I'm going to give a different opinion on this coin. I gagged too but in a negative way.
This coin is far from original and all for the sake of the money to be made by dipping out the Deep Cameo. An otherwise beautiful coin essentially ruined. If you needed to sell that coin to us, we would pay you less than we would a beautifully toned original without the DCAM and we'd never offer re-offer it to a client. I know we're in the minority but that's a different topic.
I understand that it looks beautiful and all that, but a classically original can look even better. I think it's a mistake to garner such praise on this altered and enhanced slug.
NWCS: Do you think that if you bought one from the Mint for $2 and took good care of it that it would look like that? It wouldn't, it would be toned unless it was kept in a vacuum it's whole life. And what do you want to bet that down the road this is going to have all sorts of russet spots and streaks which result from dip residue not properly rinsed. Not to mention that every imperfection is now right out in the open for everyone to see. There isn't a dust speck that doesn't stand out like a sore thumb on coins like these.
When I first started collecting higher end coins I wanted them as blast white as they could get. After I accidentally received a few original coins, my tastes changed and I could no longer stand to look at the blast white beauties that I used to enjoy. I sold them all as fast as I could. Problem is that I couldn't give them away, yet I now have people asking me weekly to sell them some of my original pieces.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it's just important to realize that such a coin is not "as made". Although bright white and flashy, it is not of the quality that will make long term, knowledgeable and experienced collectors whip out their checkbooks. That's why it's now sitting on ebay.
<< <i>NWCS: Do you think that if you bought one from the Mint for $2 and took good care of it that it would look like that? >>
Nah, I just wanted the opportunity to get one! But I would bring it back to the present if I could go back to the past. Get me a PR69DCAM Trade or something.
There are many many more 1880s out there with DCAM attributes - they just haven't been graded yet. I sold a black and white DCAM 66 a few years back for less than that 65!
Hmmm - notice the flat stars? Still don't understand why a proof can make 65, 66, 67 with weak stars but a mint state coin must be sharply struck.
Thanks for the info that has been generated in this post. Being infected by "Newbie-itous", I learned something by checking out tradedollarnuts` website. From an aesthetic point of view, The Trade Dollar up for auction is a stunner. But from a historical perspective, it`s fascinating to say the least. It brings to mind and brings to home that these coins have or have had a pratical purpose other than to be collected and admired. Reading his site, I could see the commerce side of these coins (as well as others) and the necessity we have and indebted to currency in some form for survival. "Newbie-itous" may be a reason for being ignorant, But isn`t a reason to stay ignorant. Thanks again for the generous posts !
What Tonelover said. I would rather own something like this which I do!!!!! This is a PCGS PR 66. I know some folks like to see the colors all lit up on a scan. In person all the colors you see are lit up and very translucent. I appreciate originality and this coin is a beauty.
I also understand this is not the same as a Trade Dollar. And don't know if some people know that PCGS just started adding cam and dcam to pre 1950 proofs a little over a year ago. So don't go by the pop tops. There are plenty more out there that haven't been resubmitted for such.
But not knocking what other people like, just thought I'd show the other side again.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
<< <i> NWCS: Do you think that if you bought one from the Mint for $2 and took good care of it that it would look like that? It wouldn't, it would be toned unless it was kept in a vacuum it's whole life. >>
How can you tell it's been dipped? Are you saying it is because of lack of toning?
How old can a coin be and not have any toning without being stored in a vacuum? 1964 JFK 1921 Peace 1880 Morgan
I picked the above because they are about 40 years apart. If a coin has not toned for say 25 years under the conditions it was stored what would make it tone say after 50 or 100 years as long as the storage conditions remain the same?
The black-and-white attributes of the CAM Barber half you see in my icon are really awesome in person, but I understood up front that it was not a 100% "original" coin. I don't know about Trade dollars, but I believe I read in Breen that most pre-1902 Barber half proofs were cleaned because the sulfur in the original wrapping blackened most of them horribly. I got tired of looking at black or seaweed-green, blotchy Barbers and bought that Benson coin. It was cleaned at some point to remove some lacquer the original owner had applied. So what? That really doesn't bother me, as the cleaning was not severe enough to keep it out of a PCGS slab, and really didn't haze the coin too badly or anything.
Now, original, attractive toning is hard to beat, I will admit. With or without cameo contrast. But sometimes a "curated" coin can be a nice example to collect. It gives one an idea of what the coin might have looked like when it was first made. I used to be a strict untoned fan, but some of what tonelover mentioned has sunken in a little, and I am maturing as a collector- learning to appreciate naturally toned pieces. But I still like those black-and-white CAM and DCAM pieces, even if they have been "helped" a little.
Even if not 100% original, that DCAM Trade dollar is a sight to behold.
Lord M, I kind of agree that I still like the look of a black and white dcam.But when they have had TOO much help that really bothers me. BTW, did you buy that seated half and how did it look when you got it? I am most interested in your reply.
Stman
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
I dare you to head over to the open forum and start a post with,
<< I like it both ways. >> >>
(Actually, considering my usual antics on the Open Forum, it probably wouldn't cause much of a stir.)
Stman, I got the Seated half on approval from Pinnacle. It is a truly beautiful coin, though it must be turned at a very precise angle for the colors to display as they did in the picture. I liked it but in the end I decided it wasn't exactly right for my current collecting goals or my budget, and I will be returning it. Certainly I am not returning it out of any displeasure with the coin or with Pinnacle- they've been great. I may yet blow that gold money, but my wife was looking at doublewide mobile homes today and if we go that route, we'll need a patch of dirt to call our own. I might just sink that money into real estate rather than round metallic objects.
LordM, I can understand wanting to put the money somewhere else. And you answered what I was wondering about you must have known. I was curious if you had to tilt the coin around to get the color of the image.
Many folks think when they see these images all lit up thats how they all look coming out of the box. I felt the coin you got you would have to move it around plenty under a good pinpoint light source. Thanks for the info.
stman
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
ccr
Posts: 2,446
Comments
Russ, NCNE
Obscurum per obscurius
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>I just about gagged when I saw this. >>
Naw, man, here's a Trade Dollar to gag over...
HEY! INTERESTING IDEA!
I set myself up for that one.
Next time keep your head down. You'll drool on your keyboard, but you're more likely to survive.
Yeah, that coin is awesome. I can't imagine them any better than that.
Proof Dime Registry Set
This coin is far from original and all for the sake of the money to be made by dipping out the Deep Cameo. An otherwise beautiful coin essentially ruined. If you needed to sell that coin to us, we would pay you less than we would a beautifully toned original without the DCAM and we'd never offer re-offer it to a client. I know we're in the minority but that's a different topic.
I understand that it looks beautiful and all that, but a classically original can look even better. I think it's a mistake to garner such praise on this altered and enhanced slug.
NWCS: Do you think that if you bought one from the Mint for $2 and took good care of it that it would look like that? It wouldn't, it would be toned unless it was kept in a vacuum it's whole life. And what do you want to bet that down the road this is going to have all sorts of russet spots and streaks which result from dip residue not properly rinsed. Not to mention that every imperfection is now right out in the open for everyone to see. There isn't a dust speck that doesn't stand out like a sore thumb on coins like these.
When I first started collecting higher end coins I wanted them as blast white as they could get. After I accidentally received a few original coins, my tastes changed and I could no longer stand to look at the blast white beauties that I used to enjoy. I sold them all as fast as I could. Problem is that I couldn't give them away, yet I now have people asking me weekly to sell them some of my original pieces.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it's just important to realize that such a coin is not "as made". Although bright white and flashy, it is not of the quality that will make long term, knowledgeable and experienced collectors whip out their checkbooks. That's why it's now sitting on ebay.
<< <i>NWCS: Do you think that if you bought one from the Mint for $2 and took good care of it that it would look like that? >>
Nah, I just wanted the opportunity to get one! But I would bring it back to the present if I could go back to the past. Get me a PR69DCAM Trade or something.
Hmmm - notice the flat stars? Still don't understand why a proof can make 65, 66, 67 with weak stars but a mint state coin must be sharply struck.
I also understand this is not the same as a Trade Dollar. And don't know if some people know that PCGS just started adding cam and dcam to pre 1950 proofs a little over a year ago. So don't go by the pop tops. There are plenty more out there that haven't been resubmitted for such.
But not knocking what other people like, just thought I'd show the other side again.
<< <i>
NWCS: Do you think that if you bought one from the Mint for $2 and took good care of it that it would look like that? It wouldn't, it would be toned unless it was kept in a vacuum it's whole life. >>
How can you tell it's been dipped? Are you saying it is because of lack of toning?
How old can a coin be and not have any toning without being stored in a vacuum?
1964 JFK
1921 Peace
1880 Morgan
I picked the above because they are about 40 years apart.
If a coin has not toned for say 25 years under the conditions it was stored what would make it tone say after 50 or 100 years as long as the storage conditions remain the same?
The black-and-white attributes of the CAM Barber half you see in my icon are really awesome in person, but I understood up front that it was not a 100% "original" coin. I don't know about Trade dollars, but I believe I read in Breen that most pre-1902 Barber half proofs were cleaned because the sulfur in the original wrapping blackened most of them horribly. I got tired of looking at black or seaweed-green, blotchy Barbers and bought that Benson coin. It was cleaned at some point to remove some lacquer the original owner had applied. So what? That really doesn't bother me, as the cleaning was not severe enough to keep it out of a PCGS slab, and really didn't haze the coin too badly or anything.
Now, original, attractive toning is hard to beat, I will admit. With or without cameo contrast. But sometimes a "curated" coin can be a nice example to collect. It gives one an idea of what the coin might have looked like when it was first made. I used to be a strict untoned fan, but some of what tonelover mentioned has sunken in a little, and I am maturing as a collector- learning to appreciate naturally toned pieces. But I still like those black-and-white CAM and DCAM pieces, even if they have been "helped" a little.
Even if not 100% original, that DCAM Trade dollar is a sight to behold.
Check out Anaconda's 20c piece!
I dare you to head over to the open forum and start a post with,
<< <i> I like it both ways. >>
Clark
BTW, did you buy that seated half and how did it look when you got it? I am most interested in your reply.
Stman
<< <i>LordM
I dare you to head over to the open forum and start a post with,
<< I like it both ways. >> >>
(Actually, considering my usual antics on the Open Forum, it probably wouldn't cause much of a stir.)
Stman, I got the Seated half on approval from Pinnacle. It is a truly beautiful coin, though it must be turned at a very precise angle for the colors to display as they did in the picture. I liked it but in the end I decided it wasn't exactly right for my current collecting goals or my budget, and I will be returning it. Certainly I am not returning it out of any displeasure with the coin or with Pinnacle- they've been great. I may yet blow that gold money, but my wife was looking at doublewide mobile homes today and if we go that route, we'll need a patch of dirt to call our own. I might just sink that money into real estate rather than round metallic objects.
And you answered what I was wondering about you must have known. I was curious if you had to tilt the coin around to get the color of the image.
Many folks think when they see these images all lit up thats how they all look coming out of the box. I felt the coin you got you would have to move it around plenty under a good pinpoint light source.
Thanks for the info.
stman