@MasonG "What do you think the cut-off date is, where white goes from okay to not okay?"
I think about 1995 +/- 5
@CCGGG You seem to be a collector of mostly modern coins. A purely technical grading system is perfect for coins that were minted within the past 50 years. But ALL coinage metals are reactive and will react with their environment. Some tone nicely and some are very ugly. And after 100 years, we have coins with natural toning and we also have coins that have been chemically treated to maintain their white/red surfaces. You might study the coins that are over 100 years old, and back to 200 years old, and then think about your absolute technical grading fascination.
@OldIndianNutKase said: @MasonG "What do you think the cut-off date is, where white goes from okay to not okay?"
I think about 1995 +/- 5
I think you might want to rethink this. Personal experience- I currently have a BU roll of 1960 dimes that I got from the bank in the mid 60s that are as bright and white today as the day they were made, not a hint of toning. I can assure you nothing has been done to them to make them white, they're as original as it gets. Based on what I've seen over the years, I have no problem believing it's possible for coins 50 years older than this to remain bright and untoned.
@OldIndianNutKase said: @MasonG "What do you think the cut-off date is, where white goes from okay to not okay?"
I think about 1995 +/- 5
I think you might want to rethink this. Personal experience- I currently have a BU roll of 1960 dimes that I got from the bank in the mid 60s that are as bright and white today as the day they were made, not a hint of toning. I can assure you nothing has been done to them to make them white, they're as original as it gets. Based on what I've seen over the years, I have no problem believing it's possible for coins 50 years older than this to remain bright and untoned.
I’ve seen (un-dipped) bright white 1916-D Barber Quarters, Seated Dimes from the mid-1880’s and 1925 Stone Mountain halves - all from rolls. And I’m sure others, here, have seen examples of un-dipped, white coins of similar ages.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@OldIndianNutKase said: @MasonG "What do you think the cut-off date is, where white goes from okay to not okay?"
I think about 1995 +/- 5
I think you might want to rethink this. Personal experience- I currently have a BU roll of 1960 dimes that I got from the bank in the mid 60s that are as bright and white today as the day they were made, not a hint of toning. I can assure you nothing has been done to them to make them white, they're as original as it gets. Based on what I've seen over the years, I have no problem believing it's possible for coins 50 years older than this to remain bright and untoned.
I’ve seen (un-dipped) bright white 1916-D Barber Quarters, Seated Dimes from the mid-1880’s and 1925 Stone Mountain halves - all from rolls. And I’m sure others, here, have seen examples of un-dipped, white coins of similar ages.
I like the question of where one draws the line on white silver coins. I've collected for over 60 years and have also pulled type coins from original rolls that remained white for many years stored in Capital plastic or slabs. I'm okay with Barbers, but would probably draw the line at early seated coins - anything before the CW just doesn't look right to me if it's white.
@OldIndianNutKase said: @MasonG "What do you think the cut-off date is, where white goes from okay to not okay?"
I think about 1995 +/- 5
I think you might want to rethink this. Personal experience- I currently have a BU roll of 1960 dimes that I got from the bank in the mid 60s that are as bright and white today as the day they were made, not a hint of toning. I can assure you nothing has been done to them to make them white, they're as original as it gets. Based on what I've seen over the years, I have no problem believing it's possible for coins 50 years older than this to remain bright and untoned.
I’ve seen (un-dipped) bright white 1916-D Barber Quarters, Seated Dimes from the mid-1880’s and 1925 Stone Mountain halves - all from rolls. And I’m sure others, here, have seen examples of un-dipped, white coins of similar ages.
I like the question of where one draws the line on white silver coins. I've collected for over 60 years and have also pulled type coins from original rolls that remained white for many years stored in Capital plastic or slabs. I'm okay with Barbers, but would probably draw the line at early seated coins - anything before the CW just doesn't look right to me if it's white.
With respect to silver coins, for many years, I’ve used the expression that “generally speaking, the older a coin is, the sillier it looks if it’s white.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@crazyhounddog said:
Many feel that older coins that were collected way back in the day, before plastic inert holders were around, were taken care of the best the collector, at that time, could muster. Probably in a paper envelope or maybe a pouch-sock. But any of those methods can and will create toning/tarnish. All told I kinda look at blast white coins from old days as questionable because they’re still white, how can they stay that way? How could that be?
What do you think the cut-off date is, where white goes from okay to not okay?
Plastic was invented in 1856. For however you want to take that. I haven’t the slightest idea when plastic was finally used for coin holders but I’m more than sure when it finally was, a certain amount of petroleum were used.
I’m with, Mark here. I would look at a 1814 that was blast white as really strange and I’m pretty sure the rest of you would too.
When I was growing up attending coin shows and coin shops with my dad they had, right on the counter, coin dip. White was right back then and it was the way it was. I’m talking 50’s/60’s.
With that said there was a time I thought that toned coins were never messed with until the “Coin Doctor’s “ made their debut with color. That’s when caution set in for me. I do believe there was a time, before the big bucks were paid for toned coins, that the toning was natural. It’s sad the way it is now. Morons that haven’t a clue are destroying coins trying and failing to tone their coins and sell them for a profit. Yes common date for now but later on down the road they will be more desirable and destroyed by these idiots.
Joe
The bitterness of "Poor Quality" is remembered long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.
Coins that have been lacquered generally stay white and many lacquers don't damage the coin. People have been using lacquers for over 100 yrs. They won't grade a lacquered coin,but I believe certain coatings go further than holders in protecting a coin from toning.
I also wish I could do something about all the coins I would have wanted to buy if they hadn't yellowed from sitting in the light of a dealer's display case for God knows how long.
Rainbow toning ........ yes .... I go with collector B but an ugly one? Collector A might be a wiser one.
I would buy 2 and carelessly as well as carefully handle each in separate environment.
The market may call it improved in grade if the toning turned up on the desirable hues IMHO
I don't have time (sorry) to read all the good discussions right now at the tail end of this thread since I last posted but I will later.
Keep this in mind when you post: A coin's eye appeal had no effect and was NEVER considered when assigning a "true" technical grade. One reason was at the time it was developed, toned coins were rarely encountered.
"White" was right! The ONLY time tarnish was mentioned was as an add-on to the grade description just as we did for a coin's strike which also had no influence on its grade!
Therefore, high-grade coins could be described as Choice Unc, flat strike (MS-65 at the time and virtually the highest possible grade as there were no 70's or grades over MS-65) or Choice Unc, splotchy toning. In the true technical system, it was possible to have a coin described as Choice Unc, cut in half.
Go ahead and laugh but the system was precise and worked extremely well to describe a coin since the standard did not change at all over the ten + years it was used (including at the first TPGS). A coin's grade had nothing to do with its value or rarity - only its present condition compared to how it left the dies.
Comments
@MasonG "What do you think the cut-off date is, where white goes from okay to not okay?"
I think about 1995 +/- 5
@CCGGG You seem to be a collector of mostly modern coins. A purely technical grading system is perfect for coins that were minted within the past 50 years. But ALL coinage metals are reactive and will react with their environment. Some tone nicely and some are very ugly. And after 100 years, we have coins with natural toning and we also have coins that have been chemically treated to maintain their white/red surfaces. You might study the coins that are over 100 years old, and back to 200 years old, and then think about your absolute technical grading fascination.
OINK
I think you might want to rethink this. Personal experience- I currently have a BU roll of 1960 dimes that I got from the bank in the mid 60s that are as bright and white today as the day they were made, not a hint of toning. I can assure you nothing has been done to them to make them white, they're as original as it gets. Based on what I've seen over the years, I have no problem believing it's possible for coins 50 years older than this to remain bright and untoned.
I’ve seen (un-dipped) bright white 1916-D Barber Quarters, Seated Dimes from the mid-1880’s and 1925 Stone Mountain halves - all from rolls. And I’m sure others, here, have seen examples of un-dipped, white coins of similar ages.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I like the question of where one draws the line on white silver coins. I've collected for over 60 years and have also pulled type coins from original rolls that remained white for many years stored in Capital plastic or slabs. I'm okay with Barbers, but would probably draw the line at early seated coins - anything before the CW just doesn't look right to me if it's white.
With respect to silver coins, for many years, I’ve used the expression that “generally speaking, the older a coin is, the sillier it looks if it’s white.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Plastic was invented in 1856. For however you want to take that. I haven’t the slightest idea when plastic was finally used for coin holders but I’m more than sure when it finally was, a certain amount of petroleum were used.
I’m with, Mark here. I would look at a 1814 that was blast white as really strange and I’m pretty sure the rest of you would too.
When I was growing up attending coin shows and coin shops with my dad they had, right on the counter, coin dip. White was right back then and it was the way it was. I’m talking 50’s/60’s.
With that said there was a time I thought that toned coins were never messed with until the “Coin Doctor’s “ made their debut with color. That’s when caution set in for me. I do believe there was a time, before the big bucks were paid for toned coins, that the toning was natural. It’s sad the way it is now. Morons that haven’t a clue are destroying coins trying and failing to tone their coins and sell them for a profit. Yes common date for now but later on down the road they will be more desirable and destroyed by these idiots.
Joe
Coins that have been lacquered generally stay white and many lacquers don't damage the coin. People have been using lacquers for over 100 yrs. They won't grade a lacquered coin,but I believe certain coatings go further than holders in protecting a coin from toning.
I also wish I could do something about all the coins I would have wanted to buy if they hadn't yellowed from sitting in the light of a dealer's display case for God knows how long.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
Rainbow toning ........ yes .... I go with collector B but an ugly one? Collector A might be a wiser one.
I would buy 2 and carelessly as well as carefully handle each in separate environment.
The market may call it improved in grade if the toning turned up on the desirable hues IMHO
I don't have time (sorry) to read all the good discussions right now at the tail end of this thread since I last posted but I will later.
Keep this in mind when you post: A coin's eye appeal had no effect and was NEVER considered when assigning a "true" technical grade. One reason was at the time it was developed, toned coins were rarely encountered.
"White" was right! The ONLY time tarnish was mentioned was as an add-on to the grade description just as we did for a coin's strike which also had no influence on its grade!
Therefore, high-grade coins could be described as Choice Unc, flat strike (MS-65 at the time and virtually the highest possible grade as there were no 70's or grades over MS-65) or Choice Unc, splotchy toning. In the true technical system, it was possible to have a coin described as Choice Unc, cut in half.
Go ahead and laugh but the system was precise and worked extremely well to describe a coin since the standard did not change at all over the ten + years it was used (including at the first TPGS). A coin's grade had nothing to do with its value or rarity - only its present condition compared to how it left the dies.