Tanned or chemical?
#1
Tanned or chemical?
I was just wandering if you guys look for a taxidermist that sends their hides off to get professionally tanned, pay a little extra, and get your mount back in several months? Or would you rather have him tan the hide with chemicals, pay a little less, and get your mount back in several weeks?
I am a strong supporter of getting my mount professionally tanned and paying a little extra. I believe it pays off in the long run. I have seen way too many mounts that have cracked and looked like crap after 5 or 10 years after they have been chemically tanned. I know they have supposedly come out w/new chemicals, but who's to say they won't do the same thing down the road. I also know from talkiing to several taxidermists, that a chemically tanned hide will shrink compared to a proffesionally tanned hide won't. I want my deer looking the same size as he did when I shot him. I know that an extra $50-$150 will pay off in the future, especially if someone has to find a new cape to redo their deer. A remount ends up costing more than a single mount b/c you have to find or buy another cape. Just my 2 cents. I just saw this issue come up another post and figured I would make a post just focusing on this subject. Let me know how you feel.
I am a strong supporter of getting my mount professionally tanned and paying a little extra. I believe it pays off in the long run. I have seen way too many mounts that have cracked and looked like crap after 5 or 10 years after they have been chemically tanned. I know they have supposedly come out w/new chemicals, but who's to say they won't do the same thing down the road. I also know from talkiing to several taxidermists, that a chemically tanned hide will shrink compared to a proffesionally tanned hide won't. I want my deer looking the same size as he did when I shot him. I know that an extra $50-$150 will pay off in the future, especially if someone has to find a new cape to redo their deer. A remount ends up costing more than a single mount b/c you have to find or buy another cape. Just my 2 cents. I just saw this issue come up another post and figured I would make a post just focusing on this subject. Let me know how you feel.
#2
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cambridge Ohio USA
Posts: 744
RE: Tanned or chemical?
There seems to be some confusion. The "chemical tan" your talking about that allows such quick turn arounds is actually dry preserve. It is NOT a tan. It just dries the skin. A taxidermist can tan a skin at home just the same as the big tanneries do it, except for a rug tan. The question to ask is not if they send them out, but whether they used a tanned hide or just use dry preserve. There is a one step tan out, Krowtann, but many people aren't convinced of the long term results of an alum tan. Personally, I've used it and liked it, but have since switched. Honestly, a dry preserved mount CAN be done quite well, but I've seldom seen a taxidermist who thinned the cape well enough for results that will match a well tanned and thinned cape. Most who use dry preserve are more interested in getting mounts out the door fast, and don't take the time to produce the best mount possible. Now, this isn't always the case, but if a deer's worth getting mounted, it's worth paying for the best possible work you can find. And in most cases, that means a taxidermist that uses a tanned hide.