6/20/17 Report - How To Determine How Old A Ring Might Be. Tropical Storm Near and Heading for the U. S.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.

Old Photo of Me Using an Aquasound Metal Detector.

The Aquasound was a good metal detector.  The photo must be from twenty some years ago.  I just ran across it.

---

After Warren's amazing ring find that I showed a few days ago, I thought it would be a good time to look at some of the things that will help you get a good idea of a ring's age.  If you don't know what to look for you can easily mistake a ring that is centuries old for a new ring or vice versa.  In the past I mistook some very old finds for modern finds.  It can be tricky.  I remember one enameled ring found on a 1715 Fleet beach that I immediately concluded was modern because I thought enameling was a more modern technique.  I was wrong about that.  That is just one example.

Below is an old Roman ring.  Would you know right that it was old when if you dug it up.  And what would you look fo?.

There are some features on this ring that would make you think it might be real old as soon as you saw it.  First, the setting.  The setting is covers everything but the top of the stone.  The setting would be one of the first things that would suggest to me that it is probably an old ring.  Secondly, the stone is polished instead of cut like most of today's gem stones.

Rings looked fairy similar up through the middle ages.  As I explained the other day, gems were not faceted until later.

Here is a web site on antique rings.

http://www.langantiques.com/university/Rings:_Ancient_to_Neoclassical

Below is an example of an 18th century ring that is faceted.

You can see that the the diamonds are clearly faceted.  Now look at the settings.  The stones are surrounded by the setting.  They are not set with prongs like most of the diamond rings of today.

18th century rings will often be "foiled."  The gem will be surrounded on the sides and bottom with foil - sometimes gold.  Modern diamond rings are faceted and the setting is very open to permit the light to flow through the gemstone.

I"m not a jewelry expert, but those are a few things that might help you determine if a ring might be old or not.  There are other things to look for, but I'll have to get into some of those another time.

Some old things can be in very good shape (especially if they are gold) and look almost new.  And modern items can be in terrible condition, but that does not necessarily mean they are old.  It can be very difficult to tell the difference between old and new items.

Plain bands can be difficult since you do not have all the clues you would have with a gemstone ring. Crucifixes can also be tricky.

---

We now have the two named tropical storms - the first of the hurricane season.  We had a named storm earlier in the year, but that was before hurricane season began.

Bret is heading west/northwest along the north coast of South America.

Cindy looks to be headed towards Louisiana.

Tropical Storm Cindy
Source: nhc.noaa.gov

On the Treasure Coast we'll have a 2 - 3 foot surf Tuesday and Wednesday.  Then it will decrease a bit for the rest of the week.

The tides are a little bigger and we'll have a nice negative tide Tuesday.

Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net

9/19/15 Report - Surprising Results of Detector Test With Three Small Cobs. Tropical Storm Ida And Other Weather.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.

Three Small Under Weight Cobs.

In the past I've talked a good bit about specific target training and tuning.  By that I mean learning the optimal detector settings for finding particular targets, and also tuning in the field for those specific targets.

If you are interested in finding small silver items like those shown above, you need to experiment with different detector settings to find the settings that are best.

These particular cobs are way under weight.  They were found on a beach near a 1715 wreck site. They lost much of the original material.  The one on the left is only about .015 ounces, and the other two around .02 ounces.  The second is actually a touch lighter than the third.  My scale isn't highly accurate for small weights like that.

When selecting test targets, I will often select those that are on the smaller side, assuming that if I can find the smaller ones I will have no trouble with the larger ones.

Size is much like depth in relation to signal strength.  Small items sound much, not exactly, like larger but deeper targets.

One thing I try to keep the same is the material.  If you want to find silver, test with silver.  You generally want test targets that are as similar to the desired targets as possible.  One possible exception, as I said, is size.  Again, I tend towards smaller test targets.

If you are going to hunt for a particular type of item, you want to know if your detector will detect it and what settings are required.  It is best to test your detector before going on a hunt so you have confidence that your detector will detect whatever you are hunting.  What a waste it is to spend hours hunting with a detector set up in a way that would not detect what you want to find if you were right on top of it.

I hadn't tested one my newest detector on small cobs and wanted to find out how it would do with those types of targets, and secondly, what settings would be best.  I had tested these test targets with a couple other detectors, and knew how they would perform, but I wanted to know how this detector would perform with the same test targets.

I took these items out to a space that I have cleaned out and often use as a test area.  I kept changing the settings and modes to see which worked best on these test targets.

My test area is not the easiest even though there is no ground mineralization.  There is a lot of ambient electrical interference to deal with that causes a lot of detector noise.  In this area, there are some inexpensive detectors that actually do better than some of the more expensive and powerful detectors because of the electrical interference.

Which of the above three test targets do you think gave the strongest signal?  You might well guess the first, which is both lightest and presents the smallest surface area.

Charles Garrett in his book Successful Coin Shooting, said that generally detectors are surface area detectors, and that mass makes little difference.  He suggested a way to prove that for yourself.  Take a coin and run your coil over it.  Then take a stack of the same coins and run your detector over it.  You should get about the same signal because the surface area that is presented to the coil is the same.

He threw that word "generally" in there, and that is a good thing, because I have found exceptions.  I haven't done a real precise experiment on that, but I have observed enough to feel confident about that.  There are times when thickness, or mass, seems to make a difference, though not a large one.

To answer the question, the first and third targets (as shown in the photo above) cause much stronger detector signals that the second one.  That is very consistent.  And it proves out with different detectors.

The first item, has a small surface area.  You can see that.  The photo accurately shows that.  It is however thicker than both the second and third items.

The second and third items are nearly the same weight, and one might be a bit thinner than the other, but it is not enough to be obvious from look or feel.

So what is it about the second item that produces a weaker signal?   I can't say for sure, but it does seem to be something other than surface area.  Perhaps it is the material, although the three cobs should not be very different.  They should have similar silver content.  Maybe they are a touch different though.

I've shown in the past that shape makes a big difference.  Detect a coin laying flat, and then turn it on edge and you'll probably notice a big difference in the signal.  On some detectors the difference will be greater than on others.

The second item does not appear to be shaped hugely different from the third item, but it is a little less round.  The first item is much less round than the second, but still produces a better signal even though it also presents a smaller surface area.

I've done experiments that show that angles and irregular surfaces make a difference.  A slanted surface may not produce a signal that is as strong as if the surface was flat and parallel to the surface of the coil.

The top surface of the small item is a little convex.  I don't know if that produces a better signal.

It is pretty complex.  I'd have to do a lot more experimenting before I could say exactly why the second items produces a much weaker signal than the other two.  At this point I just have some ideas.

The main thing I want to say today is that you should experiment with detectors and their various settings and relevant test targets before you go for a hunt.  Get to know what your detector will and will not do, and get to know the best settings.

---

Source; nhc.noaa.gov

We now have a named tropical storm, Ida.  Also a tropical depression, Nine.  And another disturbance up by Georgia.

I doubt we get much of anything from any of these, however there is a chance.  Both tropical depression nine and Ida will probably live and die out there in the Atlantic.

The disturbance up by Georgia might turn into something, but North Carolina has a better chance of getting something out of it than we do.

Right now the surf predications are for a slightly increase surf for mid week.  If you look out a week from Monday, they are predicting something like 4 - 7 feet.  That might be nice - if it actually happens.  I guess there is some chance, but I'm not betting on it.

Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net

2/16/15 Report - Strategically Selecting Discrimination Settings. Rechargeable Batteries.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.BlogSpot.com.

Here is a simplified illustration.  It is not real precise, but I hope it helps.

If you are interested in finding gold jewelry on a beach or in the water and want to maximize the value of your finds, you should be aware of how discrimination will affect the results and the value of your finds.

As I've said before, back a lot of years ago I thought that women didn't lose nearly as many rings as men.  That was because I was using too much discrimination and missed many of the smaller women's rings.

The illustration above shows increasing ring size as you go from left to right.  The smallest rings are for babies and children.  Charms, ear rings and chains can also fall in this range.

On the right are the larger rings such as men's school class rings and championship rings.  Larger gold rings have more gold value, but small gold rings can be more valuable if they hold valuable gem stones.

The line plotted on the chart gives an idea of how the value of gold rings of different sizes.can vary.  The least valuable are small children's rings and small lady's bands.  The most valuable are typically diamond engagement rings.  High quality diamond rings do not typically have large bands, especially the highest quality solitaire diamonds.

Men's bands are typically bigger and have more gold weight. Men's gold diamond and gemstone rings can be quite large and hold valuable gems, although usually the gems are not of the same quality as those in quality engagement rings.

And then there are the very heavy championship rings, which usually don't have the highest quality gems, but are highly valued as sports memorabilia.

When I began serious water detecting I had a Fisher 1280X.  It had simple linear discrimination controlled by a single knob.  My initial setting was something like that shown by the orange line to the right of the chart.  I was then getting a lot of men's rings, but few women's rings.

If you have a simple linear discrimination setting such as that on the 1280 or the Minelab Excalibur,  you should be aware of what you might be missing.

One thing I want to show with this illustration is how you should strategically select your discrimination settings, simple linear or otherwise.

When I dialed back the discrimination to the level of the orange line to the left, I started getting more women's rings, which includes those in the high value engagement and gemstone category.

Large gold rings have more gold weight and gold value, but some of the most valuable rings will be those with quality gem stones.  They often have very small gold bands.

There are still small and possibly valuable gold items that will be missed even with the lower discrimination setting, such as diamond stud ear rings, which have very little gold weight.

Even if you have target ID, you should be aware of valuable targets you might be missing.  As I once demonstrated using the Ace 250, if you don't dig targets in the foil and aluminum range, you could miss something like 30 or 40 percent of the gold rings.

I am not showing precise experimental data in this chart, but I hope that it illustrates the main point  -- that you should be aware of the effects of discrimination so you can make strategic decisions with your settings.

------

If your detector uses AA batteries and you detect a lot, replacing batteries can be expensive.  In that case it can be worth spending on rechargeable batteries.  Every good consumer report that I've seen rates the Eneloop Pro as the best rechargeable battery.  An eight pack will probably cost you nearly $40, but it could be worth it.  They recharge quickly, don't loose their charge quickly during storage, and last long.

There are NiCad and NiMH batteries.  NiCad batteries can develop a memory and so it is best to discharge them fully before recharging them.   NiMH batteries, such as the Eneloop batteries, use a better technology and do not have the memory effect.

It can take a number of discharge/recharge cycles for your rechargeable batteries to reach maximum capacity.  You can see that if you have a battery tester.  After the first recharge, the batteries may only show a charge of something like 70 or 80 percent.  You can expect that to improve.

I get a lot of good use out of my battery tester.  If you don't have one I'd recommend getting one.

Here is a link if you want to read more about rechargeable batteries.

http://copquest.com/battery_care.htm

I was just informed that the Eneloop batteries were developed by Sanyo (not Sony as I originally typed) but were bought by Panasonic.

Champ F. also said, Always buy the highest rated amperage ones available since you will be using them for many many years.

Good tip.  Thanks!

----------

We are back to a small surf along the Treasure Coast again.  It will give you an opportunity to check out the low tide area to see what might have washed in during the larger waves.

Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net

10/7/14 Report - The Experimental Method Applied to Metal Detecting. Adaptability For Optimal Detecting Anywhere.

Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.BlogSpot.com.

Small 10K Ring Find.

If you are always going to hunt in the same places with the same detector looking for the same types of targets that is fine, but the probability is that you are not always going to be doing the same thing all the time.  And if you are not going to be doing the same thing all the time, you need to know how to adapt.

A few days ago I did a poll and asked people where they hunted "most."  You probably read the results, yet there were several different locations mentioned in that little poll.  Like some, you might hunt on an ocean beach in the wet sand "most" of the time, but there are probably also times when you hunt in the dry sand or inland, or whatever.  That means that you will need to know how to adapt.

If you want to be able to adapt, you can't just set your detector's settings the same every time and expect to get the best results.  A day or two ago I told you how important the threshold setting could be on a PI detector.  There was a threshold level that produced the best signal.   Either too high or two low could cause you to completely miss a thin gold ring.

You need to use the best settings for each environment.  And you can't always take some one's specific instructions and simply apply them.  Their situation might not be the same as yours in some small but important way.

The point is to know how to determine your best settings, best detector selection, and best hunting techniques where ever you might be and what ever you might be hunting.

I use a method that I've called "empirical."  That means basically that it is based upon data that comes from skeptical observation.  I could also refer to my method as "scientific," even though it is not highly controlled as it would be in a laboratory setting. 

I continually conduct experiments.  You might remember the experiments I conducted to see how objects sink in sand.  Those posts were two that were the most "google plused" of any that I have done.

You might remember the experiments I did to determine how objects of different sizes and shapes moved in water.  Those are just two quick examples.

I also apply "test it" and "prove it" method when selecting my detector settings at the beginning of a hunt.  That does several things for me besides checking for the optimal settings for the particular type of target that I am most interested in finding.

I won't take it for granted that the optimal setting will be what it was last time or at another beach or when hunting something else. 

There are a lot of little things that can make a big difference.  Is there black sand today?  Is the sand rippled or smooth?  Is there radio interference or EMI?  

The beaches in South Florida are very different than those on the Treasure Coast.  I began detecting when I lived in South Florida and later moved to the Treasure Coast.  It is a big difference.  It is necessary to adapt.

Recently I reported on some experiments with the Ace 250 and Whites Dual Field Surf PI detectors.  I told you what I learned from my experiments, but the most important thing was not the results.  The most important thing was the method the method that I used to determine the best settings. 

You can pretty much use most of the same settings most of the time if you do hunt the same places and hunt for the same things in the same way all of the time, but there are still advantages of going through the method of testing with relevant test targets.  For one thing, it will give you advanced warning of deterioration in detector performance.  That is just one of several good reasons to go through the process.

The method that I used to tune my PI for gold, for example, employed a relevant test target and a systematic procedure at the location I was preparing to hunt.  The same method could be used at different locations with different detectors and targets, and the procedure would work just as well.

My point is not that there are important differences in beaches and detectors and targets.  Everybody knows that.  My point is that you can't take specific settings and set your detector the same way in every situation and expect optimal results.  That is one reason that I was not more specific about exactly where to set the gain and threshold when I did my test.  What I gave you was something better - a method of finding the best setting for yourself no matter where you are going to hunt and what types of things you want to find.

My "empirical" or "experimental" method has been applied to a lot of different things, not just tuning a detector.  I was a researcher for many years and brought that same experimental approach to my detecting.  I didn't accept what someone else said, but experimented and proved or disproved things for myself.

My experimental method not only applies to detectors and settings, but to almost everything that I do in metal detecting.  As I said above, I've done experiments on how objects sink in sand, for example, and how different types of objects are moved by waves, as another example.

I still continue to learn.  Some of my most valuable experiments showed that something that I believed was wrong.  That is when you have to figure it out and make a change.

What I'm telling you today is something that was in my posts, but which I have not made crystal clear.  The important thing that I'm giving you is an approach.  I am giving you a method of learning, not just specific information to memorize and apply.  


The surf on the Treasure Coast will be around two to three feet for a couple days.  It will slowly increase for a few days after that.

There is nothing in the Atlantic to watch.

Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@Comcast.net

6/10/11 Report - Your Best Detector Settings & Erosion on Treasure Coast

One Nice Size Cut on One Treasure Coast Beach This Morning.

This cut was about six foot high, which was as high as any I saw this morning.

See video of this beach below.

Yesterday my post was about being up to my arm pit in muck. I understand that a lot of you would like to see that. I should have taken a video, but I don't have enough hands. Usually I'm holding a scoop and detector or I am up to my arm pits in muck, which doesn't make it easy to film the comical scene. About all I would get is the sky, the bottom of my foot or some other less flattering part of my anatomy.


Recently an old church from the 1700s was redicscoverd in St. Augustine when some old recrods were found and analysed.

Here is the link to that story.

http://www.alligator.org/news/campus/article_719ce626-90cc-11e0-a59b-001cc4c002e0.html


Someone asked how I got ivory out of the beach fossil that I showed in the video yesterday. Actually I didn't. I don't know what it is, and where I said ivory I used the wrong word. What I was really thinking and should have said is enamel. I was thinking of the enamel bands that are on tusks such as those of the gomphothere as shown on page 310 of Hulbert's book, The Fossil Vertebrates of Florida.

It might not be a piece of an enamel band either. I'm thinking wood now, butreally don't know.

That is one of the good things about writing a blog. If you make a mistake, someone will point it out. That helps.

I don't spend a great deal of time on these posts and sometimes I write like I was thinking out loud. If I did put a lot of time into proofing and checking everything I say, there wouldn't be nearly as many posts.

I really don't know much about fossils other than what I've learned myself over the past couple of years from the fossils that I've personally found and subsequently researched. This one didn't look like any of the ones that I have become familiar with, and I don't know what it is yet. Over time I will find out what it is and in the process learn a lot about what it is and also about some things that it is not.

If you know what it is, I'd like to hear from you.


Talking about self-education, I was out scouting around on the beaches this morning and learning more about a detector that I haven't used too much. I like experimenting, especially with detectors.

Just the other day I was reading in a forum where someone was asking what settings to use on a particular detector and the discussion that followed. My advice is to not pay too much attention to what other people say about things like that. It might give you a starting point, but then go and test it out and find the settings that are best for your particular detector on the beaches that you actually hunt.

If you aren't sure about what settings to use on your detector or if you simply want to optimize your settings, take some test targets to the beach and try the different settings t see which provides the best results.

The beach that I visited today was ideal for testing. There was a broad relatively flat beach where you could easily test your settings in dry sand, wet sand and shallow moving water.

First I'd recommend just throwing out a coin on the surface of the beach. Swing your coil repeatedly over the coin, change the sensitivity settings and observe the change in signal. Find the setting that gives the loudest clearest signal. Then adjust the threshold and other settings to get the best signal. Play around with your settings like that until you find the best combination.

You can do the same thing moving to the wet sand, and then into the shallow moving water.

For some detectors the optimal setting will not change much for the different zones of the beach.

After you are comfortable with the settings that you obtained using a surface coin, bury a coin and test your settings. Just dig a hole and put the coin in it and cover it up. Repeat the test and adjustments until you get the best signal you can from the most deeply buried target.

Note: A newly buried target will not necessarily give as good a signal as one that has been buried for a while, and where you bury it will also determine how deeply it can be detected. If you bury a coin in shells you usually won't be able to detect it as deep as a coin buried in densely packed salt-water saturated sand.

If you ask me, doing this is much better than using the preset settings or the settings that you read or heard.

Another note: Don't always go for maximum sensitivity. When increasing the sensitivity causes an erratic threshold, you might get a signal but the signal could easily be disguised and lost in all of the noise.


I took sometime to play with my sensitivity and threshold settings today. With the detector I was using, increasing the sensitivity beyond a certain point resulted in an erratic threshold sound and more noise which off-set the effect of the increased sensitivity. I personally like a smooth threshold so I can really catch those marginal whisper signals.

I'd say that one important thing that many people do not do enough, is use test targets and play with their detector's settings.


Treasure Coast Beach Forecast and Conditions.

Here is a video showing one beach where I found some nice erosion this morning. In a way it almost looked like a winter beach, but that was superficially.

Here is the link for the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1ScNFMBqtY

Notice the erosion, and notice how the sand had been pulled down and extended the front beach.

On other beaches that I saw this morning, but did not detect, there were dips in front of the beach. I didn't have time to check them out.

On this beach there were a good number clad coins between the slope and front beach. I'll define that better for you some other time - probably tomorrow.

The erosion on this beach has been a slow process that has been accumulating for a few days. I mentioned a few days ago that there were some slight erosion. This is one of those spots and it evidently eroded a little more last night.

Unlike this beach, most of the other beaches I saw this morning were covered with sea weed, indicating that the sand was building on those beaches.


I think that is it for today.

Happy hunting,
Treasureguide@comcast.net