Deleted
JeffersonFrog
Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭✭✭
Deleted
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
1
JeffersonFrog
Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Some 'operations' on coins are deemed beyond the pale: meaningful surface alterations (whizzing, burnishing, tooling, artificial toning, etc. all count). Buffing with a rubbing compound would not count as conservation in my book, not any more that doing a total repaint job on a valuable painting that had some flaking or fading or other issues.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Cleaning(Polishing) it removes the "original" worn and cruddy surfaces and contamination. The "patina" if you prefer that term. What was once the character of the coin is stripped away.
Collector, occasional seller
The strange thing is that coins that ...appear... to look good....and WOULD be if we used albums, are often "enhanced."
Thus we succumb to the tenet of avoiding those and searching for examples of "pure" coins regardless if some others would satisfy our eyes more.
A conundrum that may resolve IF "new" collectors ignore what's advised and just collect for what appeals to them.
A distinct possibility as fewer collectors may care about originality and buy what they ....LIKE.
Very good points by the OP. I once showed off a CC Morgan and a forum member quipped that it had been cleaned. Maybe so, but a bunch of other stuff that boggles the mind could and did happen to those coins as well. Certainly an uncirculated Dollar that had been "cleaned" could in time be circulated down to a lower but gradeable condition.
When science examines life on Earth, it seems that the so called lower animals are never condemned for their activities...only humans are. Coin cleaning falls into that basket.
It is relevant because coin value is based on condition. The higher the grade the higher the value. A cleaned coin has "no grade."
Being cleaned does not negate the fact that a coin is rare. It only removes the possibilities of higher value.
The East Is Buying Gold. The West Is Buying Time.
A very light cleaning at AU may be covered on the coins way to VF. Clean a coin with a Brillo Pad and it is likely ruined. Best advice is never clean a coin and leave restoration to the pros. Unfortunately most people are not collectors so coins get cleaned.
@JeffersonFrog asked: "Why is it relevant whether a well-circulated coin has been cleaned or not?"
It all comes down to a matter of personal taste and knowledge of market preferences.
I suppose if a person cannot detect the cleaning it does not matter. Probably over 85% of the coin hoarders and non-numismatists in the country would prefer to have a highly polished coin rather than an old original example.
If a coin is cleaned properly (conserved), it does not matter either. I guess the bottom line is that most folks who buy coins for a living don't like obviously cleaned coins.
Interesting question. I guess it's all about originality. The masses prefer original, circulated examples, without 'issues'. They prefer nice original patina, which is the result of many years of commerce. Appling rubbing compound is not part of regular circulation. I equate it to a bent coin. It may have occurred during circulation (possibly as a result of going through a bank's coin counting machine) , but it makes the coin undesirable to most. Once bent, you can't go back. Once cleaned, you can't go back. Again, collectors always prefer examples without 'issues'.
Dave
The preference in coin collections is for unaltered pieces. That does not extend to archeological purposes.
Think about it differently--how is a coin supposed to be used? What is normal? Coins jingle in pockets and cash registers, they fall on the ground and in the dirt, they pass through lots of hands. That's how they wear down and pick up a patina. Coins were designed to do this--it's their purpose.
Coins weren't designed to be cleaned, so that's damage. They also weren't designed for someone to carve a big X on them, and that's damage, too.
While some damage can be accidental (some scratches, for instance), usually damage is active, while everything that affects the condition of a coin that is considered "normal" is passive. People using coins aren't trying to make them dirty or wear them down, but that's just what happens. The difference is intent.
I own a 1798 Bust dollar and sent it to CAC a few years ago. It came back without a bean. The explanation was “A light cleaning, long ago.” The coin has greater than average detail for the assigned grade and decent eye appeal. I considered the comment and could see no hairlines, evidence of polishing, or obvious distractions. Over the years I’ve realized that the coin simply lacks layers of patina. It’s OK, just not as original as some. Its toning is probably secondary to one or more trips to the dip bucket.
I guess my point is that the evils exist on a spectrum all the way from polished with barb wire to barely discernible hairlines. Given a choice, take the one without issues.
Or...maybe CAC was wrong. The coin was numerically graded in a PCGS or NGC holder and you have a very experienced eye for coins.
@BryceM said: "I own a 1798 Bust dollar and sent it to CAC a few years ago. It came back without a bean. The explanation was “A light cleaning, long ago.” The coin has greater than average detail for the assigned grade and decent eye appeal. I considered the comment and could see no hairlines, evidence of polishing, or obvious distractions. Over the years I’ve realized that the coin simply lacks layers of patina. It’s OK, just not as original as some. Its toning is probably secondary to one or more trips to the dip bucket. I guess my point is that the evils exist on a spectrum all the way from polished with barb wire to barely discernible hairlines. Given a choice, take the one without issues." >
@Coinstartled replied: "Or...maybe CAC was wrong. The coin was numerically graded in a PCGS or NGC holder and you have a very experienced eye for coins.
CAC was not wrong. Neither was the original grading service. The evidence of any type of cleaning occurs on a running scale. As Brice posted: "a spectrum all the way from polished with barb wire to barely discernible hairlines."
CAC was more critical on the OP's coin than the TPGS. If CAC said it was cleaned at some time in the past, it was. Furthermore, if a TPGS tells you your coin is cleaned, 99.9% of the time it is cleaned enough not to be straight graded as the OP's coin was.
Here is where my head goes numb, my fingers tremble and my eyes cross.
Bryce as I recall, has mentioned more than once over the years that he is a physician.
So this intelligent fellow with what, a dozen years of advanced education, who can reassemble body parts and save cardiac patients from dropping off the abyss...well to the CAC fan club, this numismatist is incompetent to accurately grade a coin without the aid of a single anointed messiahesque coin dealer
Probably a few hundred thousand or more skilled practitioners like Bryce that can save a limb or keep a gunshot victim alive, yet in this entire universe of coin collecting, only one gentleman
has the Superman-like power to discern if a two hundred year old coin was wiped a century and a half ago.
Good grief!
The condition of a coin tells a story. Wear tells a better story than cleaning. Do you want the coin that served its intended use in its own era, or the coin that was cleaned by a coin dealer trying to pass it at the next grade, or by a stupid collector or museum curator who wanted the coin to look “shiny”?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Yes and no. I don't think CAC is the be all, end all, and to that end I only own a coin or two with a sticker (happened to have them when I bought them), and have never sent in anything of my own. But while your point may be sound that multiple people can make a solid assessment of a coin's quality, the argument doesn't hold that because someone is good at one thing, they are good at another. Great surgeons can put people back together, but maybe they aren't the right people to put an airplane back together. Just the same, a private pilot who buzzes around on a nice Sunday afternoon probably shouldn't be commanding a 747. Even in the world of physicians, the doctor a patient sees depends on what needs fixing.
There is something to be said for honing your craft. In the world of coins, a lot of the knowledge required to assess coins comes with seeing tons of them. This doesn't mean many people, including collectors, can't be good at assessing a coin, but certainly someone who has spent decades devoting his time to studying them will have a leg up.
Thank you for your response, Jeremy. Had Bryce been new to the game on coins we would be 100% in agreement. but he has been a regular on the forum for 7 years and takes the hobby seriously. While there are many quirks to silver coins that might be more complex than say resecting a colon, I would expect that a physician/collector should be able to get a read on whether a coin the size of the thyroid, had been improperly conserved.
The OP has posed a valid inquiry...and some excellent inputs have followed. Those of us who started collecting in childhood probably remember taking a pencil eraser to a copper coin to 'clean it up'....Really looked nice when done...
As we grew in age and experience, we learned that 'cleaning' abrades the surface and removes some metal as well as tarnish and dirt. It is also true, that commerce can cause scratches, dents and dings on a coin. These marks are unintentional (aside from graffiti or counterstamps) and affect grade. Abrasive cleaning affects the entire surface - thus no grade. Dipping, done properly, will be excused... over dipping, with acidic solvents, will not be excused. Cheers, RickO
A quick dip on a uncirculated coin or "proper" cleaning or conservation by an expert, or one who thinks they are, is usually accepted and might even go undetected. Anything else would interrupt the natural aging or wearing process of the coin and would be considered damage, sometimes also accepted depending on the extent and the coin in question, but damage non the less.
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
I can understand light cleaning (soap and water) but any harsh or abrasive cleaning is a no-no. That's is unless a coin is toned. Then I'd dip it,,,, twice.
I get that he's not new, but that's not my point. There's a difference between someone with experience who takes the hobby seriously and someone who dedicates his life to it. I've been collecting for over 20 years. I've seen a LOT of coins. Every once in a while I handle something in a details holder and really have to look to figure out what's wrong, already knowing someone else spotted the problem. All the more so when the coin may be considered market acceptable, but someone with an eye for specific characteristics is looking closely. No matter how much time I spend looking and learning, I won't have the knowledge base of someone who dedicates many multiples of that time. Yes, everyone with some experience should be able to spot many problems, but not necessarily all, especially when they're minor.
cleaned is usually a term associated with removing a layer of the top of the coin. you end up with pushed metals and less details. Thus not original state. If one cleans off a coin with acetone to remove residue and items not adhered that is OK. For a circulated coin to survive in non-circulated condition is rare. Most are used for wealth transfer.
I think that if you have a cleaned coin and you can cleanse it and make it look better for your taste great good for you. Problem is, we have dishonest folks who will take that coin, an present it to a newbie as original or almost MS take them for a lot of money. We may argue that it is that Newbies fault, but it might turn new collectors off and shrink the market for when we want to sell our coins.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
OK Mr. Bill Jones. Please have the courtesy to explain for all of us what you disagree with in my post. Neither of us saw the OP's coin. JA did. I believe my standards for originality are as high as anyone ever born in the WORLD! That includes both you and JA. The numismatic community is lucky that I'm muzzled and on a tight leash as I personally helped destroy the bottom line of at least two TPGS's for being too strict about originality!
PS Look forward to seeing you at FUN. Really!
I once bought a 1916 D dime in a 2x2 the dealer had graded it as VG8. The 2x2 staples were rusted and the stain was spreading towards the coin. I took it out of the 2x2 and put it in a fresh one with new staples. a year later I took it back to the same dealer to sell back as I had found a better grade . The dealer informed me the coin had been " cleaned " and therefor would grade G3 at best and not worth half the value . Apparently the dealers eyesight had improved over the year and he was able to better distinguish a "Cleaned" coin and he swore he had never sold me that coin. Over the years, I have personally cleaned 30 to 40 coins. As I have grown older and hopefully wiser, I sometimes wish I could go back and retrieve those coins and not cleaned them. I guess my point is Buy the coins you like, Its your collection, don't stress over whether they've been cleaned or not. Truth be known I would say a lot of coins that exhibit that pristine look that are 100 years old have had some form of what today would be declared as cleaned. By the way if any of you have a Chain cent thats's been "Cleaned" and you feel its not worthy of your collection, please by all means feel free to give it to me as a Christmas gift. I assure you I will display it with relish.
Bob Sr CEO Fieldtechs
News Flash. Although I read your posts, I have no clue who you are, what you do, or how qualified you are to have an informed opinion about anything having to do with numismatics in general and grading a coin in particular. That is the way it is with most members posting here. Most are only known by our posts. So no disrespect to you but some things you have posted are absolutely wacky.
Example: Just because a member is very accomplished in their field of endeavor has nothing to do with their numismatic skills. Furthermore, many of the most successful dealers in the country cannot grade coins. I know because I've had successful dealers, doctors, scientists, etc. in my classes over the years so my opinion of their lack of skills is based on actual experience. Just the fact that they are taking a course earns my respect.
There are folks here that we all know. The only one I'll mention here is Mr. Bill
as he has given me a "fly-by" disagree without posting a reason. I finally got to meet him and I think we both see pretty much eye-to-eye. IMO, Bill is one of the good graders around here. It comes very easy. I tell students that their minds are like a computer. Good info in, good info out. Unfortunately, from my experience there is not enough "good" info reaching the computers of 90% of collectors/dealers.
PS Here is where my head goes numb, my fingers tremble and my eyes cross: When any long-time successful dealer or collector comes to my table with a coin that I can see is cleaned while still in his hand two feet away askes me, "Is this cleaned?" Actually, I'm just looking for an excuse to quote you. LOL.
I enjoy educating folks of all skill levels as I'm always learning something too. I hope you and any other members here stop by the table at the FUN show and show me your coins.
"A light cleaning long ago" reminds me of something I read concerning the practice of cleaning coins in the 19th century to disinfect them and that the service was sometimes offered at hotel front desks
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
@airplanenut said: "There's a difference between someone with experience who takes the hobby seriously and someone who dedicates his life to it. I've been collecting for over 20 years. I've seen a LOT of coins. Every once in a while I handle something in a details holder and really have to look to figure out what's wrong, already knowing someone else spotted the problem. All the more so when the coin may be considered market acceptable, but someone with an eye for specific characteristics is looking closely. No matter how much time I spend looking and learning, I won't have the knowledge base of someone who dedicates many multiples of that time. Yes, everyone with some experience should be able to spot many problems, but not necessarily all, especially when they're minor."
AMEN!
@Insider2 said: I believe my standards for originality are as high as anyone ever born in the WORLD!
I will say I liked your article in numismatic News about literature,learning and the difference time has made on accessing information but this may be a little much to take. Even from you!
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
So if only one guy in the world can spot the problem...maybe it is not really a problem.
Well, this thread is certainly entertaining.
Yes, I'm a physician.... an orthopedic surgeon to be precise. Please don't ask me about the heart and especially not the colon. If I see either one of them, something went very, very wrong.
Some of what I said earlier has been incorrectly extrapolated. Don't assume from what I said that my opinion of the 1798 dollar is based solely on JA's opinion. I bought the coin because, first, I liked it, second, it was positively reviewed from someone whose opinion I value quite highly, and third, the price was right. Early type is not my area of specialty so I'm not afraid to seek outside input. It did not have a bean when I bought it and I really didn't think it would get one when I sent it in. In this, I was not disappointed. After owning the coin for a while and learning more about numismatics in general, I realized that there were actual reasons JA said what he did. On this coin, the two of us are in agreement.
JA's opinion is an informed opinion. My reviewer's opinion is also an informed opinion, and I'm pretty sure "my" expert has spent time as a grader at CAC in the past. Does the difference in opinions here bother me? Not one bit.
When it comes to Peace dollars, I know what I like and between you and me, I happen to think they aren't JA's strongest series. Don't think I'm trying to disparage him because I AM NOT. I'm not trying to say I can detect problems better than him, because I can't. I can't authenticate them worth beans, unless the issues are obvious. He certainly has a better eye for subtle PVC issues, thumbing, and doctoring that I do. I own (and in other cases owned) many Peace dollars that I think are fantastic that were not CAC approved and a few with beans that I don't think deserve them. One in particular has a HUGE swath of nasty hairlines that should have precluded a numerical grade.
I assume he looks at coins the same way I look at X-rays. Am I perfect? No, but I can spot a hairline fracture or the earliest beginnings of arthritis in an instant. Other people can't. It's what I do, every day, day in and day out. On occasion I'll happen upon an X-ray and notice something that I missed the first time. It happens. We humans are imperfect creatures.
Sadly, we've turned a reasonably intelligent question from the OP into another CAC thread. That's too bad, because when that happens we all lose the chance to learn something.
Bryce, would you mind sharing what the grade of the 1798 dollar is?
VF30, but why is that relevant?
Figured that at a lower 6-10 grade the TPG's are more apt to let a cleaning slide.
I examine coins with the capability (seldom required) of using more magnification (80X at my desk) than most folks. I consider what I do to be a big game called "Let's see what we can get past the grader today." Once a person looks at enough totally original MS coins they can tell very quickly when one is not. Detecting artificial toning is harder.
The good thing for collectors is "originality" is a very easy thing to learn when you put your mind to it. It can be accomplished in a short period of time for folks with normal vision and lots of coins to examine.
Now, every informed person on CU knows that "originality" is on a sliding scale of "market acceptability." I'll repeat what I posted: "I believe my standards for originality are as high as anyone ever born in the WORLD!" I also know that I can teach anyone to equal my standards given enough time and coins.
Perhaps the "rub" is this. While anyone who has the experience can pick out an 100% original coin just as well as anyone with the same level of knowledge ever born in the world, the difficulty for them comes when they are no longer making a PERSONAL judgement but are making a judgement based on the commercial coin market's acceptability for a dealership, sticker service, or TPGS. See the difference. Some unoriginality is tolerated.
@Coinstartled said: "So if only one guy in the world can spot the problem...maybe it is not really a problem."
I think you enjoy twisting-up a discussion with fanciful nonsense as this: "So if only one guy in the world can spot the problem..." Where has this EVER BEEN STATED? Exactly who is the one guy in the world? Are you thinking of JA?
Can't you spot problems also. If so, that's three of us so far.
Jeff Bezos.
Again, as with the other fantasy scenarios, Jeff Bezos has nothing at all to do with this discussion.
@JeffersonFrog Has your original question been answered satisfactorily? Grading and cleaning can get very involved and convoluted. It is up to you to keep asking specific questions and to weed out any nonsense.
One of the things I learned in a grading class is that intentional changes inflicted on a coin are judged much more harshly than changes that occur during normal use.
This would be a good opportunity to include natural toning vs artificial toning to the discussion.
For those pondering over the OP's question, here's another wrinkle. Suppose you collect ancient or medieval coins. None of these coins have survived above ground. A few were in the middle of a large hoard and avoided the contamination of dirt, rain, and other gross things, but the overwhelming majority were dirty. So at some point every one was cleaned. But some were "cleaned" and others were "cleaned" There is surely a difference. Many of these are highly collectible and valuable. A bright and shiny (even lustrous) Roman denarius or Greek tetradrachm is a sight to behold, a 2000 year-old marvel, but not really a natural phenomena!
So go back to our modern era coins. A hundred year old Mercury dime with cleaning is similarly unnatural but not unspeakable. In general, everything must be considered when evaluating a coin, including its planchet, strike, wear, color, state of preservation, etc. Don't focus only on the grade number. Even at the higher end of collecting, there is MS65 and there is MS65. And there's a reason they trade at vastly different prices.
What did the old timers, I guess the true coin collectors did before the three TPGs? PCGS and NGC didn't exist until the mid 80s. ANACS first certified a coin in '72. Before this grading thing took over the coin hobby, how were coins certified to be "MS 65", was it based on how much the buyer wants it, how they see the coin? How were errors identified or if a coin was cleaned or not? Was it pertinent then? Just seems all the conversation now about how beautiful (or ugly) a coin is is dependent on its grade or how it will grade.
Please someone let me know if this is irrelevant to this thread and I'll start a new one. Thanks!
I think it’s a relevant question. It was a little bit like the Wild West.
The grading structure was basically the same but with fewer gradations. Anyone could write their grade on a cardboard holder. Anyone else could either agree or disagree. MS65 included basically everything from MS65-70 with adjectives used to describe something truly special. Price would be up to the dealer & potential buyer (no different than now, really).
There were lots of shenanigans though. You could buy a coin from a dealer in an AU58 holder one day and try to sell it the next and get anything from “Sure, no problem” to “That’s no better than VF.”
Smart collectors navigated these waters just fine. Unscrupulous dealers preyed on the ignorant, ultimately driving hordes of people out of the middle & upper ends of the hobby. Then (as now) many people just enjoyed collecting from circulation and didn’t get all worked up about the number on the holder.
Cleaned is an old favorite weasel word amongst dealers used to beat down a sellers price. I think of one dealer in particular who in a rare moment I caught using his thumb doused in lighter fluid to improve the look of a some morgan dollars as he pulled them from an "original" roll
I suspect though that in the pre grading days, collectors were paying up to a ten times premium when jumping from one grade to the next higher.
The TPG's and the registry pandemonium created a spiral of unsustainability where common Washington quarters of the loftiest grades were bringing $10,000 plus.
Most OLD coins have had something “bad” happen to them in the 150+ years of their existence.
You can always clean. Once you have you can’t go back.
So, I prefer my ladies with their original circulated undamaged uncleaned and unaltered surfaces. At least as perfect as I can find them
A: The year they spend more on their library than their coin collection.
A numismatist is judged more on the content of their library than the content of their cabinet.
Nope, not at all. There were only two grades for MS coins. Uncirculated and Choice Uncirculated. BU covered everything. Pluss were used a lot. The price differences were minor. I remember a time when 1881-S $ were about less than $10 and one prominent dealer of today (he was ahead of the game) was buying PL and DMPL's for a buck or two more as not many folks cared. One of my bosses stopped collecting as prices were too high. He could not see paying $5 for a BU Liberty nickel! Ridiculous price.
Cleaning .... another problem like dipping.
Some don't care as much as others.
Just remember if it's a problem coin it will always be a problem coin. Even the doctors of coins are smart enough know this , and how to clean clocks. And they can clean clocks pretty good, too.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I often hear the term “old” when describing cleaning. Problem for me is that is usually a way to justify the cleaning. I can see old cleaning that has toned over but the thing about old cleaning is that it looks just like recent cleaning.
I’ve also heard said that a problem coin is just a coin that hasn’t been worked enough....it’s tricky out there to differentiate between a bozo from the past shining up his coins and a doctor trying to level up a coins value.
Ive been through this with a vintage car recently. The seller had a nice barn find auto (65 VW Bus) for sure the thing had some PO hacks and some old time booger pickers in the breaks etc, but thats ok, you can sort that out. Then, before it could be bought the current owner went and polished the paint and started the engine, running 40 year old gas and oil through rusted cylinder walls. Thinking he could now get more, I actually bailed on the deal as now they had erased all the forensic mechanics information and removed much of the originality of the classic. The crusty, unmolested condition was where the money was at for the seller, and what they should be selling, but they’re always too afraid to leave money on the table or something, so they clean it.
Classic coins are alot like classic autos in this regard. You can properly wash them and get the smuts off to reveal the actual surface, but once the original services are disturbed, then you just have a piece of metal and not a collectible. Since were really talking about circulation here, the same again goes for autos, we’re seeing that normal wear and thin paint and even some rust is preferred over a shiny new refinish, and when the rust starts coming through a respray, it really looks bad and oddly weird, same as coins when the doctoring techniques age out or fail.
I tried here, but I’ll admit it’s a hard question to answers in one sentence. It’s just an intuition and experience that wins. There are only so many old ones left it’s best to not wreck any more, but I guess if you own something you can do what you want.
I don't mind details coins. There are only so few of so many kinds of coins left. I really have an affinity for coins cleaned awhile ago, but dislike over dipped blast white.
Who knows, maybe years from now acetone will been seen as silly as the conservation methods of the late 1800s and early 1900s. I already think dipping some coins is absolutely unnecessary.
Collectors were probably "doing it right" back then, too (e.g., lacquer on copper).
And it's not as if they are all deceptive. It's pretty clear an 1818 raw coin has been cleaned or cleaned then enhanced, or cleaned 100 years ago and toned again. There's a market for them and money to be made and coins to be enjoyed for cheap. That's not to say though that there aren't raw cleaned coins being passed off with original surfaces; and the sellers who try to pass them off as original.
If a coin was cleaned a hundred years ago and it's two hundred years old, who cares? If it's appealing to someone and priced right then it'll sell just as anything else in the "my money my coin".
But, it'd be a long stretch to say details coins are, or should be, collected on the same level as authentic unaltered coins. Like selling any other collectible, the closer you get to the original, and the more details you can see, and more remaining detail, the better it's going to sell.
I think the raw details market fills the gap between the two. Oddly though some of these coins are only 20 to 40 fewer dollars than a slabbed piece (at least in the 150 to 500 range). That tempts me to say some people prefer them over "real" coins.