Options
Recolored Gold Coins
Sonorandesertrat
Posts: 5,695 ✭✭✭✭✭
In a recent CoinWeek article, Doug Winter mentioned problems with recolored gold coins. I have seen some 19th-century U. S. gold coins with patinas that I thought looked funky---sort of bright orange (like Cheetos). Can others elaborate on what the recoloring agent is, or show some examples for discussion (as I don't have any)?
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
0
Comments
<< <i>One of the frequently used agents is Iodine. They spread the stuff on the surfaces to make the coin look "crusty." The real crusty part is the Iodine which a strong glass can indicate is laying on top of the coin's surfaces instead of into them. >>
What Bill said, plus one must understand what patterns gold tones in. See link for a past post:
Link
Latin American Collection
<< <i>One of the frequently used agents is Iodine. They spread the stuff on the surfaces to make the coin look "crusty." The real crusty part is the Iodine which a strong glass can indicate is laying on top of the coin's surfaces instead of into them. >>
Good to know
Steve
<< <i>One of the frequently used agents is Iodine. They spread the stuff on the surfaces to make the coin look "crusty." The real crusty part is the Iodine which a strong glass can indicate is laying on top of the coin's surfaces instead of into them. >>
Is it easily washed off with acetone?
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
Latin American Collection
DesertRat: <<In a recent CoinWeek article, Doug Winter mentioned problems with recolored gold coins. I have seen some 19th-century U. S. gold coins with patinas that I thought looked funky---sort of bright orange (like Cheetos). Can others elaborate on what the recoloring agent is, or show some examples for discussion (as I don't have any)? >>
Unfortunately, many of the modifications are not clearly evident in images. As to which specific coins Doug is talking about I am not sure. The chemical dips that change the color of gold coins are often considered legitimate by 'players' in the coin business and such dipped coins are often considered gradable here and ATS.
In my experience, the doctoring of gold coins usually involves changing the color blends on the coin rather than recoloring the entire coin, as is often done with copper. Pastes, gels, putties, films, and staining agents are targeted at particular areas of gold coins, usually to cover or obscure imperfections, though sometimes just to make the coins seem more attractive to those who do not know that they have been doctored.
For example, the orange gels that are often added to Saints bring about orange tones that are similar to orange tones that naturally appear on many Saints. Usually, these added substances cannot be identified via catalogue images. In some cases, a coin has to be rotated and tilted under a lamp for evidence of doctoring to be seen.
How will Coin Collectors Interpret Certified Coin Grades in the Future?
Boosilibri: <<With all of the CAC whining this week it is funny that there is no mention of the impact the firm has had on weeding out processed, recoloured or puttied gold. Given how prevalent problem gold is, it is no wonder CAC'd pieces get a premium>>
I really believe that it is 'good for business' to discuss this problem, openly. Doctored gold coins often 'turn' over time. When they 'turn,' it may become readily apparent that something is very much wrong. Collectors or investors who notice their coins 'turn' will get angry. They will then tend to voice very negative remarks about the coin business to their friends and business associates. It is best to educate people before they spend a lot of money on coins.
Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 3
<< <i>Boosilibri: <<With all of the CAC whining this week it is funny that there is no mention of the impact the firm has had on weeding out processed, recoloured or puttied gold. Given how prevalent problem gold is, it is no wonder CAC'd pieces get a premium>>
I really believe that it is 'good for business' to discuss this problem, openly. Doctored gold coins often 'turn' over time. When they 'turn,' it may become readily apparent that something is very much wrong. Collectors or investors who notice their coins 'turn' will get angry. They will then tend to voice very negative remarks about the coin business to their friends and business associates. It is best to educate people before they spend a lot of money on coins. >>
I agree that a thoughtful discussion on the topic is good. If one could filter the 70% of ego, ignorance, obstinance, and arrogance from the discussion down to the 30% of fact and rationale debate, there would be a great educational value to the discussion.
I can understand from seeing the coins posted overtime by many of the CAC nay sayers why they would dislike CAC. Their coins will never be acceptable at any grade. It is easier to stand behind some dogmatic view that somehow 90% of the forum is as good as the best in the business than to accept that own abilities can always be supplemented by sharper eyes. Alternatively, many simple are too stubborn to accept that the poor results generated from being an overly price conscious buyer are in fact due to individual ignorance. Take your pick.
CAC has done more to lift the rare gold market than almost any other set of series in numistmatics. Most forum members have no clue about what "nice" gold is. When I hear statements like, I like my gold yellow, looking like what gold "should" look like, I cringle. No wonder so many gold coins have been processed overtime. The TPG's need to start penalizing these coins and helping to further disincentivize the behaviour.
Latin American Collection
I haven't seen the article yet, but what I think of as a Cheetos coin ( I actually use that term) , it is a coin that has been processed and has turned the entire coin into an unnatural looking color, like this coin:
Cheetos Coin
Coins that have partially toned surfaces, floating across the surface, sometimes just not flowing right, or in some place you would not expect it, and many times preceded by a dip, are what I think of as recolored coins.
Recolored Gold Coin
<< <i>
<< <i> CAC has done more to lift the rare gold market than almost any other set of series in numistmatics. When I hear statements like, I like my gold yellow, looking like what gold "should" look like, I cringle. No wonder so many gold coins have been processed overtime. The TPG's need to start penalizing these coins and helping to further disincentivize the behaviour. >>
If this comment is in the context of rare circulated gold, I would tend to agree, except that I think PCGS does a pretty good job of it (NGC not so much), and I think CAC has tightened the belt a bit more. They have the policy right, once in a while the implementation isn't.
I cringe when I read a statement from CAC that, "dipped coins with substantial mint luster are not considered offensive..." That is still acceptable, and as far as I can tell, CAC has done nothing to change that behavior.
<< <i>With all of the CAC whining this week it is funny that there is no mention of the impact the firm has had on weeding out processed, recoloured or puttied gold. Given how prevalent problem gold is, it is no wonder CAC'd pieces get a premium. >>
Since MS Saints are the most common gold coin in holders let's discuss them first.
I think the effects of recoloring is rather limited considering that for Saints in 65 to 67 grade CAC only stickers around 5-15% of all coins. They reject most of them for lack of original surfaces (dipped), stacking friction, and too many marks. I don't think we can say that the 85%+ of rejects are all puttied, recolored or played with. I would be surprised if even 10-20% of all MS65 Saints (1923-1928) are doctored. What CAC has basically done is take Saints back to the early to mid-1990's grading standards. They will rarely sticker a 1908 NM Saint in either 67 or 68 grade....and there are close to 1,000 of those out there. Only 26 MS67's stickered so far out of 793 WF coins from the first submission....a 3% rate. They haven't stickered any MS68 NM 1908's from the original WF hoard of 100. Most or all of the ogh WF MS68 Saints are in original condition from when they were put away 100+ years ago....and none yet stickered. Probably not a single coin was messed with. I think CAC's basic concern with 1908 NM saints is that they are struck rather poorly compared to the 1923-1928 dates and really don't want to pay premium 67/68 money for them. I can buy that. CAC's effect on the gem gold market is quite pronounced since they reject from 80-95% of all coins seen. Very unlikely that the bulk of those are from doctoring....more than likely just from gradeflation/marks. Imagine if they were that tough on the silver and copper coins by rejecting 85% of what they see?
My point is that if CAC is rejecting 97% of the MS67/68 Wells Fargo Saints, it isn't because of doctoring. And I think that same idea applies to most other common date Saints as well. $20's probably saw the most gradeflation from 1995-2008. So that was a prime focal area for CAC. Min grade, bulk submissions of Saints got us here. MS65 and MS66 Bust halves are probably the next most inflatred area in 19th and 20th century classic coins.
<< <i>
<< <i>Boosilibri: <<With all of the CAC whining this week it is funny that there is no mention of the impact the firm has had on weeding out processed, recoloured or puttied gold. Given how prevalent problem gold is, it is no wonder CAC'd pieces get a premium>>
I really believe that it is 'good for business' to discuss this problem, openly. Doctored gold coins often 'turn' over time. When they 'turn,' it may become readily apparent that something is very much wrong. Collectors or investors who notice their coins 'turn' will get angry. They will then tend to voice very negative remarks about the coin business to their friends and business associates. It is best to educate people before they spend a lot of money on coins. >>
I agree that a thoughtful discussion on the topic is good. If one could filter the 70% of ego, ignorance, obstinance, and arrogance from the discussion down to the 30% of fact and rationale debate, there would be a great educational value to the discussion.
I can understand from seeing the coins posted overtime by many of the CAC nay sayers why they would dislike CAC. Their coins will never be acceptable at any grade. It is easier to stand behind some dogmatic view that somehow 90% of the forum is as good as the best in the business than to accept that own abilities can always be supplemented by sharper eyes. Alternatively, many simple are too stubborn to accept that the poor results generated from being an overly price conscious buyer are in fact due to individual ignorance. Take your pick.
CAC has done more to lift the rare gold market than almost any other set of series in numistmatics. Most forum members have no clue about what "nice" gold is. When I hear statements like, I like my gold yellow, looking like what gold "should" look like, I cringle. No wonder so many gold coins have been processed overtime. The TPG's need to start penalizing these coins and helping to further disincentivize the behaviour. >>
You say: "I agree that a thoughtful discussion on the topic is good. If one could filter the 70% of ego, ignorance, obstinance, and arrogance from the discussion down to the 30% of fact and rationale debate, there would be a great educational value to the discussion." this then go right into name calling and disrespect. Hard to have a good conversation with someone like this.
The main reason CAC is doing well with gold coins is that they are seeing a lot of coins well after they have started to show problems and also the fact that they do have a person pretty good with gold there. If you sent every coin back to PCGS that CAC calls foul on and ask them to reevaluate the coin I would bet they would have very close to the same success rate. A newly treated coin or even an older one that was done well is hard to see, that is a fact. And look no name calling.
[URL=http://s16.photobucket.com/user/jmicky41/media/Mobile Uploads/5910d_zps2pdylli1.jpg.html]
I would suspect that there was some heat applied to generate that color.
Latin American Collection
<< <i>Bought a cleaned $5. I would like to recolor, not to cheat anybody out of money but to make it more enjoyable to view for my benefit only. PM me if you have a suggestion. >>
To make it more enjoyable for now just wear sunglasses as wanting to cheat or not at some point it will be sold.
Boosilibri:<<CAC has done more to lift the rare gold market than almost any other set of series in numistmatics. Most forum members have no clue about what "nice" gold is. When I hear statements like, I like my gold yellow, looking like what gold "should" look like, I cringle. No wonder so many gold coins have been processed overtime. The TPG's need to start penalizing these coins and helping to further disincentivize the behaviour.>>
Coin collectors should seek views of coin professionals. Collectors should not let their egos get in the way of seeking advice and help. After all, most collectors have or had full-time jobs that are unrelated to coins.
During a lot viewing session, I may spend a few minutes on a coin. With the exception of .400 batters like JA, even most grading experts need time to fully absorb a coin and assess imperfections. No classic U.S. coin is perfect.
Regarding TPGs, it is important to have realistic expectations and to understand that TPG graders may go through 800 to 1200 coins a day. Being a grader at a TPG is hard and requires much stamina. Someone who tries grading 1000 coins in one day will attain some understanding of the difficulty of their job.
Although buying PCGS certified coins is much less risky than buying coins that are not PCGS certified, collectors should learn about their coins seek additional views, IMO. The founding of PCGS was tremendous for the hobby, but PCGS is not a solution for all relevant problems.
How will Coin Collectors Interpret Certified Coin Grades in the Future?
<< <i>Boosilibri:<<CAC has done more to lift the rare gold market than almost any other set of series in numistmatics. Most forum members have no clue about what "nice" gold is. When I hear statements like, I like my gold yellow, looking like what gold "should" look like, I cringle. No wonder so many gold coins have been processed overtime. The TPG's need to start penalizing these coins and helping to further disincentivize the behaviour.>>
Coin collectors should seek views of coin professionals. Collectors should not let their egos get in the way of seeking advice and help. After all, most collectors have or had full-time jobs that are unrelated to coins.
During a lot viewing session, I may spend a few minutes on a coin. With the exception of .400 batters like JA, even most grading experts need time to fully absorb a coin and assess imperfections. No classic U.S. coin is perfect.
Regarding TPGs, it is important to have realistic expectations and to understand that TPG graders may go through 800 to 1200 coins a day. Being a grader at a TPG is hard and requires much stamina. Someone who tries grading 1000 coins in one day will attain some understanding of the difficulty of their job.
Although buying PCGS certified coins is much less risky than buying coins that are not PCGS certified, collectors should learn about their coins seek additional views, IMO. The founding of PCGS was tremendous for the hobby, but PCGS is not a solution for all relevant problems.
How will Coin Collectors Interpret Certified Coin Grades in the Future? >>
Analyst...agree with what you have said. My point regarding the tpg's is that regardless of technical grade, dipped coins revealing the underlying luster are receiving higher overall grades than original gold with deep patina and a muted luster. My wish is for processed gold to be either penalized or original gold rewarded by the tpg's to disincentivise processing which amounts to destruction to me. The past TPG standards have in fact encouraged this adverse behavior.
Latin American Collection
Boosilibri:<<My wish is for processed gold to be either penalized or original gold rewarded by the tpg's to disincentivise processing which amounts to destruction to me. The past TPG standards have in fact encouraged this adverse behavior.>>
Yes, this is a timeless thread. I have revived it now because others in the forum have recently spoken against coppery areas on gold coins. The removing of "copper spots" often involves considerable harm to the coin. In some cases, there may be just a micro-thin patch of copper at the surface, though, in many other cases, the copper areas have significant depth and moving them amounts to transforming a chunk of metal on the coin. Acids, other chemicals, ovens and/or torches are often used to remove coppery areas. Such processes are harmful to the coins
A Saint that is of a uniform, bright, light color has probably been processed and harmed. When Dr. Duckor's Saints were auctioned in 01/12, the coins with coppery areas tended to bring a premium. The leading collectors of Saints competed fiercely for coins in that sale.
Understanding Classic U.S. Coins and Building Excellent Coin Collections, Part 2: Dipped Coins
insightful10@gmail.com
Re: 1859 $10.
ROFLMAO. If they were using heat, the very first thing they would do is use a butane cigar lighter to burn out the carbon on the reverse. Wear gloves.
How, pray tell, would heat great enough to stain one side of the coin not stain the other?
The obverse toning pattern is OK, but who knows how good those doctor friends in low places might be. They may have boxes (of varying sizes, shapes and woods, plus the odd chemical compound)) cooking at 104 degrees in an convection oven as we type. Maybe the pattern forms too quickly (and wrong) at 120 degrees.
This 1861 half eagle has notural copper toning on the obverse.
My YouTube Channel