Loading…
19
I was skeptical about using a hand lens in the field but now I feel naked without it
For the first few months of my intro geology class I thought the hand lens was just for show. I kept missing tiny details in outcrops like cleavage planes and small fossils. Then last week I actually used it on a granite outcrop near the river and spotted microcrystals I never would have seen otherwise. Has anyone else had a tool they wrote off at first?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
the_julia4mo ago
The hand lens thing really clicked for me too once I got past feeling self-conscious pulling it out. @the_jana mentioning the rock hammer makes me wonder if all the basic field tools just take a moment to prove themselves... like nobody starts out dependent on a hand lens until they've used it to spot a tiny garnet or a hidden cleavage plane that changes the whole story of an outcrop. It's not dramatic if that tool saves you from walking away clueless about what you're looking at.
7
the_jana4mo ago
I wrote off my rock hammer as gimmicky until I chipped into a sandstone layer and found a perfect trilobite." Yeah, that's cool. But are you really that dependent on it now? Feels a little dramatic.
3
lily3944mo ago
I was right there with you honestly... I thought hand lenses were kind of a prop for people who wanted to look like real geologists. But then I had this moment at a road cut where I was staring at what I thought was just a boring gray rock and finally pulled out my lens just to see. Turned out there were these tiny garnets all over it that I completely missed with my naked eye. Now I feel weird if I forget it at the car or something because I know I'm probably walking past stuff that matters. It's not about being dramatic to me anymore... it's more like realizing you've been half-blind without it. The rock hammer thing is kind of funny because I used to think that was way over the top too but after finding one good fossil from a chip I totally get it now.
2