Thread: Ivory Speckled Hone ID?

2 doorsch: Sorry, can't understand:
do you mean that it's a hindostan in your picture?
Could you show more pics with other sides and with bigger magnification?

Originally Posted by Botanic

2 doorsch: Sorry, can't understand:
do you mean that it's a hindostan in your picture?
Could you show more pics with other sides and with bigger magnification?

Sorry picked the wrong term in meaning of a german/english translation....i will show some more pictures....

More pictures added the post before....

Here is another Washita Type less translucent and less orange....more going into a ochre color...

Also typical look for a Washita is that type of havin certain darker areas looking like brown spreaded flecks and sometimes you have a type of visible veines running thru the stone...some just visible some darker in color...

Here one example of a Hindostan for a knowledged Person you can see the material difference in general....

Most of the Hindustan stones have sedimentry layers resampling tidal rhythmites....so they are normally quite easy to identify...on the other hand there seems to be species which have no certain banding or have a bigger area between these layers, so that they might not be visible...more here:

http://igs.indiana.edu/FossilsAndTime/Tidal.cfm



Another one with shorter banding:

Originally Posted by doorsch

Here one example of a Hindostan for a knowledged Person you can see the material difference in general....

Most of the Hindustan stones have sedimentry layers resampling tidal rhythmites....so they are normally quite easy to identify...on the other hand there seems to be species which have no certain banding or have a bigger area between these layers, so that they might not be visible...more here:

Indiana Geological Survey

I've got a coarse one (hindustan) that only has two layers. I don't know if fewer layers means more coarse, but when I got it, the photos on ebay showed no layers (i could only see them when I got it) and it looked like a large piece of coticule, so I took the risk. I have to admit that it's a pretty worthless stone!!

Actually, hindostan isn't a smthing unique.
More about that http://straightrazorpalace.com/hones...tml#post984160
and http://straightrazorpalace.com/hones...ml#post1002384
It's just a sandstone from Indiana.

I have a sandstone (may be from Indiana, may be not)

more pics: https://fotki.yandex.ru/users/beavers-net/album/453901/
it's quite similiar to hindostan but has no (visible at least) layers. It's not rough and at the same time - it's quite dense one.
Microscope will show you the difference between a hindostan\sandstone and washita more clearly than any other ways.
..another sandstone but with bigger grains (for me - it's just the same structure as hindostan has):


(here is a "hindostan" at the right)
..just for emphasize the difference in structure washita (solid surface like ice) vs sandstone (rouger and you can see separate grain).

Just for a little more photo reference, here is one of my hindostans:





And a pair of my Washitas:





One other thing I've noticed is that Washitas tend to slightly fluoresce a very dim red (blotchy-looking) under U.V. light - at least every one I've had has done so.

There's no banding on the sides that I can see and under magnification(30-100x) I cannot see any grains like you'd expect in a sandstone. So I'm leaning toward washita based on the great info you guys have shard.

Thanks!
Jum

try to enlighten your stone like this:
//where it was?...mmm.. ok, here it is:

Washita is semitransparent (may be slightly, may be not).
Hindostan\sandstone is not.

an oiled washita .

an un oiled fine washita .