Originality
RYK
Posts: 35,797 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Q & A Forum
David,
There has been a lot of discussion about originality on the boards of late. Everyone seems to have different ideas about what it is, how to assess, how to value it, and whether grading services should consider it.
As a collector of rare date gold/branch mint, mostly circulated, I prize coins that have not been dipped. My impression is that PCGS places enough emphasis on luster that speculators are incented to dip AU, MS, and proof gold coins to get a better grade, and therefore, a better price. Once dipped, "originality" is gone, and the coin is forever altered.
Your opinion on this difficult matter would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Robert
There has been a lot of discussion about originality on the boards of late. Everyone seems to have different ideas about what it is, how to assess, how to value it, and whether grading services should consider it.
As a collector of rare date gold/branch mint, mostly circulated, I prize coins that have not been dipped. My impression is that PCGS places enough emphasis on luster that speculators are incented to dip AU, MS, and proof gold coins to get a better grade, and therefore, a better price. Once dipped, "originality" is gone, and the coin is forever altered.
Your opinion on this difficult matter would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Robert
0
Comments
Great comment/question and a complex issue.
Luster is very important...but original luster is the only luster that counts. The graders can tell the difference between original blazing luster and the freshly dipped look. I personally put it on a continuum...and of course it's all a matter of degree and it's very subjective...but, that said, here's my personal preference...
1. Original blazing luster ala Clapp/Eliasberg.
2. Slightly more subdued original luster.
3. Lightly dipped.
4. Dull, but original.
5. Original but dirty and gross.
6. over-dipped.
David