Using the term doctoring in relationship to dipping is IMHO not using the term doctoring loosely. When you dip a coin you're intentionally altering the surfaces of the coin. That falls under what I believe is the strict definition of doctoring.
A while back TomB (our resident Ph.d chemist) provided the strict definition of corrosion. If my memory serves me correctly the major distinction is that corrosion is strictly related to the oxidation of iron and is destructive in nature. With respect to a discussion of coins we're not discussing the oxidation of iron and the toning process is protective not destructive (shout at me TomB if I missed something ).
After reading your statement again it looks like I may have read into your statement that you thought toning could loosely be considered doctoring regardless of how it was acquired. Strictly speaking that's not what you said. BUT making the connection between doctoring and dipping versus toning and corrosion is IMHO inaccurate as far as the strict/loose usage of the words doctoring and corrosion are concerned.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
Just for the record, I did NOT use the term "corrosion" either, although, I suppose it might be considered synonymous (by others) with "tarnish." Neither did the definition of tarnish include the word corrosion, however, the oxidation of a metal (in this case coin metal) may take on an attractive appearance, but it is till the beginning (early stage) of a process that WILL damage the surface if allowed to proceed uninhibited.
Another illustration of why agreement with respect to terms/terminology has so much significance - terminology/vocabulary is one of the greatest obstacles to effective communication.
BTW, I don't recall you and I being so far apart on usage. In other words, both of us historically are sticklers for NOT READING into what is typed or trying to be specific in our statements so as to preclude the need to read into what is typed. hmmmm.
But I am not trying to convert you, Paul. You are fairly knowledgeable, and strong-willed to boot. I'm just surprised that twice you have concluded that I meant something other than what I wrote.
PNG member, same identity as Julian, a veteran numismatic dealer since 1965. Operates a retail store, also has exhibited at over 1000 shows.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
O.K. good buddy...I slipped up (it seems to be happening more often since I hit the big 50 ). On the other hand (here comes the pigheaded part) although you didn't use the word (corrosion) Baseball's did "If dipping is doctoring, than MONSTER toning, no matter AT or natural, is nothing but corrosion" and you seemed to agreed "I also like Baseball's analogy..."
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
why o why do we insist on a Yes or No answer to a question to which the REAL answer is ALWAYS
IT DEPENDS!!
This is the same answer to the question of: is toning REAL or ARTIFICIAL
well, it depends: how long did it take, how intentional was it, is it attractive and "real" looking?
same with dipping: was the coin nice bright uncirculated or proof with a print or light light dirt that dipped right off? then, no, not doctoring (well, technically yes, but not "cleaned")
was it a heavily toned VF coin that was repeatedly dipped until it was white and smooth?
then yes, obviously that is doctoring and not for the better.
for everything in between, it's always, IT DEPENDS on how much and the outcome.
Okay, I must admit, I did say THAT (GDit Baseball ), although I don't take that position on toning. And, like I said, we have been known to be sticklers -- so there, ya' got me. BTW, it has nothing to do with being 50; I'm just a few short years behind you, and "slipping" in this forum IS NOT age exclusive.
Comments
....... bob**rgte**
Marcia
"The more I know, the less I understand"
***********************************
Ray
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
dorkarl is the voice of reason.
Everyone has the right to decide for themselves "eye appeal" and what it is worth to them.
I find that most buyers get themselves in trouble when they rely too heavily on someone else's hype and the possible dollar signs they anticipate.
Trying to figure out whether a coin is AT or not is ridiculous (as most are in some way or another).
Just figure out what it is worth to YOU.
Joe.
Using the term doctoring in relationship to dipping is IMHO not using the term doctoring loosely. When you dip a coin you're intentionally altering the surfaces of the coin. That falls under what I believe is the strict definition of doctoring.
A while back TomB (our resident Ph.d chemist) provided the strict definition of corrosion. If my memory serves me correctly the major distinction is that corrosion is strictly related to the oxidation of iron and is destructive in nature. With respect to a discussion of coins we're not discussing the oxidation of iron and the toning process is protective not destructive (shout at me TomB if I missed something
After reading your statement again it looks like I may have read into your statement that you thought toning could loosely be considered doctoring regardless of how it was acquired. Strictly speaking
Another illustration of why agreement with respect to terms/terminology has so much significance - terminology/vocabulary is one of the greatest obstacles to effective communication.
BTW, I don't recall you and I being so far apart on usage.
But I am not trying to convert you, Paul. You are fairly knowledgeable, and strong-willed to boot.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
myurl
O.K. good buddy...I slipped up (it seems to be happening more often since I hit the big 50
IT DEPENDS!!
This is the same answer to the question of: is toning REAL or ARTIFICIAL
well, it depends: how long did it take, how intentional was it, is it attractive and "real" looking?
same with dipping: was the coin nice bright uncirculated or proof with a print or light light dirt that dipped right off? then, no, not doctoring (well, technically yes, but not "cleaned")
was it a heavily toned VF coin that was repeatedly dipped until it was white and smooth?
then yes, obviously that is doctoring and not for the better.
for everything in between, it's always, IT DEPENDS on how much and the outcome.
after it's done, the coin is what it is, no?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Okay, I must admit, I did say THAT (GDit Baseball