Question on this coin

alaura22

I'm looking at this coin that's for sale
Here is the True View

Notice the "something" on the shoulder
Now, here is the dealers picture

That "something" is now gone
My question is, if the coin had this "something" when it photographed graded and encapsulated how did this "something" disappear
Your opinions are welcomed and appreciated
On the fence on this one
Thanks

Dynoking

That something now shows a stain. Could the photo have been touched up? What ever the cause I would continue the search.

lcutler

I can still see something there but not nearly as obvious. I'd question the dealer about it and ask for more pictures of the area. If they don't want to do it, then I'd just walk away from it.

Morgan White

It may have been sent back for conservation and reholdered.

alaura22

@Morgan White said:
It may have been sent back for conservation and reholdered.

Would it get the same cert number?

coastaljerseyguy

@Morgan White said:
It may have been sent back for conservation and reholdered.

Hopefully and not 'spot' treated/removed via software. Not worth losing business and reputation.

coinbuf

Hard pass, even if that was removed there appears to be some residual remnants of whatever it was.

BillJones

@coinbuf said:
Hard pass, even if that was removed there appears to be some residual remnants of whatever it was.

It all depends upon the grade and the price. It is only a “hard pass” if there is active corrosion or some other progressive form of deterioration.

One thing you learn about older coins. Nothing is “perfect” especially when it’s copper.

Greenstang

If you increase the size of the dealers photo, you can see a small line the same shape as on the true view photo.
Whatever was on there has been removed and left a mark.

alaura22

@Greenstang said:
If you increase the size of the dealers photo, you can see a small line the same shape as on the true view photo.
Whatever was on there has been removed and left a mark.

But, how?
The coin has the same cert number that it had when the true view was taken

may

I think its a small piece of tape, and the tape fell off either in transit for PCGS, or when the slab was banged around for whatever reason.

Mr_Spud

It almost looks like the thing on his shoulder was solid and not the normal sticky gunk that ends up on coins. Could it have simply been not adhered well and it was simply knocked off? Like a old corn chip crumb kinda thing.

coinbuf

@BillJones said:

@coinbuf said:
Hard pass, even if that was removed there appears to be some residual remnants of whatever it was.

It all depends upon the grade and the price. It is only a “hard pass” if there is active corrosion or some other progressive form of deterioration.

One thing you learn about older coins. Nothing is “perfect” especially when it’s copper.

I have been collecting copper coins for over 40 years. As a long time copper collector, I must disagree with your assertion for a common coin like this. If this was a very rare, difficult to find early large cent coin then concessions might be in order, not for this.

JBK

I have a slabbed buffalo nickel that has a tiny piece of plastic loose inside the slab.

Yours almost looks like a bit of something stuck to the coin that fell off somewhere along the way.

alaura22

@Mr_Spud said:
It almost looks like the thing on his shoulder was solid and not the normal sticky gunk that ends up on coins. Could it have simply been not adhered well and it was simply knocked off? Like a old corn chip crumb kinda thing.

Tim, if you blow up the dealer photo you can see an outline of it is still there

BillJones

@coinbuf said:

@BillJones said:

@coinbuf said:
Hard pass, even if that was removed there appears to be some residual remnants of whatever it was.

It all depends upon the grade and the price. It is only a “hard pass” if there is active corrosion or some other progressive form of deterioration.

One thing you learn about older coins. Nothing is “perfect” especially when it’s copper.

I have been collecting copper coins for over 40 years. As a long time copper collector, I must disagree with your assertion for a common coin like this. If this was a very rare, difficult to find early large cent coin then concessions might be in order, not for this.

“Rare” is a relative term. For you, a 1912-D cent is common. For other collectors, a piece with good eye appeal, like this one, it might be the “right” coin.

coinbuf

@BillJones said:

@coinbuf said:

@BillJones said:

@coinbuf said:
Hard pass, even if that was removed there appears to be some residual remnants of whatever it was.

It all depends upon the grade and the price. It is only a “hard pass” if there is active corrosion or some other progressive form of deterioration.

One thing you learn about older coins. Nothing is “perfect” especially when it’s copper.

I have been collecting copper coins for over 40 years. As a long time copper collector, I must disagree with your assertion for a common coin like this. If this was a very rare, difficult to find early large cent coin then concessions might be in order, not for this.

“Rare” is a relative term. For you, a 1912-D cent is common. For other collectors, a piece with good eye appeal, like this one, it might be the “right” coin.

Its not relative at all, there is hard data, just look at the numbers, over 10 million minted, I'm not going to look up the numbers but I'll bet there are over 10K in TPG holders in all colors and grades. Who knows how many sitting in 2X2's, folders, and albums of collectors and dealers. There is nothing eye appealing about a problem coin in my opinion, you seem to be defending this coin hard, do you know the dealer or something? I'm actually surprised that Mike is even interested in this coin knowing the quality of his copper collection.

This is getting away from the question posted so I'm out, defend this coin all you want.

alaura22

@coinbuf
Thank you for the compliment on my copper sets, it means a lot
As for this coin, I do like the looks of it as a MS-64BN, I just don't like the "something" that was/is there

PeakRarities

PCGS is not the most scrupulous these days when it comes to trueviews and cert numbers being accurate, especially with conservation. There's a substantial possibility that the after conservation TV was not good, and the dealer used this one instead....OR it was a simple oversight. But it does look like it was removed though, I do not see signs of editing.

gumby1234

It looks like a spot of pvc to me. It could have been conserved. Yes it can retain the same cert number. I had a spot removed from a Roosevelt dime and it kept the same cert number.

Typekat

I’m seeing a really nice coin, but with a corrosion spot on Lincoln’s chin.
However, the remaining nano-stain on the shoulder would never be noticed if we hadn’t seen the “before” picture.

OAKSTAR

It looks like some type of glue. Could it have fallen off?

TomB

Sometimes (read; often enough) PCGS uses compressed air or something similar to blow off or "clean up" coins submitted for certification. Sometimes the stuff they remove will leave a telltale sign. Other times, it does not. They do this even without the submitter asking for it. So, it may have been that this coin was submitted with crud adhered to the obverse that PCGS then blew away after the coin was imaged and then it was encapsulated without the crud.

They did this to an exquisitely original RE half dollar of mine and returned to me a coin that was missing its original gunk. I inquired and they admitted they did it without asking and also offered to pay me full market value for the coin.

robec

The seller could have used Photoshop to eliminate the spot fairly easy.

alaura22

@Typekat said:
I’m seeing a really nice coin, but with a corrosion spot on Lincoln’s chin.

I'm not seeing that

alaura22

@robec said:
The seller could have used Photoshop to eliminate the spot fairly easy.

I hope that is not the case

davewesen

I could be some plastic from previous crackout that jostled loose and is floating around in slab somewhere

AUandAG

Whatever it was we will never know. I think that it was debris that fell on to the coin during the TV shoot. Then fell off before encapsulation.
WAG

bob

TomB

Another realistic possibility is that the coin was certified with a glob of glue or some other crud adhered to the surface and the coin was imaged at that time. Later, the coin was submitted for conservation and the crud was carefully removed, but a new image was not taken. This would yield the same cert number with only a single image, yet the PCGS image would show the crud and the dealer in-slab image would not show the crud.

This is a realistic scenario.

I don't think the image was edited by the dealer and I don't think the material removed precludes it from being a very nice coin. Quite simply, itt had schmutz on it and now it doesn't, and we would never know otherwise if the PCGS image didn't show it.

winesteven

I was about to say what @TomB just concluded above:

1. EVERY time a coin undergoes Restoration, it absolutely gets a new cert number, despite desperate pleas to keep the original cert number.
2. Our theory is that this coin originally had a cert number different from the one you now see, and that coin had the crud on the shoulder, and a TV photo was taken.
3. The coin then underwent Restoration, the piece of crud was removed, and it left that underlying trace. A new cert number was issued, which is the cert number you now see. For some unexplained reason, the TV photo used for the new cert number is the same photo as the original, not a newer photo.

I think the advice given at the very top of the thread is excellent! Contact the seller, and ask for an explanation, with them having the coin in hand. Hopefully you can arrange for a return privilege due to this legitimate concern. If indeed the crud is now gone, and you keep the coin, I suggest incurring the expense of getting a new TV at PCGS, so when the time comes that you or your heirs sell the coin, potential buyers won’t be turned off! Depending on the facts and circumstances, maybe PCGS will even do this for free if they have some involvement with using an older photo for a coin they Restored.

Good luck, and let us know the outcome.

Steve

1madman

The rim ding would annoy me more than the disappearing debris

Typekat

@alaura22 said:

@Typekat said:
I’m seeing a really nice coin, but with a corrosion spot on Lincoln’s chin.

I'm not seeing that

The white fuzzy spot on the tip of his chin shows up in both photos. It’s not huge,but not nano.

Morgan13

@TomB said:
Sometimes (read; often enough) PCGS uses compressed air or something similar to blow off or "clean up" coins submitted for certification. Sometimes the stuff they remove will leave a telltale sign. Other times, it does not. They do this even without the submitter asking for it. So, it may have been that this coin was submitted with crud adhered to the obverse that PCGS then blew away after the coin was imaged and then it was encapsulated without the crud.

They did this to an exquisitely original RE half dollar of mine and returned to me a coin that was missing its original gunk. I inquired and they admitted they did it without asking and also offered to pay me full market value for the coin.

Imagine if they blew a rare coin right across the room.
Yikes!!!

jmlanzaf

@Morgan13 said:

@TomB said:
Sometimes (read; often enough) PCGS uses compressed air or something similar to blow off or "clean up" coins submitted for certification. Sometimes the stuff they remove will leave a telltale sign. Other times, it does not. They do this even without the submitter asking for it. So, it may have been that this coin was submitted with crud adhered to the obverse that PCGS then blew away after the coin was imaged and then it was encapsulated without the crud.

They did this to an exquisitely original RE half dollar of mine and returned to me a coin that was missing its original gunk. I inquired and they admitted they did it without asking and also offered to pay me full market value for the coin.

Imagine if they blew a rare coin right across the room.
Yikes!!!

You mean like @FredWeinberg spilling a Stella into the garbage?

BillJones

@coinbuf said:

@BillJones said:

@coinbuf said:

@BillJones said:

@coinbuf said:
Hard pass, even if that was removed there appears to be some residual remnants of whatever it was.

It all depends upon the grade and the price. It is only a “hard pass” if there is active corrosion or some other progressive form of deterioration.

One thing you learn about older coins. Nothing is “perfect” especially when it’s copper.

I have been collecting copper coins for over 40 years. As a long time copper collector, I must disagree with your assertion for a common coin like this. If this was a very rare, difficult to find early large cent coin then concessions might be in order, not for this.

“Rare” is a relative term. For you, a 1912-D cent is common. For other collectors, a piece with good eye appeal, like this one, it might be the “right” coin.

Its not relative at all, there is hard data, just look at the numbers, over 10 million minted, I'm not going to look up the numbers but I'll bet there are over 10K in TPG holders in all colors and grades. Who knows how many sitting in 2X2's, folders, and albums of collectors and dealers. There is nothing eye appealing about a problem coin in my opinion, you seem to be defending this coin hard, do you know the dealer or something? I'm actually surprised that Mike is even interested in this coin knowing the quality of his copper collection.

This is getting away from the question posted so I'm out, defend this coin all you want.

When you reach a certain level as a collector or student of numismatics, it becomes easy to look down your nose at those who you think are below you. Years ago, some EAC collectors denigrated those who collect “walkers, Morgans and commems.” I’ve tried to avoid that. I have some of those coins in my collection along with early copper and many other “rarer” items.

The one exception for me is modern counterfeits. Please don’t buy those. It is feeding the beast.

coinbuf

@alaura22 said:
@coinbuf
Thank you for the compliment on my copper sets, it means a lot
As for this coin, I do like the looks of it as a MS-64BN, I just don't like the "something" that was/is there

To get to the meat of your question I think the coin was spot treated to remove whatever was there. If you notice in the TV the area under and around Liberty appears darker than the dealer photo. Now this could be due to different lighting and camera equipment, but I get the feeling from studying the photos that the coin was worked on. That is why I said a hard pass for me, it has nothing to do with degenerating anyone. Simply that there are questions and issues with this coin that bother me enough to keep looking. And I would not fault the collector that buys this coin, at first blush it is a very attractive coin and will find a collector who will enjoy the coin.

When you reach a certain level as a collector or student of numismatics you want to avoid mistakes, that is not looking down your nose at anyone. Rather using your experience to your advantage just as you did here. Not every collector would do more research and look for photos other than the sellers, kudos to you.

braddick

Is there ever a time when a TrueView is shot before the coin is graded? If not, my theory doesn't hold up, yet if so- maybe the coin was slightly 'conserved' after the photography and upon entering the grading room.

alaura22

Thanks for all the suggestions and comments. I have decided to pass on this coin, too many issues and problems I'd rather not have to deal with.
Once you see it it's hard to not see it.
It might take me awhile to find another one but I'll keep searching for the right coin

Cougar1978

I believe the problem was removed (hobby knife?). Was the coin sent in - what is its grade on the holder? Or is it raw. It’s certainly improved / he did a good job.

jmlanzaf

@Cougar1978 said:
I believe the problem was removed (hobby knife?). Was the coin sent in - what is its grade on the holder? Or is it raw. It’s certainly improved / he did a good job.

You really can't tell? You have a True View and a picture in a slab.

Cougar1978

So what is its slab grade now. Irregardless that had to come off. What is the certificate number? It would have needed to be cracked to get that off. Show the slab!

Cougar1978

@jmlanzaf said:

@Cougar1978 said:
I believe the problem was removed (hobby knife?). Was the coin sent in - what is its grade on the holder? Or is it raw. It’s certainly improved / he did a good job.

You really can't tell? You have a True View and a picture in a slab.

I don’t think you understood my question - What is the grade on the original holder, cert number. What is the grade on the new holder and its certificate number. Or did the dealer just play games with photo? The original slab would have been cracked to get the crud off.

jmlanzaf

@Cougar1978 said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@Cougar1978 said:
I believe the problem was removed (hobby knife?). Was the coin sent in - what is its grade on the holder? Or is it raw. It’s certainly improved / he did a good job.

You really can't tell? You have a True View and a picture in a slab.

I don’t think you understood my question - What is the grade on the original holder, cert number. What is the grade on the new holder and its certificate number.

I don't think you understood your question.

"Was the coin sent in... Or is it raw. " yes, you also asked for the grade on the holder... after you asked if it was in a holder.

Cougar1978

Irregardless the original slab would have had to be ctacked to get the crud off imo.

jmlanzaf

@Cougar1978 said:
Irregardless the original slab would have had to be ctacked to get the crud off imo.

Or the TV was taken before it was encapsulated.