think this print would dip off? Grade the 1935 Peace dollar, older pcgs holder *Updated: Cracked &a

Baley

it's in a green pcgs holder, what do you think it grades?
does it have a chance at an upgrade if cracked/dipped?

airplanenut

What's the current grade?

Baley

you tell me, champ

CaptainRon

What is it slabbed at now. Was the print that defined when it was holdered 15 years ago, or did they start becoming more visible after slabbing.

FrattLaw

No, I don't think the print will dip off and I'll guess MS64 shot at MS65 but the reverse is weak.

Michael

Baley

dunno, just got it.

Baley

I don't think the print will dip off

why not? too old, and "set" into the surface?

Baley

but she's got a beard, man!

I want that print off

mdwoods

Looks like a great strike, also it is very clean of marks. I'd say the grade depends on the luster. Probably a 65 but maybe a 66. If the print would come off, a dip might improve the luster too. I could see the coin in a 66 holder.

Rampage

I say MS64, but then again, I suck at grading Peace and Morgan Dollars, and as of recently, I suck at IKEs, too.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH

Don't need to dip it try some olive oil then then pat it off gently. I have removed many finger prints in this manner.

Baley

olive oil? popeye's girlfriend?



seriously, I've used EVO on ancient roman dug coins and corroded IHCs, but never on a silver coin.

what's the process, the oil dissolves the fingerprint oil and leaves the toning?

won't I have a light area of the print lines, and the rest of the coin will still be golden toned?

grip

Just what FrattLaw said.

stman

MS64.... As far as the "Textile or toning breaks" please don't ask me, you might not like my answer. Although I do believe you have more than just the one print in the face. It might not show in person though. I also believe this coin has been dipped in the past to try and rid the thing of prints.

Upgrade? To what? You can upgrade it to your album I guess.

XpipedreamR

I'll guess 63, maybe 64.

Baley

... and you'd be right, Xpipe!



... and now, tap tap maxwell silver hammer, this little lady has a date with a jar of jewelluster!

stman

This contest was fixed. The print was in my way. Actually there appears to be plenty of little marks in the obv field, that would be consistent with the 63 grade.

Merc

I would have graded it MS64 based on the few ticks on the eagle's wing and slight strike weakness on the eagle. Then it appears to have a few small marks on the cheek. A MS63 is a bit low. Then I wouldn't dip it. I don't see that print comming off. I think it is etched in and you will have a white coin with a big fingerprint after a dip. If you dip it, post some photos.

Baley

I think you're right, Merc, the prints are probably etched. Not gonna do anything tonight, anyway, but when I do bust her out, she will go into an album, but maybe into a dip solution first. I like the gold color, and the print is nowhere near as obvious in real life as it is in the intentionally angled photo. But it it there, and it does bug.

Stman, the obv. fields are actually pretty nice, there is a little noise at her temple, cheekbone, and upper lip, and hair over ear, the reverse fields are a little marky-er and there is some chatter along the lower wing edge, but I have seen far worse coins in PCGS and NGC 64 holders, so I'm pretty happy for eighty bucks

stman

Baley, I guessed 64, and felt good with that. I know I mentioned marks in the field, and just assumed that's why it graded 63. I believe I did this with your Bust half as well. Must be the angle you are shooting at.... making scratches in the plastic appear to me as marks. Now get that darn thing outta there.

darktone

It's already been dipped and as mentioned ALL the prints look etched- not much you can do with them as far as dipping goes. mike

Baley

How do you know that the coin has already been dipped?

darktone

When the fingerprints turn that crusty white color I assume the coin has already been dipped. mike

Cam40

Print problem solution.......fine grit sandpaper......

No, but have you considered having NCS look at it for this fingerprint problem?

I side with those that say it probably wont be fixed with just a dip. It may only further reduce the luster
thus lowering the overall grade.
If NCS cant fix it, it may not be fixable.

grip

I hope you diden't know the fingerprint was on there, when you payed the $80.00.There are plenty without

Baley

plenty, really? Please point me in the direction of another one, then, same thing, old pcgs 63 holder.
Also in the market for a 1934.
preferably no prints, but will consider one with a few light prints

mdwoods

That coin looks nicer than a 63.

Baley

Well, I figured the downside was pretty limited, if the dip went bad, it would still be a raw MS63.
If it went "right" it could be a pretty sharp MS64 coin worth about double. So into the dip she went:





What do you think now?

darktone

Looks good Baley!

mdwoods

I see a few more marks than I did before, but it still looks good to me. At least a 64.

Baley

... and a shot of the little darling in her natural habitat:

fcloud

I liked it better with the print.

DAM

<< <i>I liked it better with the print. >>



Me too. Now it has that "dipped look". I didn't like the print, but I don't like the alternative either.

fcloud

And, I like white coins, but the cleaned look is too white. Man have I changed my opinions over the last year and a half!

CalGold

Bailey,

An excellent example of a case in which dipping is both necessary and appropriate. I like toned coins but when toning, haze and prints make a coin unsightly dipping may be a practical and valid altenative. Sure the "original" zealots will chime in and say that the coin now looks "unnaturally" bright (which it doe not, as any dollar collector knows--these are often found with bright full "orginal" mint luster), but you can rest assured that not one of them would have touched that coin in its "orginal" finger printed state. Of course, a finger printed coin is not "original" at all--it did not come off the press like that-it has been impaired and fortunately this one nicely restored.

CG

XpipedreamR

It looks really nice. I hope it doesn't turn funky on you. Although, I guess it already was a little funky with that fingerprint.

1jester

Big improvement. The coin is beautiful now, and for those that claim it has the "dipped" look, I say that it looked dipped before. But it looks much nicer now, and even shows natural luster.

Cam40

Now that the fingerprint appears to have been dissolved i wonder if it may return in time.
Like many dipped clad coins they intially look great but over time they eventually turn.
I know its not a clad but silver will sometimes retone in less-than eye-appealing ways.

Was this a straight dip or did you work the dip into the print area with a Q-tip?
That MAY have helped to rid the print of a future breakout.

Looks to me that the dip was successful.
Now the test of time comes into play.

Good Luck.

DRUNNER

The coin is super (and although I am a toning afficionado--improved) . . . but what is really impressive is that "Library of Coins" album!!

Hard to find nice!

Baley

The dip was 3 seconds in 50/50 EZest and water, 30 seconds rinse, pat dry with soft cotton cloth, air dry for 30 minutes, and into the Library of Coins album, where it will remain for the next several years, possibly acquiring a bit of subtle tone, maybe staying blast white.

This coins is a textbook example of a light light print removed by a quick dip. As the pictures show, some of the little nicks and ticks are more apparent, the luster is greatly improved, and of course the unslightly fingerprints are now gone. Unfortunately, the soft golden toning is also gone. However, as mentioned above, the coin might regain a measure of attractive toning, and some remnants of the fingerprints may return.

c'est la vie! For now, I believe my coin is greatly improved; I know that some of you think it is worse off, and the zealots seem to think it is ruined forever. I'm curious as to how bad a fingerprint or how ugly the toning or other residue would have to be for these extreme "anti-dippers" to accept that some coins were mistreated in the past, and can benefit from a little "help"

Also note that the coin is for me, to put in my collection, and look at often; it is not for resubmission in the attempt to get a higher grade and sell for a profit, even though, to balance the discussion, I and others may have mentioned an "upgrade" I think we were talking about improving the eye appeal of the coin, not "slabbing" it and selling the widget to some sucker.

All I know is that before, when looking at the coin, all I saw was the print. Now I see the luster, the surfaces, the relief, the whole coin, and can enjoy it in the years to come, and the prints that were on it are but a memory... at least until they reappear, if they do. I'll let you know in half a decade how she's doing.

Now, anyone have for sale a lightly fingerprinted 1934 in an old green MS63 holder?

Merc

Nice removal of the fingerprint. In wasn't sure what would happen, but was afraid it might remain. You dip coins about like I have done but I rinse the coin in pure ethanol after the water rinse. It removes any organic matter and the water. This allows the coin to dry in 30 seconds without having to pat it dry.

I have a 1925-S in MS64 with 2 fingerprints on the reverse. It has a medium gold tone. You don't see the streight on, but when you tilt the coin. I know they will never come off since they are part of the toning.

Baley

If the toning were any nicer to start with, or the prints less obtrusive, I would NOT have dipped this coin.

Baley

For example, if I ever found a 1934 dollar, with pale golden toning, no fingerprint, in an NGC holder, I would definitely crack her out for my Library of Coins, but wouldn't dip her.

oreville

Baley: So far so good. But keep the coin out of the Library of Coins book. Dipped coins do NOT retone well in those books. Only undipped original coins fare decently in those books. I would resubmit back to PCGS for regrading even if it gets back into a MS-63 holder. You are better to try to keep the coin looking white in a slab than allowing it to retone at this point. Any retoning at this point is apt to be the hideous yellow color along with a distinct chance that the fingerprint will return.

At the very least put it in a plastic 2x2 or in a intercept holder.

Baley

5 months later and the coin still looks like the "after" pics

sliderider

You should wait for some of the toning to come back. You might get a bodybag for being too clean. Another thing to consider is all the recent complaints about coins coming back from PCGS with prints on them. You may have gotten rid of the original prints, only to have it come back with fresh ones. Hopefully it'll be in a 64 holder, but you may end up back at square one with a printed 63.

wam98

Interesting thread Baley. I like original toning as much as the next collector, but this was an example where dipping improved the coin and removed an unsightly print. Good move IMO.