Options
Coins back from Restoration - before and after pics
badger
Posts: 1,217 ✭✭✭
Have two silver proofs coins that spotted or messed while in the holder. They were stored in bank safety deposit box and Intercept Shield holders. Is it worth trying to restore them?
1953 Washington PR68 Cam - PCGS Guide$300 Odd. Looks like whitewash but reverse is pristine.
1962 Franklin PR68 DCam - PCGS Guide $525 More like rusted than toned.
I have lost track of the value of mid-level proofs vs guide. If restoration made these perfect for grade, what would they be worth on BST? Whether they can even be restored is another issue.
Collector of Modern Silver Proofs 1950-1964 -- PCGS Registry as Elite Cameo
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
5
Comments
What does CoinFacts auction history tell you? The answer may be there (sorry, I can't answer your question).
Based on the auction archives at GC, the price guide on the Washie may be 10-15% low, while the Franklin is probably worth more like $400. This assumes no spots, of course. I'm not optimistic about restoration on those coins, but will defer to the experts.
I'm sorry Badger. Does anybody know if this is common with silver cameo proofs? Looks like a chemical reaction between the silver and what is used by the mint for the cameo effect.
it should be clear that these two coins need help and will sell at a steep discount as they are now. this is an area where I collect and I wouldn't be interested in owning them as they are now at any price. understanding that, I would think you'd just submit them for PCGS to restore.....................if they can.
You know, I never scrolled down far enough on Coin Facts to see the auction prices. Saw the coin info and the 'for sales' and stopped.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Keets, I agree. I would never have bought these coins with those defects. Would have just passed. But may be worth and experiment to send to PCGS to see what they can do -- or if they will do lol.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
WAG based on past experiments- the white stuff on the quarter might come off okay but I'd be concerned the orange spots on the half have eaten into the surface.
With the wealth of information available via CoinFacts auction records and completed ebay sales it seems to me that you might be able to rather quickly formulate a good price structure.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Badger, how much time has elapsed since these changes took place?? I would suggest, as MasonG has, that you act immediately to stop anything worse from happening. if you send them to PCGS they'll evaluate and go from there. I will say this much: if either coin has "Milkspots" they may not be able to remove everything without a ghost remaining. by definition, a "Milkspot" is a substance that was on the planchet prior to striking, that means it has been forced into the coin and isn't just laying on the surface.
The Franklin does not look like milk spot but may be worse than milk spot regarding a ghost. The Washington almost looks like milk spot spider web. But is not fuzzy at the edges like milk. Yeah, a ghosted coin is not much better.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Unfortunately, I don't think PCGS will cover this under the guarantee, but it might be better to ask @BrettPCGS @HeatherBoyd first. If PCGS will not cover the restoration, crack and do it yourself:
Step 1 - MS70
Step 2 (if necessary) - EZest dip
If those are milk spots though, it won't come off. I'm cautiously optimistic that it might be something else.
Does anybody know if PCGS recommends using either MS70 or EZest cleaners?
PCGS would never recommend any cleaning product. They would recommend using their conservation service.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
PCGS doesn't endorse any product. I think if you submit it there is a good chance that PCGS will tell you (1) it isn't covered under their revised guarantee and (2) they may recommend against even trying and charge you a fee erring on the ultra conservative side. If AND ONLY IF there is no coverage under the guarantee, then you don't have anything to lose by cracking and conserving the pieces yourself. The coins are not sellable as is. All would trade for enormous discounts. Paying to conserve coins (if there is no guarantee coverage) is potentially throwing good money after bad.
EZest and MS70 are cheap. You may even already have some. Ditto for cutting pliers. (I recommend every collector have these and acetone on hand).
To use PCGS restoration, there is a restoration submission form that needs to be used. It is different from the standard submission form.
You restore for one of these reasons: (1) if you want to keep them for sentimental reasons, (2) your cost is low enough to absorb the preservation fee, subsequent grading fee if encapsulating, and enough margin to make some money at that eventual future sale event.
A Barber Quartet is made up of Nickels, Dimes, Quarters, and Halves.
.
if you haven't perused this, now is the time. i wanted to look it over myself to check for any updated language. pcgs guaranatee
The quarter has a chance, IMO. The half appears to have the typical spotting that can be found on proofs from the 50's and 60's. The spotting most likely has eaten into the metal.
You know the bad part? I am selling the remnants from my serious collecting days. I must have looked at 40 Proof Franklin singles in the last week. Some sitting open, raw in a drawer. Some in slips. Most were PR65-67 and think I have one PR68Cam. And reviewed about 200 proof sets in cello with Franklins. NONE had the detritus growing on it like the PR68DCam. Why won't that stuff attack lower grades? Only caked coins get the virus lol.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Wow... that is upsetting to find on stored coins...especially slabbed coins. IMO neither one looks like typical milk spots....That being said, I cannot offer any suggestion as to what may have caused the problem. If they were my coins, I would seriously consider restoration by PCGS....If they will not do it, then I would try the home remedy suggested above. I have doubts that they will come out without some signs of the stains remaining. Cheers, RickO
"Have two silver proofs coins that spotted or messed while in the holder. They were stored in bank safety deposit box and Intercept Shield holders." I would send along as much evidence you have with a guarantee/warranty submission as it seems that you did everything right and the coins still turned in the holder.
Paying to conserve coins (if there is no guarantee coverage) is potentially throwing good money after bad.
no matter what happens, it's realistic to presume that the coins will be re-holdered prior to selling them. the fee for conservation performed by PCGS(despite how everyone feels about their skill) would be low and the best choice. let them assess the coins and do what they can to help them.
also, since this happened in your bank SDB you might consider something different, it seems that storage might be unsafe.
I fully agree with @keets . To be clear, their evaluation fee is only $10 per coin, so besides that and round trip shipping, the cost is low to see if they'll agree to restore. If they do agree to restore, then the restoration fees are higher (and shown on their website), but if they agree not to restore, it's easily worth that total of $20 plus shipping for the potential that they could possibly restore one or both coins. Their fee to restore includes reholdering, along with their opinion of the new grade, but that should NOT be lower than the current grade.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Appreciate all the comments. I have a shipment going to PCGS for grading and reconsideration. Am going to piggyback these two coins on the shipment for restoration. Let's see if PCGS can work magic.
Responding to a reply above, the coins have no real sentimental value. They were part of my registry but got bumped along the way. So, the sentiment was displaced and is more economic now. Of the coins that I still have attachment, one went to Big Dave, one to CoinJunkie, and the rest are at Heritage.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
do the Heritage coins include any of your Proof Jefferson Nickels from the 1950's?? when I participated in the Set Registry Proof Jefferson Nickels w/major varieties I always seemed to be chasing you or admiring your set.
I've been away from that for maybe 10 years, but a quick look at your sig-line links reminded me why.
Hi Keets. Yes, my Proof Jeff with Varieties (1938-1942) are at Heritage for Long Beach auction. One is going in on a weekly and I just posted an alert on BST. I had stomach ache for a week after submitting the coins. Have some PR66 and PR67 that I am sorting now.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
I'm confused. OP said they were stored in intercept shield holders, so not slabbed by PCGS already? Obv if they're not in PCGS slabs then their guarantee wouldn't apply at all, but reading the link from @LanceNewmanOCC it sounds like even in PCGS holders they don't guarantee against any kind of environmental damage.
Successful BST transactions with: Cameonut, Rob41281
.
intercept shield holders are some type of cardboard holders that you can put slabs into for protection of the slab from scratches. not sure i see any other purpose for them. had a few and they are ok. on higher-dollar coins, they or something similar is pretty important imo as reholdering, shipping adds unnecessary risk/cost etc vs a little extra holder, no question at all.
.
.
it sounds very limiting. much more than i had thought previously.
.
.
.
@mothra454 I think the PCGS slabs are in Intercept Shield boxes (which claim to give some protection against environmental damage). That's how I read it, anyway.
Thanks to you and @LanceNewmanOCC for the answers. Now I can say I learned something new today! I checked out the intercept shield website and found some interesting stuff. It sounds like they use a copper infused material in the intercept shield that's supposed to absorb potentially corrosive gases before they can affect the coins inside. They claim that after they have absorbed a lot of gas molecules they turn from brown to jet black (I assume it's the equivalent of very dark toning on a copper coin).
OP: does your storage box have a layer of this material, and did it change color?
interceptshield.com/faqs.html
Successful BST transactions with: Cameonut, Rob41281
protection of the slab from scratches. not sure i see any other purpose for them
the Intercept Shield technology most certainly has protection from more than scratches. the Black Lining used in their product has a corrosion inhibitor, I believe it is copper, which acts as a sacrificial barrier against contaminants: the reaction takes place in the IS barrier and never reaches the coin slab. I don't use it as much as I used to but still have 2x2 flips and 2x2 boxes lined with the material. in Badgers case, what is harming the coins he pictured was almost certainly on the coins prior to encapsulation.
interceptshield.com/
I think Lighthouse Products makes the same thing now, available as before plus in sheets.
I have more hope for the Washington than the Franklin...the Franklin looks doomed to me - I totally see them as milk spots.
Sorry, just back. The coins were slabbed PCGS then placed in Intercept Shield. Held in bank's safe deposit box. Am going to check the now-empty shields for any discoloration.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Coins are back from restoration. Before and after are shown in the first comments. The Washington turned out great. Looks clean and bright in hand. Restored the value to that coin. Stands well as PR68Cam. Any defects now were there prior to restoration and were just not noticeable due to the spider webs.
The Franklin had more problems to start compared to the Washington. The marks are still observable but 95% improved. Restoration moved this coin from melt to a reasonable coin. Would not bring top value as a PR68DCam but is now saleable. Someone will want that coin for the right price. And the price will be righter than before lol. Am going to continue the challenge and send to CAC to see if it beans.
Feel free to comment on the coins as my comments are owner biased. Though would highly recommend the restoration by PCGS. Am looking at what is left of my collection for more candidates. Going to send some hazy coins which are less problematic but could still benefit.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Amazing transformation on the Washington and huge improvement on the Franklin. Congrats.
Glad you sent them in.
WS
@badger
thank you so much for posting this full circle. i only skimmed the thread again but am wondering what generation of holder those 2 coins were in. i do feel many could benefit from this information.
some of those people out there with high-end proofs (or blast-white 100+ year old coins) may want to do conservation as a hedge against possible future problems since unless each owner took the coin(s) directly from mint packaging to holder cannot guarantee there are no harmful surface contaminants. ESPECIALLY improper self-conservation jobs.
i think the most common comment i see from self-restorationers (that's a mouthful), have said to do acetone as either the next to last or the last step. perhaps some experienced members with doing acetone fairly often as next-to or last step can state whether acetone can leave harmful impurities behind that may be long-term slowly corrosive or whatnot. i'm kinda tired but you all should see what i'm aiming at.
congratz on some pretty decent results all things considered!
Well worth it. Good job!
How long did the restoration submission take with PCGS?
Latin American Collection
From receipt to shipment was 70 days for Regular Restoration. I submitted a Regular Reconsideration at the same time that was 12 days for comparison.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Thanks for the follow-up @badger. The washie looks great, and the frankie looks a lot better. Can you give some info on whether the grades are (did they change after conservation?) and what you were charged by PCGS for the restoration service?
While I can't answer your specific questions, I can state that PCGS Restoration will not lower the grade. For all coins they charge $10 to inspect if they choose to not accept the coin for Restoration. For coins valued at less than $300 accepted for Restoration, they charge a flat $28, and that includes the grading fee if the coin is raw. For coins valued over $300 that are accepted for Restoration, they charge 3% of the coins value (minimum $10). That does NOT include grading fees for raw coins.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
yes, as winesteven said. Following on, I did the Regular Restore for $35 + $5 for Gold or Trueview + $10 order charge/shipping. I had four coins total in the submission so order charge and shipping were spread. Whole order for four coins was under $200. Of course economics come into play. I considered the Wash and Franklin as non-saleable at the start. I already sold the Washie and covered the submission costs. Any more positive results are gravy.
Again, highly recommend PCGS for the restoration service. Placed the restore decisions in their hands. Can trust the experts to decide the right path depending on the coin. Very positive experience.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
I have had a SDB for many years. I have had gold in the box for years and Never had any spot issues. I also had about 10 rolls of 90% Silver Proof State Quarters in the Box & I wasnt as lucky. In my bank the safety deposit boxes are downstairs (Basement) below ground. Every roll proof Quarters has the same cruddy rusty or spotty patches on the coins. I also had rolls of BU ASE in the box and they are (as of today) fine. I think the mold in these old damp bank vaults are the reasons my proof roll look like this. Just glad it wasnt on expensive coins. 90% is still 90%.
This is JMHO,
Mike
MIKE B.
The quarter looks much better. The half dollar also looks better but is still not all there (it was very bad to begin with). I hope they don't deteriorate again over time.
Wow, that is impressive and I will not hesitate to use this service now.
@badger
Thanks for sharing the results of the conservation. I will now consider using PCGS for the few pieces I have that need it.
I can add to the discussion a little. A long time ago, when NGC was the only restoration service in town, I had some proof Franklins restored as a test. IIRC, I submitted 4 1962 Franklins with some frost - none were ultra cam. I wanted to see if the milk spots would come off. They looked very similar to the spots on your Franklin above.
Turns out my NGC test had very similar results to the PCGS result. The spots were reduced significantly, but still left a telltale mark. All graded cameo at NGC and I ultimately gave them all to a YN program.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
if it is the toned one, THANK GOODNESS it didn't get restored!
Good comment. Yes, the 1940 posted was the one bypassed for restoration. Why send a coin for restoration with that toning? I am no grading expert, but have had many high level prewar Jefferson proofs. IMHO prewar Jeffs covered with tone were not graded as highly as rim-toned proofs. Every PR68 that I have had exhibited attractive rim toning and a mostly untoned center (and/ or had some level of cameo that is tough to find in Jeffs). I had no PR68 that were fully heavy in toning. Personally, I like the heavy toning on Jeffs. Also had some great toning on mid-range Jeffs that I thought were under-graded.
So this was an experiment. I thought the underlying features of the coin might have a chance at PR68. Wanted to see if a little less tone would move it up. I don't know the actual factors or preferences of the graders. I may not have had a big enough sample size to make full judgement. LOL but at PR67+ the experiment ends. I like the coin as is. And some of my lower level toners I would never restore just to nudge a low level. Especially if I like the look of the coin.
One last thought. The 1942-P Type 2 example has silver content and is typically less/ differently toned than its cousins. The restoration did not strip it of color. There was no color to start... only haze.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties