Clarity, and the gap
On this page10
The archetype's position
"Displayed as much as stored. Clarity matters more than anything else." For a collection of sea glass that is exactly right.
What the shelf actually offers
94 clear containers out of 298. By colour the rest is 59 white, 45 amber, 29 blue and 26 natural, which is a lot of opaque for a display craft.
Which is the same gap the coins property found
And it is worth stating the same way: if visible storage is the point, the real choice is 94 containers rather than 298, and that is still a usable range.
Glass improves the clear end
Of the clear containers, the glass ones are the better long-term object. PET is clear when new and can scratch and haze with handling, which over decades shows.
Amber has a real use here
45 containers. For a find that fades, amber is the compromise between seeing something is there and protecting it, which suits a working collection better than either extreme.
Opaque suits the archive half
Most collections have material that is kept rather than shown. White and natural containers with a good label are the right home for it and cost nothing in enjoyment.
So split the collection, not the container choice
Display in clear glass, archive in opaque, and let the label do the identification in both. That is a system rather than a compromise.
A clear jar is also a label
Being able to see the contents means the container identifies itself, which for a collection consulted often saves opening it and saves the label from being the only record.
And PET scratches where glass does not
For a collection that will be handled for decades, the 63 glass Boston rounds and 21 glass straight sided jars are the better long-term clear container, at the cost of weight and breakage.