Talk:Geologist's hammer

That's a "Bricklayer's Hammer"
Sorry guys but (Estwing or not,) that blue-handled hammer on the front page of the article @3/29/15 is not appropriate to represent a "Geologist's Hammer". 99.8% of all hammers sold in that specific style are used by bricklayers. The flat rear chisel blade gives it away. The "classic" Geologist's Hammer (or as we see in the article, "pick") has, instead, a tapering pick at the rear, and runs conical down to a point, not a chisel-blade. If some geologists may choose to use a bricklayer's hammer since they can always find one at their local hardware store and one has to typically do mail order for a classic Estwing-style hammer (rear-point/non-chisel), I still don't think it's the best choice for the article. and do we (really) need two separate articles for this? Let's just change the lead picture (and/or acknowledge the use of the bricklayer's hammer as also in the geologist's toolkit, although designed and manufactured for bricklayers. Earrach (talk) 13:36, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * As a geologist, I've never owned a hammer with a pick end, only ones with a chisel end. It would not be appropriate to use a bricklayer's hammer as the steel is unlikely to stand up to hitting really tough rocks without shattering. See here for the range on offer (in the UK at least), including both pick and chisel ended hammers - the one important thing is the quality of the steel head. Mikenorton (talk) 14:10, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * As another geologist, I agree with Mike. The chisel end is especially useful for bedded rocks, by the way. Wilson44691 (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Use as scale
As hammers are used to give scale in photos, the article needs to give an idea of their dimensions. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:56, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I was wondering whether the length is standardised so they can be used in photographs for scale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.172.80 (talk) 05:01, 2 December 2017 (UTC)