I know ticks ) on some primitive level, yes, and so you can say no..
I know I don't know anything

That's why I don't like traditions, centuries-old traditions and so it was, so it's necessary
This is a very narrow estimate.. Well, for hundreds of years, the Chinese have beaten their slaves, can we go back to centuries-old traditions?
If we say that someone acts according to tradition, because everyone does it, then today it turns out to be complete nonsense. I act as I think most objectively, based on the opinion that I can only generate, and not because someone and something (not counting small elements or compulsion). If you have a choice, you should choose, and not follow someone else's example )

It's not too late for anything! It is impossible to say something like this with absolute accuracy-life is so multifaceted that it is practically not predictable.. Many people have this assessment and it is not correct.. I, like many others, once thought that certain qualities or thoughts of mine would never change, so strong and stable were they in my mind, and even going through the most severe options, I could not imagine that such a thing could happen.. But it happened because there were unforeseen circumstances that changed everything, and completely different from what everyone thinks )
There are old people who start reading literature hard, playing sports and studying computers, although maybe 5 years ago they claimed that computers are a complete der..., destroying the brain, morality, that sports are stupid, that there is nothing to read.. Even before death, a person's opinion can change dramatically, because it's just an opinion..

Things don't change depending on how long they've been in a particular state, or how long they haven't been.. It depends on what happens to them at certain times. That last major impulse that changes everything.

I gave arguments that speak not only about aesthetic perception, although this took up most of the text. I just tried to express all the arguments from myself, including both objective and not (by the way, this is also written about ), and your opinion is already your opinion.. What is true for one person is not convincing for the other because of his perception.. So what to say.. If you look from a more "distant distance", then collecting insects is not objective at all, and those who collect insects can not provide convincing arguments for others to collect them..

Again, someone glues flat, and someone carefully, and these are completely different things that do not speak about the sticker at all.. I'm not telling you that if some people stab beetles in the head, then you shouldn't stab them at all.. Or the fact that some people spread butterflies by piercing their wings with a thick pin is not worthy of the fact that butterflies should not be spread at all

And you can look at the pasted beetle from below - I look, and many people look, and everyone sees it perfectly.. Another thing is how some others glue, pouring glue, so that nothing is clear, and even supermoment glue.. and the fact that soup cannot be eaten with a fork is not an argument that a fork should not be used at all, and that a spoon is a hundred times more convenient to eat long spaghetti )

In general, who came up with the first glue absolutely does not matter, what difference does it make who? If we find out who it is, will we curse or sing songs to it? It won't make it any better, and it won't make it any worse )

A. Y. Elez, I'll catch up with you soon in terms of the volume of messages )

I don't recommend it

This post was edited by Bolivar - 13.04.2009 13: 35

I pricked large beetles, I prick them, and I will prick them to the end of my life. I would have stabbed the smaller ones, but not with my hand. That's why I glue them.

Thank you, Dmitrich! I thought I was the only pervert. I am quite satisfied with the impaled beetles and I will also prick beetles from a centimeter and more.

No one is forcing anyone ) This is all for yourself, like-colite, like-glue )

I'm not telling you that if some people stab beetles in the head, then you shouldn't stab them at all.. Or the fact that some people spread butterflies by piercing their wings with a thick pin is not worthy of the fact that butterflies should not be spread at all

Maximalism, dear RippeR, again a craving for extremes, incorrect examples. Pricking beetles on stationery pins, in the head, piercing the wings of butterflies when spreading out - all this is amateurism, and it is pointless to spend time discussing such "ways" of mounting material.
You are absolutely right - no one today will be able to make absolute, convincing arguments for everyone that beetles should not be pricked at all. Because a puncture through the right elytra is a classic, regardless of the opinion of the supporters of gluing. Let the sticker on the dies first last as long as the traditional method of mounting on pins has existed, and then it will be visible (only, alas, neither I nor you will have to live in this beautiful time...).

These are completely different things, do not confuse them, and argue in vain about this...
That's why I don't like traditions, centuries-old traditions and so it was, so it's necessary ...
If you have a choice, you should choose, and not follow someone else's example )...

Our discussion is beginning to remind me of the argument between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. And on this it is necessary to finish. My sincere respect for you, as a colleague in your hobby, an interesting interlocutor, a specialist who is growing to the delight of all forumchanam right by leaps and bounds, does not depend at all on my personal attitude to the method of editing material chosen by you. I hope we'll settle on that. Don't mind?

No one is forcing anyone ) This is all for yourself, like-prick, like-glue )

I agree everyone prefers their own way:someone sticks on the dies, someone pricks, and someone in general to gather dust on the mattresses
But a die is a die,and whatever beetle is on the die will still be better...

It's like collecting insects in series...you can catch a lot,you can catch 1-3, or you can even be too lazy and not pay attention to this - then it turns out to suck and not the collection

It's like primitive people - instead of forks and spoons-with their hands ...so do beetles
or there is a steral machine, why is it needed because people have been manually since ancient times-so it's more convenient and I will be so

Adherence to the old methods is also so ingrained that people are afraid of the new.. For people who have never thought about pasting all their lives, who have always been pricked, they are very skeptical about everything new. Many people do not see this as necessary and some advantages. But don't be afraid of the new, sometimes you can at least just try to decide whether it suits them or not.

Well, try it, and we'll wait...

Adherence to the old methods is also so ingrained that people are afraid of the new.. For people who have never thought about pasting all their lives, who have always been pricked, they are very skeptical about everything new. Many people do not see this as necessary and some advantages. But don't be afraid of the new, sometimes you can at least just try to decide whether it suits them or not.

Well, that's not quite true. I have almost all the ants pasted on (they are too small for pricking). I started gluing in 1989 - a huge experience. Conclusion-just like glue, some parts of the insect's body (according to the law of meanness, which is necessary in the definition) are not visible or poorly visible.
Aesthetics? The taste and color of the companions are not present. Now I watched glued ants and impaled wasps - I like impaled ones better.
Proponents of gluing talk about some kind of hole. My insects don't have holes - there's a pin in the hole. I do not plan to remove my insects from the pin and give them to anyone.

Proponents of gluing talk about some kind of hole. My insects don't have holes - there's a pin in the hole. I do not plan to remove my insects from the pin and give them to anyone.

That's it! By the way, if I transfer my already mounted beetles to colleagues (Anthrenus, Elizar), or accept similar specimens from them, then we give them away, of course, without removing them from the pin. And it doesn't bother us at all.

... then we give them away, of course, without removing them from the pin. And it doesn't bother us at all.

Not, well, pin of course a little sorry

No, well, the pin is certainly a little pathetic

livejournal

Well, it's not all the same for Moldovan students to anneal. We can do it too, though not as creatively.

Sorry, I missed the active phase of the exchange of opinions, but
I wanted to express a couple of thoughts and make a small statement

From the point of view of aesthetics, copies on the die can be considered with a different opinion. For example, not as a beetle
glued to a die, but as a beetle with a foreign body stuck (oh, horror!).
There is no limit to perfection. To fully satisfy the aesthetic pleasure, you need to go further. Remove the pin, die, and label.
Put the beetle directly in the box, and recreate the appropriate natural conditions around it.
This is complete harmony and the right aesthetic appearance.
In my opinion, the pin should not be related to aesthetics. A perceived need. The pin should be excluded from perception, as it is kindly
done for the die by supporters of gluing.
After carefully reading the entire topic and in accordance with my experience, I concluded that pin is a convenient, sufficient, time – tested, so
to speak, tool for working with the material.
I made a decision-and continue to prick, and glue small ones. (May
Liparus and RippeR forgive me)
Even the slogan was drawn. On Mayakovsky.
Prick always,
Prick everywhere,
Until the last days of the Donets.
Prick! And no nails,
that's my slogan.
Everything is simple.

Freely expressed his opinion, on the most free forum.

P.S. The most important thing is the presence of an instance, since
its absence cannot be more important.

From the point of view of aesthetics, copies on the die can be considered with a different opinion. For example, not as a beetle glued to a die, but as a beetle with a foreign body stuck (oh, horror!).
In my opinion, the pin should not be related to aesthetics. A perceived need. The pin should be excluded from perception, as it is kindly
done for the die by supporters of gluing.
After carefully reading the entire topic and in accordance with my experience, I concluded that pin is a convenient, sufficient, time – tested, so
to speak, tool for working with the material.
 

Ready to subscribe to every word!

of course it all depends only on perception
I remember even outlining the idea. where we fantasized about the future that insects in boxes will be in a weightless state

Still, it's safer on the die.
Maybe someone stuck a bug in the box and doesn't touch it, but I have them in constant rotation: I take pictures, study, just admire, etc.
Especially this feeling is acutely awakened when drunk (and I often drink )
So, if they were just impaled, I would have broken them all long ago in my hands, and on the die I am much more reliably protected from accidental breakdowns.
You can certainly pull off a beetle like a mummy, but how aesthetically pleasing it is, judge for yourself.

And here is a good example.
Before and after processing in Photoshop.

This post was edited by rpanin - 18.04.2009 14: 29

Pictures:

Carabus__Hemicarabus__nitens_L.__1758.jpg — (338.35к)


______Carabus__Hemicarabus__nitens_L.__1758.jpg — (750.25к)

For photographing, the presence of a pin or a puncture from it, with the available technical capabilities, does not matter at all – this is understandable.

Tell me someone, and why, when they glue a beetle "flat" on the die, they also glue whiskers, paws, and even tentacles? What would be more difficult to remove (in the sense of unmounting)? Unless without it gluing is less reliable.? Or it is, as in the case of a pin hole, just a trace from working with the material (in this case, straightening, which is not done in a different quality with this option).

And more. Someone tried mounting on dies (only in practice, not in theory!) very large and very large beetles (megasomes, chalcosomes, goliaths, macrodontii, titanus, etc.)? I have not often had to deal with a more "hemorrhoid" and meaningless occupation.

This post was edited by Aaata - 18.04.2009 20: 48

whiskers and paws are bitten when they are straightened in another way-directly on the die smeared with glue.

It also glues large lucanus cervus, Synapsis tmolus.. Such beetles are very easy to glue, since cutting out the die is no problem, putting the beetle on the die is easy, since everything is large and easy to put.
Everything is fine, no problems.

So I'm talking about this method - when they stick it on large rectangular plates (the size of a pocket calendar, or even postcards when the beetle is very large), on which it is spread out and, for some reason, glued legs and whiskers.

If you glue a huge beetle on a die placed on the right under the middle chest (I prefer it so that it "does not take too much"), then it always turns around the pin together with the die (you have to stick the die firmly to the pin); the beetle is heavy and the die under it tends to bend, despite the fact that it is already fixed to the pin (you have to take a very thick and dense die, or even a double one, but this is often not enough, then you also need a support for the die from the opposite side at an angle in the collection (very aesthetically pleasing). It goes without saying that the entire structure rotates freely together with the pin, even in dense foam (you have to use at least 4-6 more pins to hold it). In addition, the height of the pin (number 7, length 53 mm.) is already too short (the beetle "at the withers" is under 5 cm!), and then a thick die "eats" 2 mm., it turns out to be at the very bottom of the pin, and the beetle itself is actually on foam, resting on it with its feet; labels are pressed from below in the die, there is no question of reading them freely or at least removing them.

Well, if there is only one such instance, you can tinker if there is nothing to do, but if there are a lot of them...? It's not practical somehow, it's easier to pin such 100 pieces than to tinker with the spot installation of one (I repeat, only about real giants). It is better to immediately put them on the bottom after straightening (without tattoos), fixing them from the sides with pins, especially since taking into account the size, it is not difficult to remove them from the collection and rearrange them.

well, with absolutely giants have never encountered..
And pins for absolutely giants, even 7-ki is not enough.. My Manticores are impaled, and there's not much room under them because they're so high.. What about all sorts of dynastes, I can't imagine at all..
It is not convenient to prick them..
I have beetles that spin on the dies that on the pins .if they are healthy, but this is more due to the foam, and not the method of tattooing. If the foam is very dense. beetles don't usually spin around.. But just in case, especially on a bad styrofoam side, I put a pin.

Absolutely giants. indeed, it is most likely better to just put it on the bottom and fix it with a pair of pins.. Or completely glue on a healthy plate, but then you will also have to fix it..

Citizens, use transparent celluloid dies! Nothing is etched into them and the taped area of the beetle is visible!

Citizens, use transparent celluloid dies! Nothing is etched into them and the taped area of the beetle is visible!

I've been doing this lately (packaging from many consumer goods beresh and rezhesh dies).

Citizens, use transparent celluloid dies! Nothing is etched into them and the taped area of the beetle is visible!

I've been doing this lately (packaging from many consumer goods beresh and rezhesh dies).

I've seen celluloid dies in other collections, but somehow I don't dare go there myself. Glue on homemade narrow (or triangular) dies made of white cardboard. Do you use PVA glue on celluloid? Is a washed X-ray film (from images) suitable?

Glue on thick carpentry PVA or Czech "Hercules". I take the film from packages of various products-from food products (some sweets) to haberdashery and perfumes (boxes of ties, belts, transparent linings under the collar of new shirts, boxes of perfume and deodorants). The main thing is that the film used has a high degree of transparency and has sufficient rigidity, not less than that of thick cardboard. I.e., for example, the windows from boxes of Korkunov chocolates are not suitable - the film is too thin. In addition, the film has another important advantage - in the case of mounting a small beetle on a triangle, the label is perfectly readable through the film directly from above, and there is no need to look under the beetle in order to make out what is written there.

X-ray film, especially washed from the pictures, I saw a very long time ago and do not remember what it is

X-ray film, especially washed from the pictures, I saw a very long time ago and do not remember what it is

Well, it just meets all the requirements you have stated: transparent, dense.
Here's what's interesting: it seems that transparent celluloid dies are really more convenient and practical. Then the question arises: why did foreign merchants from entomology not set up the production of such dies, but sell opaque cardboard ones?

Glue on thick carpentry PVA

I'm not sure exactly, but I've heard that just carpentry PVA turns into a rubber-like transparent mass when soaking a copy. And you need to use stationery PVA (for example, in small white plastic bottles), which is almost completely soluble in warm water. I use such a PVA myself and have no problems with remounting.

By the way, I use just such a stationery PVA. There don't seem to be any problems.