I sent in a Washington Quarter.

Type2

I sent in a Washington Quarter for a reholder to put a type-B verity on the cert. Well when looking at it I see that a spot of toning is missing in the new true view. It's right in front of Washington eyes. Did someone sneeze on it and Q-tipe it off? I have seen toning go on a coin after time when at grading but not come off in less some one mess with it. I don't know why but there it is.

1st pic is when I first sent it in and forgot to check the box for the verity.

New 2nd pic with the verity.

The coin was only at PCGS for two or three weeks.

SanctionII

Most likely a drop of some sort of liquid dropped onto the coin and was thereafter removed. Whatever was in the drop of liquid caused what you see in the after photo.

OAKSTAR

66+ is still a great looking coin! 👍🏻

yspsales

Two different lighting angles.

You can see at spot you mentioned and at the base of the ponytail. A couple of die scratches changed as well.

bsshog40

I would say lighting also. The contact marks on the cheek look different from original to new one also.

PeakRarities

@yspsales said:
Two different lighting angles.

You can see at spot you mentioned and at the base of the ponytail. A couple of die scratches changed as well.

I think that op is referring to the spot on the bridge of his nose. That’s not a lighting issue, something happened there.

yspsales

@DeplorableDan said:

@yspsales said:
Two different lighting angles.

You can see at spot you mentioned and at the base of the ponytail. A couple of die scratches changed as well.

I think that op is referring to the spot on the bridge of his nose. That’s not a lighting issue, something happened there.

I see what you are saying, but the angles are different on the reverse.

You can see the progression of color is slightly different as well.

That higher little flare is colored and present.

Photo is latin for the bending of light. A different exposure producing more light and/or different angle gave it the lighted edges inside the rims. It will affect other areas as well.

I shot half million wedding images, so that is my semi-pro opinion.

Coins may be the toughest things in the world to photograph.

PeakRarities

@yspsales

I know lighting does some crazy things, but Im not seeing how lighting can do this. We can respectfully disagree and still be friends

LanceNewmanOCC

the beautiful thing is, once it is back in-hand, we'll have a definitive answer but imo, the coin was altered somehow.

i've put a lot of toners under water and NEVER had the toning affected so i'm wondering if that is a splash of hand sanitizer or something similar.

anyone have a toner they want to test some sanitizers? i have like 10 different kinds around here and will look for a toner i'm willing to nuke and post results if i see any change.

while it is best to be careful, i do KNOW that people are still getting sick AND dying from c19 so considering the TPGs are handling huge volumes of stuff that can and most likely is carrying a variety of crap, i don't blame em too much if that is what happened here but MAY require a lil customer service to smooth over.

seems they've really picked up turn around times too. fwiw

yspsales

Look at the die polish lines.

One dark, one light

Also in the blowups, look at the difference in color in front of the nose near the edge of the image.

Not unlike going under water and the deeper you get, you lose color.

These angles will affect the color.

It seems dramatic to me as well, but it is what it is... just my opinion.

PeakRarities

@yspsales said:
Look at the die polish lines.

One dark, one light

Also in the blowups, look at the difference in color in front of the nose near the edge of the image.

Not unlike going under water and the deeper you get, you lose color.

These angles will affect the color.

It seems dramatic to me as well, but it is what it is... just my opinion.

Did polish lines? - Sure, they appear different.

Difference in color in the splotches in front of nose? Sure there is a difference in color. However the splotches are visible and consistent in both photos.

Nose bridge perfectly circular untoned spot that is unrecognizable in any way in the original photo? Not the snowballest chance that was caused by lighting.

PeakRarities

I tend to agree with @LanceNewmanOCC that the most likely culprit would be hand sanitizer, IF someone can attest to its effect on toning.

Steven59

Yeah,that spot looks pretty clean now.

yspsales

Compare the progression of color just below the spot.

The over exposed image is missing color.

If I am wrong, I will eat green beans on Thanksgiving.

Have only eaten them once in my life and puked in front of my brothers girlfriend at age 8

SanctionII

I had a proof Lincoln cent that ended up having a drop of Visine fall on it. I quickly washed the Visine off, but the damage was done. A spot just like the one shown on the Washington Quarter appeared.

coinbuf

I think an attempt to remove a small bit of PVC/gunk, seems to be there in the before photos.

Type2

Thanks all. That's what it looks like to me as well.. looks like there was two small Virgil but I never ask to remove them. Oh well I'll see if they do anything for it. Thanks all have a safe and happy Thanksgiving all.

Cladiator

For some reason when I saw the title of the thread I thought the first post might be, "...and all I got was this lousy t-shirt" LOL

MedalCollector

Also some new spots in the latest photo. Strange!

Before

After

Meltdown

It's a mystery for sure but hard to deny something happened while at PCGS. I would be pretty upset if that was my coin.

ricko

Interesting discussion. I certainly agree that lighting can play tricks on images. However, that certainly appears to be a distinct removal of tarnish in that spot. Cheers, RickO

TomB

In my opinion there are two issues here.

The first is simply the angle and intensity of the lighting used for image production. This leads to us seeing spots, die polish and die cracks in one image and not necessarily in the other image. It is more pronounced around the rims of the coin since the lighting is coming from the sides and/or the slight upward flow of the rims can cause low shadows. The spots seen around 4 and 5 o'clock near the obverse rim in the second image are there in the first image, as well, but the lighting angle makes them sit in deep shadows. Similarly, the first image shows a strong die line through RTY of LIBERTY along with some other disturbance in and around the BE of LIBERTY while the second does not. This is because of that same angle change for the lights.

However, I believe something happened to the coin while in the possession of PCGS. I don't see how the prominent spot immediately in front of Washington's eye, traversing the bridge of his nose and ending in front of this face can be an artifact of lighting angle. If I shift the color balance of the first image so that Washington's cheek is nearly the same shade of white as in the second image then the spots still do not show up. Additionally, there are two spots that appear behind Washington's portrait that are a little surprising, as well. The circle closest to the Y of LIBERTY has two spots in it in both images, but the second image shows the lower, rightmost spot appear to grow in relation to the other spot in the circle. This might be lighting, but it doesn't feel like it. The circle beneath that shows another spot that appears in the second image, but is not there in the first image. Again, I am not sold that it couldn't be in the first image, but it doesn't feel like it is there. Finally, on the reverse on the eagle's wing directly beneath the N of UNITED there is an area that looks quite a bit less toned in the second image than the first. This, too, might be lighting, but I don't think so.

My opinion, which that is all it is (opinion) is that something happened to the coin while in the possession of PCGS. Even though the angle of lighting has changed, the white balance is a hair different and the intensity of the lights (exposure) looks to be a tiny bit different, as well, my experience in shooting many thousands of toned coins under various lighting conditions makes me look at these before and after images and think "hmmmmm...".

In both images below the second TV is on the left (with circles drawn on it) and the first TV is on the right-

yspsales

Can someone do an overlay?

That little flag above the spot on the bridge of the nose is masked by color in the other image... IMHO

davewesen

I wonder if they felt that could have been PVC?

I am sure you already know the 66+
went from a pop 70 with 482 higher price guide $45
to type B pop 5 with 2 higher price guide $550

MFeld

Could the area at the bridge of the nose be something on or inside the holder?

TomB

@MFeld said:
Could the area in question at the bridge of the nose be something on or inside the holder?

The images in this thread are PCGS True Views, so the coin would have been raw during the image acquisition.

RLSnapper

I had an experience with a regrade where a tiny spot of corrosion was removed from the reverse of an 1855 Large Cent. The coin is MS65 and the conservation improved the coin. There is a barely noticeable toning spot now. I never asked for the conservation to be done and did not pay for it.
For your coin it looks like someone was trying to help and it turned out badly. I would ask customer service what can be done. Tough break.

MFeld

@TomB said:

@MFeld said:
Could the area in question at the bridge of the nose be something on or inside the holder?

The images in this thread are PCGS True Views, so the coin would have been raw during the image acquisition.

I’ll take that as “No way.” 😉

Thanks!

FlyingAl

@TomB said:

@MFeld said:
Could the area in question at the bridge of the nose be something on or inside the holder?

The images in this thread are PCGS True Views, so the coin would have been raw during the image acquisition.

Edit: Incorrect info.

I also agree that something happened at PCGS. I've never seen color disappear like that spot on Washington's nose based on lighting.

TomB

@FlyingAl said:

@TomB said:

@MFeld said:
Could the area in question at the bridge of the nose be something on or inside the holder?

The images in this thread are PCGS True Views, so the coin would have been raw during the image acquisition.

This is usually true, but not recently. I believe PCGS has stated that TrueViews are now sometimes taken after encapsulation. Here's a TrueView of a coin I sent recently where you can see the slab glare (left obverse):

I also agree that something happened at PCGS. I've never seen color disappear like that spot on Washington's nose based on lighting.

If that coin is already newly encapsulated then where are the prongs? I would think they should be visible.

FlyingAl

@TomB said:

@FlyingAl said:

@TomB said:

@MFeld said:
Could the area in question at the bridge of the nose be something on or inside the holder?

The images in this thread are PCGS True Views, so the coin would have been raw during the image acquisition.

This is usually true, but not recently. I believe PCGS has stated that TrueViews are now sometimes taken after encapsulation. Here's a TrueView of a coin I sent recently where you can see the slab glare (left obverse):

I also agree that something happened at PCGS. I've never seen color disappear like that spot on Washington's nose based on lighting.

If that coin is already newly encapsulated then where are the prongs? I would think they should be visible.

Fair question. It was a reholder, so it could have been taken in the old slab, but you'd expect to see the old ring gasket. Now that I really look, I can't explain that glare.

TomB

That glare is just bad lighting by PCGS.

FlyingAl

@TomB said:
That glare is just bad lighting by PCGS.

I have edited my post.

PeakRarities

So are we all in agreement that @yspsales is eating the green beans tomorrow?

PCGSPhoto

@TomB said:

@FlyingAl said:

@TomB said:

@MFeld said:
Could the area in question at the bridge of the nose be something on or inside the holder?

The images in this thread are PCGS True Views, so the coin would have been raw during the image acquisition.

This is usually true, but not recently. I believe PCGS has stated that TrueViews are now sometimes taken after encapsulation. Here's a TrueView of a coin I sent recently where you can see the slab glare (left obverse):

I also agree that something happened at PCGS. I've never seen color disappear like that spot on Washington's nose based on lighting.

If that coin is already newly encapsulated then where are the prongs? I would think they should be visible.

RE: The Buffalo Nickel. It was shot out of the holder. An editor was careless in assembling the image - there was something obstructing the lens of the first obverse shot. This correction will be online soon. -Phil

batumi

@LanceNewmanOCC said:
the beautiful thing is, once it is back in-hand, we'll have a definitive answer but imo, the coin was altered somehow.

i've put a lot of toners under water and NEVER had the toning affected so i'm wondering if that is a splash of hand sanitizer or something similar.

anyone have a toner they want to test some sanitizers? i have like 10 different kinds around here and will look for a toner i'm willing to nuke and post results if i see any change.

while it is best to be careful, i do KNOW that people are still getting sick AND dying from c19 so considering the TPGs are handling huge volumes of stuff that can and most likely is carrying a variety of crap, i don't blame em too much if that is what happened here but MAY require a lil customer service to smooth over.

seems they've really picked up turn around times too. fwiw

Whatever, if anything was applied to the OP's coin, I would be grateful to be rid of that patch of discoloration on a very attractive piece.

LanceNewmanOCC

@Type2 said:

JoeLewis

Any follow up on this?