What is the difference between a coin doctor and a coin conserver ?
STEWARTBLAYNUMIS
Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
The term coin conserver is relatively new.Ten years ago anyone that doodled with coins was called a coin doctor.
My knowledge with coin doctors was that they were always extremely secretive and most of the time noone with whom I did business.I discovered ancient coin dealers always had to fix many coins.Dealers who delt with early Federal issues used terms like
" I'm sending the coin to the body and fender shop" and then there was always the BEST spot remover in the business.There were also the guys who left the coins by their windows to tone after they were dipped.We all knew of putting coins in those little brown envelopes to get "color".Or putting coins in those old Wayte Raymond boards to get concentric toning
Heck,the Canadian mint use to spray lacquer on most or all of their proof sets
Indeed,Rick Montgomery has his work cut out for him
Let's hear some stories !!!
Stewart
My knowledge with coin doctors was that they were always extremely secretive and most of the time noone with whom I did business.I discovered ancient coin dealers always had to fix many coins.Dealers who delt with early Federal issues used terms like
" I'm sending the coin to the body and fender shop" and then there was always the BEST spot remover in the business.There were also the guys who left the coins by their windows to tone after they were dipped.We all knew of putting coins in those little brown envelopes to get "color".Or putting coins in those old Wayte Raymond boards to get concentric toning
Heck,the Canadian mint use to spray lacquer on most or all of their proof sets
Indeed,Rick Montgomery has his work cut out for him
Let's hear some stories !!!
Stewart
0
Comments
</FONT>
5% of the coins value to examine the coin and an additional 5% to fix it.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
How does Professional Numismatic Conservation differ from restoration and "Coin Doctoring"?
Numismatic conservation involves examination, scientific analysis, and reliance upon an extensive base of numismatic knowledge to determine the nature of a coin’s state of preservation and the extent of any damage. Conservation also encompasses appropriate procedures to protect the coin’s original appearance and to guard against future deterioration to whatever extent possible.
Professional conservation should not be confused with "Coin Doctoring", in which an attempt is made to improve the appearance and grade of a coin through deceptive means such as artificial toning and where unaccepted or unorthodox methods are employed. Also not qualifying as conservation is restoration where mechanical repairs are made such as filling holes, smoothing out scratches, and re-engraving of detail.
Don,
Ask me what I think about intercept shield holders.I own an 1807 large cent that is full red.Pcgs graded it ms 66 red and it was never stored in an intercept shield
Ask me what I think about false breasts.I like em "real"
Are coin conservators licensed ? Do you go to the better business bureau with your complaints ? How about the ANA ? After all the ANA got bribed (paid off) to endorse NCS
Dave Camire is a very personable man.He is in charge of NCS.He is an expert with die varieties as well as errors.That is the reason he began working for NGC
Every coin doctor or coin conservator I've met or heard about has screwed up coins GOOD LUCK
You get four stars **** Bear
Camelot
I appreciate your honest comments. Can I ask you one more question? Do you know of any good process for problem coins, or are they really not worth bothering with?
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
the key is to get it in a higher holder and/or with a helpful designation on the holder after the hospital visit then the end user is happy.............lol
i mean this has gone on as long as theer have been coins and will never EVER CHANGE!
LOL
sincerely michael
remember the market is only giving it what the end user wishes.....lol nothing wrong with that!
just remember this
be careful what you wish for you might get it.....lol right up your wazoo....lol
But if PCGS were to start its own service? With a similar "wink" of "don't worry, we'll get it through the service, especially with a grade guarantee?" It would be a whole new ball game, and we could well see an influx of more eye appealing (generally) coins, and the next ramification would be upward grade and pop creep.
A lot to think about here.
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
I have to admit I'm ultra-aware about pre-NCS "conservation" methods, to the point of distraction sometimes. A forum member linked this unusual looking proof and rather than enjoy it, all I can do is wonder if it was once this coin with the same toning behind the ear on the upper neck. To me the worst thing about full scale doctoring isn't the coins themselves, but the suspicion it creates about unusual looking original coins. I would think a curator's work, on the other hand, would be very subtle and leave little doubt about a coin's lineage.
I'll drink to that!
LSCC#1864
Ebay Stuff
LSCC#1864
Ebay Stuff
This shouldn't boil down to a NGC vs PCGS question. I would imagine a large number of copper coins that have been conserved will be in PCGS slabs, given their guarantee. Does PCGS slabbed conserved coins, of course they do.
These coins were hauled off the sea floor, conserved and slabbed.
Good point IrishMike, how soon we(I) forget. Mark
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
that the preservation of coins , especially superb examples, is the prime concern. It would seem better to
have a competent company use the latest scientific techniques,
rather then some of the chop shop Mechanics we have seen operate.
As long as the coin is returned only to its origonal
state, and not enhanced by artificial means I see no real problems.
As for abuse, the potential is always
with us and as always ,will take vigilance among collectors and reputable dealers and national associations
to control it. Bear
Camelot
You certainly get the award for comparative references. You posted several of these and they are always interesting. I would be stunned to know someone could take that brown reverse and bring back that much of a mirrored finish. Also, what's up with the denticles at 3:00 on the Heritage coin? It looks like 2 of them are missing or corroded. Must be the scan because I don't think it would grade 65 with that kind of damage. But if it's real, it would rule out that these two are the same coin. Thoughts?
NOTE: No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Type collector since 1981
Current focus 1855 date type set
Who on this board feels "DIPPED" should be put on a holder ?
Can you imagine instead of seeing Eliasberg or Norweb on the holder,it said dipped or dipped Eliasberg.I bet that kind of coin would sell for a premium !!!!
Nic - As you stated PCGS has its own service.Its just not for hire.Heritage and most all coin companys do their secret work
Dipping is stripping.It removes haze and changes the color of a coin
As for copper the EAC guys have been at it for longer than anyone is alive.Sheldon would "WAX" coins.Eac guys brush their coppers with a camel hair brush.Brushing a coin will always eventually remove all the red color from a copper coin.That is why they collect brown coins
Big D 5 - Can you tell me how NCS can conserve a coin and still leave original surfaces intact ?
Bear - A coin can't be returned to its original state
Irish Mike - The SS Central America gold was conserved.Most of the coins original "SKIN" was stripped.I agree PCGS was guilty....Because Collectors Universe was a principal in the deal.Do you think those coins are a good investment or rare ?
BNE - I agree you you that false breasts can be seductive !!!!!!
Can we agree that they also need constant conservation ?
I still like em "REAL" and not TOOOOO big
Stewart
i for one have never seen the Sistine Chapel nor have i used NCS. i'm a slow study, so i watch and learn before i move. as BNE stated above, coins which were once passed over by me are now given a bit of extra thought as a result of some advances in numismatics. that's a good thing. i have some coins right now that are waiting for a trip to NCS; it's just a matter of time. and i FIRMLY beleive it's just a matter of time before PCGS offers a similar service and the hobby in general embraces conservation as the boon to collecting that i feel it surely will become.
why is everyone afraid of it?
al h.
We may find acceptable "curating" the environmentally-induced masking of original surfaces: hazing on proofs, unattractive toning, smoke damage, PVC spots, carbon spots and the like. Most of our "dipping" falls into the category, and most of us are untroubled by a lightly-dipped coin.
Unacceptable are efforts through "doctoring" to deceive as to the original surfaces: enhancing details, artificially-induced luster, AT, removing or filling scratches, holes and gouges (only mimicking original surfaces). Even some of this work done with early issues some people find acceptable, if the work is honestly documented.
I expect elaborations and other perspectives. Good thread!
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
I've had them do work and I think they do a good job. Some people seem to think that NCS working on a coin is bad. Consider this, I sent them a coin which had some waxy substance on it. The coin would never get into a slab with this on it. I purchased it at a good price partly because of this. NCS removed the substance. The coin was submitted to PCGS and they slabbed it and very near the top of the pops. Without NCS this coin is a problem coin and off the market. I would dare anyone to find anything wrong with this coin. Without conservation this coin could been damaged further thanks to the substance.
I like NCS (I'm quoted in one of their advertisements). I've seen many coins they have worked on and none were miracles (MS63RB -> MS65RD). It just doesn't happen. However, the coins still looked original. They looked as original as blast white Morgans, which we all know have been dipped.
Curating a coin doesn't mean you are looking for an upgrade when slabbed. The last coin I had them do I was informed before they did the work that it would not maintain its current grade. The coin would lose about 75% of its value (not much in dollar terms) if this happened. I still had them do the work. It made the coin look better even at a lower grade.
Great point. I thought about this as well. Irreplacable works of art are restored, and this isn't limited to just removing built up gunk. Colors are touched up. New materials added. The Old Glory flag in DC is undergoing a multi-year preservation job. But many of these items are unique. You can't make a comparative value judgement like you can to coins with hundreds of extant specimans. I hope we don't go so far as to add materials, but should a light touch up be considered sinful?
Stewart - Interesting thought about labelling the holder but in the end it creates another set of issues. If a coin has been conserved, perhaps it should be noted. The collector can then make an educated decision whether they want an exquisitely beautiful coin that has been through a conservation process or something with less eye appeal that is original. The market would determine the value. The breakdown in this logic is that there are hundreds of thousands of coins out there that have already been messed with. And to the extent the market values original over conserved, someone will always be trying to work the system in hopes that their "conservation" efforts will go undetected. So in the final analysis, unless there is a 99.9% accurate method to determine conservation, we're left with the ambiguous situation we have today. Which includes some fantastically toned AT coins in certified holders.
NOTE: No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Type collector since 1981
Current focus 1855 date type set
i don't advocate any enhancement to any coins. i think dpoole stated it very well as to what the general community finds acceptable/unacceptable. most of what is currently being scrutinized at NCS has been done behind closed doors for longer than most of us realize. they just happen to be out in the open with it and our heads need to come outa the sand!!!
i was weened on the fact that a coin is never-ever-under-any-circumstances cleaned. i understand that not to be a sound statement today. heck, even when that was the mantra in my formative years in the early 60's it was taking place!!!
al h.
Greg - You're very sharp !!! You bought the coin on the basis of what it could become......and it became
I go to coin auctions all the time and always have to bid against dealers who bid according to what the coin COULD grade.These guys hate me as I'm a "COLLECTOR" and I don't get along with them as they do everything to make me pay.
Since noone has mentioned gold,Is anyone aware of how jewelers can use lasers to remove hairlines that can't be detected without the use of a powerful loop or a microscope.
And the most widely collectable "Morgan Dollars"
Look at the prices of "original common date Morgan Dollars" vs dipped B.S. Morgans
More stories as we're on a roll
Stewart
LSCC#1864
Ebay Stuff
The most blatant cases of copper doctoring involve retoning from RB to RD, something NCS states is beyond their limits. From what I've seen so far on copper, NCS has mostly just removed gunk from coins whose originality was becoming not worth preserving. Coin doctors have much higher aspirations, like this example.
I don't buy the argument that it should NOT be disclosed because so many coins are already in the marketplace that have been dipped or otherwise conserved with no notation of the conserving on the slab. Selling a coin without disclosing alterations to the surfaces violates the ANA bylaws (yea Greg I know, who cares about the ANA bylaws
I'm not saying all conservation is bad although we may have a difference of opinion regarding which coins would benefit from conservation. I like toned coins where others only like blast white. To each his own. I do believe that a person buying a coin that has been intentional subjected to a chemical or mechanical process to alter its appearance has a right to that knowledge and believe the seller has a responsibility to disclose the details of the process.
Dipping is not considered altering. Yes I know it changes the surface ever so slightly, but the industry doesn't consider it altering. You and I may disagree, but until the industry changes its view, dipping will never be considered altering.
I disagree with the industry in general regarding dipping but I also understand the industry reality that it has become an "accepted" practice. That said I don't want to see that mentality extended to conservation in general. And if the industry is really so accepting of dipping and other forms of conservation then making a notation on the slab label regarding what has been done to conserve the coin should not have a major impact on the marketability of a coin that has been conserved.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
For example the conserver removes pvc and other damaging stuff putting the coin back to near it's original condition while the doctor fixes & removes marks or adds toning, frost, or PL qualities making the coin something it's not just to sell it for more $$$$.
prevent out gassing) but never a coin. But I don't expect that it would do any damage with a short exposure.
A long exposure given the nature of how these work would probably cause microdamage to the coin. But I'm
just speculating, has anyone actually done any research on this?
obligatory original thread content - The difference between a coin doctor and a conserver is:
1) Spelling
2) A slabbing company has wrapped a cloak of respectability around coin doctoring. Would you think it was
acceptable if it hadn't been done by a grading company?
Scott M
Everything is linear if plotted log-log with a fat magic marker
link 1
link 2keets used my same example of the sistine chapel, so some of you may have already read those old threads.
bottom line is, cleaning methods don't change, but what "professionals" call it does. the following are all examples of cleaning:
dipping, brushing, polishing, whizzing, removing haze, removing fingerprints, removing spots, lightening dark toning, wiping, water and detergent, sonic vibration, laser treatment
. . . . and the list goes on and on. no matter what someone calls it (usually in order to justify a reason for charging $), it is cleaning. the REAL question is: does a collector accept it or not as valid. unfortunately, the people who are making this decision just coincidentally happen to be the ones making money from performing such "service".
funny how that works.
K S
The Fairly Tell would have us believe others are responsible for "full disclosure" of a coin's curration/doctoring (yes, they are in many ways one in the same).
They're not. Pretend we live in a world where every coin is enhanced and then educate yourself on what to look for and at. THEN you're on your way to successfully enjoying this hobby without getting burned (most of the time).
peacockcoins
First, there is only one Sistine Chapel. If you want to see the Sistine Chapel you've only got one choice. Arguments about whether it has been conserved don't really have much meaning since you don't have a choice of another Sistine Chapel to view. On the other hand there are numerous coins that are in their present state (either toned or blast white) due to happenstance or intentional munipulation (doctoring or conserving). If coins that have been conserved/doctored were labeled as such you would have a choice of purchasing a coin that is either in its present state through happenstance or one that has been conserved.
The other difference is in having a knowledge of the history of the chapel or coin. What was done to Sistine Chapel was well publicized. When you look at the Sistine Chapel you know what you're looking at, a very close facsimile of MA's work but not the original work. Since there is only one Sistine Chapel that's the best view available to you. I think the companies that are conserving coins should identify the fact that the coin has been worked on. I think some collectors have a higher appreciation of a coin that has arrived in its present state (either toned or blast white) as a matter of happenstance over coins that have been intentionally subjected to some type of chemical or mechanical process to improve their appearance. Another reason it's important to have that knowledge is making a judgment about the add risk that the appearance of the coin may change as a byproduct of the conservation process. Has anyone here every had a slabbed coin go bad on them because of some prior attempt at conservation? If a coin has been conserved and develops a problem down the road who is responsible for address the problem?
I know and respect Brian Silliman at NCS. I have no doubts about the ability of those working at NCS to do a first class job. BUT IMHO more knowledge is better and my preference would be to know as much about the history of a coin I'm buying as possible.
Some will argue "PMH, how much of the history of the coins in your collection do you really know?" Some more than others but that is really a none issue. Since we now have companies like NCS selling this type of service why not provide this part of the coins history to the potential customers. If conservation is as widely accepted as many propose then this added knowledge should not have a major impact on the market pricing of a particular coin.
perhaps a better example would be the restoration of antique automobiles. nobody would argue that a restored '53 corvette is more desirable, valuable and useful than one preserved in its original condition, with the motor burned out, dents in the fiberglass and smashed windows, etc., would they? yet the car, when "curated" or "conserved" is no longer original, just more valuable.
on the other hand, how much of the "history" of such a car would you REALLY care about when you bought it? i expect most of us wouldn't care a whole lot what was done to it, as long as the numbers matched and it looked as original as possible.
K S
We are attempting thru conservation or curating, to return a coin to the state it was
in when it was coined at the US Mint. We are not adding or replacing parts, merely removing that which
detracts from the beauty of the coin. Bear
Camelot
Now I can think of a couple of reasons why coins might be different, but they do raise a good point. Is it really a "crime" to remove unattractive toning? Does this all of a sudden make the coin less "genuine"? Is a nice coin only "real" if it is never touched, regardless of the vicissitudes it experienced throughout its existence?
Rhetorical questions, all. I am still trying to figure out where I stand on this, but I may give them a whirl with some coins I have that have really detrimental eye appeal problems (hazy, milky toning in the fields) that kill their value, when I know a professionally-done, gentle dipping would improve them immensely. I have never dipped a coin myself, and I'd just as soon leave it to the pros. Why not "save" a coin that would currently be unlikely to be loved?
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
however, adding wax, though restoring a more "original" look, would be adding something to the car that wasn't there when you found it. would it be wrong to go ahead with waxing that puppy?
for that matter, what if you just vaccummed it out, or gave it a good old wash. does that make it less original?
i think there is a valid analogy here. if you don't like the "car" analogy, substitute fine, antique furniture.
& keep in mind , as honorable as an objective as it would be, it is physically impossible to return a 100 y-o silver coin to it's "orginal" state as it left the dies at the mint in philadelphia. the instant the hot surfaces of the planchet encounter oxygen in the air, it begins to change, and the process cannot be reversed.
whaddya think?
K S
on it. As to coins however, King Farouk of Egypt liked to put a coat of laquer on his coins. I would not
personally buy or enjoy such a coating or a wax coat or silicon coat on my coins. Also in my origonal
response to you I correctly should have said"return the coin to as close as possible to the origonal state ."
Bear
Camelot
bear, i do believe you & i are on the same page, though we may reading a little something different on it. which is the way it should be, since this after all, a hobby.
1 other point: q david bowers tells the story about when he, as a very young lad, lacquered a bunch of red pennies. decades later, he found the coins again, removed the lacquer, and found that they had retained 100% of their originality. a lot of rare old coins were lacquered, and thankfully so, as the protection from the air went a long way to preserving their originality. especially true of extremely rare european and classic coins, more prevalaent on medals though!
all in all, a terrific thread.
K S
My 1866 Philly Mint Set