No. Lightly circulated coins, especially gold, can show hairlines from incidental handling. The coin you have shared an image of looks to me to simply have hairlines from circulation.
Incused Indian $5 and $2.5 gold coins do not have raised rims that would provide a degree of protection to the fields so these coin types should be expected to have more hairlines after being in circulation. The OP's coin looks typical for an AU coin of this type.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
The easiest tell for determining what hairlines are from circulation versus cleaning is considering all the hairlines together. Cleaning hairlines are almost always in groups that follow the same paths (all the fibers of a cloth or particles of an abrasive being moved in the same direction). Circulation hairlines are usually scattered about and you wouldn’t see dozens parallel together in a patch.
I agree with the advice from @airplanenut above. I don’t see any patches of hairlines on this coin that would cause me any concern - but hairlines are hard to photograph. I check for hairlines by rotating the coin under a halogen light which is a harsh light source that tends to reveal every flaw. I’ve also seen coins with hairline patches straight grade - Peace dollars in particular.
@PerryHall said:
Incused Indian $5 and $2.5 gold coins do not have raised rims that would provide a degree of protection to the fields so these coin types should be expected to have more hairlines after being in circulation. The OP's coin looks typical for an AU coin of this type.
@MapsOnFire, what caused you to click on “LOL” for the accurate and informative post quoted above?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Coin Finder said:
I do agree with the comments above however this coin looks lightly cleaned In my opinion.
+1. There’s a lot of parallel hairlines and the coin looks a bit too bright, yet it has dirt in the crevices of the feathers. I suppose I might be wrong but I’m leaning towards cleaned.
Have to revise my opinion based on the reverse unfortunately. The reverse looks questionable to me, particularly from 7:00 to 11:00 in front of the eagle, particularly toward the rim. Try photographing under various lighting conditions and at different angles and maybe a few more folks can chime in.
@Riley1955.... That gold coin looks to me to have handling/circulation hairlines, not cleaning. Friction rub is easily embedded on the soft gold, and there are no rims or raised devices on incuse coins to protect the fields. Cheers, RickO
Reverse does look lightly cleaned, but probably still MA. Very subjective topic in a lot of borderline cases, especially for what I call 'rough' circulation. Lots of folks use the term 'cleaned' when the coin deserves a details grade, but just was roughly handled, and not MA.
For me, obvious cleaning usually involves straight, one-way hairlines on the coin from a wiping and usually vertical, as it is easier to move your thumb up and down vs sideways - try it. If the lines are all over, it may just be rough circulation, which I agree may not be MA.
Another telltale sign to me is slightly left over toning, gunk, etc that the cleaning did not get all off, i.e. in the eagle's reverse above.
Then there are the cleaning/wipe hairlines on very circulated coins, i.e. XF and lower. Usually the extra circulation fades out the rougher earlier circulation. AU coins, exp dollars, can have a lot of distracting circulation marks that look like cleaning when I'm not 100% sure. But if I see those hairlines on a VF, its a cleaning. JMHO.
Here's some different pics without all my not so good editing. This has been a good learning experience for myself and I appreciate all of your replies. PS these are from my cell phone. I've seen others say they use this method a lot.
The second image you posted was a little alarming, but given the additional images I still think the coin is just lightly circulated and does not show much in the evidence of being cleaned.
Bill, the most recent set of photos is a little too "digital" to ascertain grade with respect to surface preservation, I'm not sure if the photos are out of focus or if its a resolution issue, but they looks more like paintings. That being said, the lighting is not as harsh as it was in the op photos, and If they were the only photos you showed us I might not have guessed "cleaned".
@DeplorableDan said:
Bill, the most recent set of photos is a little too "digital" to ascertain grade with respect to surface preservation, I'm not sure if the photos are out of focus or if its a resolution issue, but they looks more like paintings. That being said, the lighting is not as harsh as it was in the op photos, and If they were the only photos you showed us I might not have guessed "cleaned".
There are certain lighting angles that will make almost any piece of circulated gold look like it has hairlines.
Of course, you can have both random light scratches and a nasty patch of parallel lines. It's almost impossible to evaluate well in a photograph, but pretty easy to see in-hand. Random, multi-directional light scratches are to be expected. A nasty patch of deeper, parallel lines would be more of a problem.
Riley1955
Posts: 136 ✭✭✭
Comments
No. Lightly circulated coins, especially gold, can show hairlines from incidental handling. The coin you have shared an image of looks to me to simply have hairlines from circulation.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
No, it could be due to repeated contact through circulation.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Not necessarily, but usually yes
They can be caused by other factors, think friction on any slightly abrasive surface…
Always is a bit too inclusive a word to be used here. Could have been slid across a bar. Usually may be more accurate.
I think “often” might be even more accurate.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Incused Indian $5 and $2.5 gold coins do not have raised rims that would provide a degree of protection to the fields so these coin types should be expected to have more hairlines after being in circulation. The OP's coin looks typical for an AU coin of this type.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
The easiest tell for determining what hairlines are from circulation versus cleaning is considering all the hairlines together. Cleaning hairlines are almost always in groups that follow the same paths (all the fibers of a cloth or particles of an abrasive being moved in the same direction). Circulation hairlines are usually scattered about and you wouldn’t see dozens parallel together in a patch.
I agree with the advice from @airplanenut above. I don’t see any patches of hairlines on this coin that would cause me any concern - but hairlines are hard to photograph. I check for hairlines by rotating the coin under a halogen light which is a harsh light source that tends to reveal every flaw. I’ve also seen coins with hairline patches straight grade - Peace dollars in particular.
@MapsOnFire, what caused you to click on “LOL” for the accurate and informative post quoted above?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Riley1955 can you post a picture of the reverse?
Type Collector of U.S. Pre-33 Gold https://instagram.com/deplorable_dan Successful transactions with- @drfish, @Cladiator, @johnny010, @Pedzola, @PerryHall, @2windy2fish, @Ike1964, @JohnThePainter, @rpmsrpms, @REALGATOR
Here's the reverse. And Thanks for the replies.
I do agree with the comments above however this coin looks lightly cleaned In my opinion.
+1. There’s a lot of parallel hairlines and the coin looks a bit too bright, yet it has dirt in the crevices of the feathers. I suppose I might be wrong but I’m leaning towards cleaned.
Type Collector of U.S. Pre-33 Gold https://instagram.com/deplorable_dan Successful transactions with- @drfish, @Cladiator, @johnny010, @Pedzola, @PerryHall, @2windy2fish, @Ike1964, @JohnThePainter, @rpmsrpms, @REALGATOR
Thanks for the opinions. I'm going to try for better pictures tomorrow (still struggling in that area).
Have to revise my opinion based on the reverse unfortunately. The reverse looks questionable to me, particularly from 7:00 to 11:00 in front of the eagle, particularly toward the rim. Try photographing under various lighting conditions and at different angles and maybe a few more folks can chime in.
@Riley1955.... That gold coin looks to me to have handling/circulation hairlines, not cleaning. Friction rub is easily embedded on the soft gold, and there are no rims or raised devices on incuse coins to protect the fields. Cheers, RickO
Reverse does look lightly cleaned, but probably still MA. Very subjective topic in a lot of borderline cases, especially for what I call 'rough' circulation. Lots of folks use the term 'cleaned' when the coin deserves a details grade, but just was roughly handled, and not MA.
For me, obvious cleaning usually involves straight, one-way hairlines on the coin from a wiping and usually vertical, as it is easier to move your thumb up and down vs sideways - try it. If the lines are all over, it may just be rough circulation, which I agree may not be MA.
Another telltale sign to me is slightly left over toning, gunk, etc that the cleaning did not get all off, i.e. in the eagle's reverse above.
Then there are the cleaning/wipe hairlines on very circulated coins, i.e. XF and lower. Usually the extra circulation fades out the rougher earlier circulation. AU coins, exp dollars, can have a lot of distracting circulation marks that look like cleaning when I'm not 100% sure. But if I see those hairlines on a VF, its a cleaning. JMHO.
Here's some different pics without all my not so good editing. This has been a good learning experience for myself and I appreciate all of your replies. PS these are from my cell phone. I've seen others say they use this method a lot.
ttt
The second image you posted was a little alarming, but given the additional images I still think the coin is just lightly circulated and does not show much in the evidence of being cleaned.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Bill, the most recent set of photos is a little too "digital" to ascertain grade with respect to surface preservation, I'm not sure if the photos are out of focus or if its a resolution issue, but they looks more like paintings. That being said, the lighting is not as harsh as it was in the op photos, and If they were the only photos you showed us I might not have guessed "cleaned".
Type Collector of U.S. Pre-33 Gold https://instagram.com/deplorable_dan Successful transactions with- @drfish, @Cladiator, @johnny010, @Pedzola, @PerryHall, @2windy2fish, @Ike1964, @JohnThePainter, @rpmsrpms, @REALGATOR
@TomB
Ok, I think these are the best I currently have.
Those photos look better. Cleaned or not, who knows for sure. If it was, lightly done. Still good shot at MA.
I think it's been wiped a few times in its life but I wouldn't lose sleep over it. Possible ex-jewelry piece imo
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
There are certain lighting angles that will make almost any piece of circulated gold look like it has hairlines.
Of course, you can have both random light scratches and a nasty patch of parallel lines. It's almost impossible to evaluate well in a photograph, but pretty easy to see in-hand. Random, multi-directional light scratches are to be expected. A nasty patch of deeper, parallel lines would be more of a problem.
MA?
Not the worse I've seen in a clean holder. Would need to see in hand.
I'm guessing MA is Market Acceptable.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.