Options
Educational Thread: Bust coins and Originality (LOTS OF PICS)
Varlis
Posts: 505 ✭✭✭
As most of you know, anyone looking for bust coins on eBay is in for a challenge: how do you find coins that are actually original when a great many sellers claim their cleaned coins have “NEVER BEEN CLEANED!!! L@@K!!!!”? The best way to tell, of course, is to look at lots and lots of coins—since bust coins present their own special set of problems just because of their age, determining originality can sometimes be tricky. The purpose of this thread, then, is to show some VF-range bust halves that I have pulled from eBay. In many cases, the sellers have explicitly stated that the coins are “original” or “problem-free” or have “never been messed with.” Granted that photographs of coins are never 100% accurate tools for grading or determining originality, I thought it might be instructive to post some pictures with my personal thoughts. Again, this is subjective, so please post any other thoughts, tips, or disagreements.
We’ll start with the most egregious examples:
Unfortunately coins like this aren’t uncommon on eBay, and if you see them, you should run, run, run! Characteristics of this species of cleaned coin is the brilliant mirror-like finish on a coin with VF details—even an uncirculated example this old would not have this “Turtle Wax” shine. With the coin in hand, you would probably see lots of hairlines across the surfaces, which as you know is another hallmark of harsher cleaning.
This next coin was described by the seller as “all original and never been cleaned!” Although it isn’t quite as bad as the 1821, it is definitely not original:
You can tell by looking at the fields, which even in the photograph are much too reflective for a coin in this grade. For me, one of the telltale signs of a cleaning is that the fields are too reflective—this seems obvious, but if you have a coin that was cleaned maybe 100 years ago and appears to have original toning, the fields may well be too reflective under the tone. I think this is the case with this coin:
Now we’re getting into less-bothersome examples of cleaning. To me, the devices on this coin are too white, and there appears to be unnatural reflectivity peeking through the tone, both of which suggests that the coin has been cleaned at some point in its past.
A similar fate has befallen this 1827, which has other problems to worry about:
Now for a grouping of 1834 halves. The first one is tougher to call than the others I’ve posted. I would say this piece has probably been cleaned, lightly or not, at some time in its history:
This is my opinion because again the fields look too light under the tone. In my experience, the best way to tell if a toned coin has an old cleaning is to rotate it under a light and see how much bounces back at you. If the light is subdued, the toning it likely original. Since we can’t do this with eBay coins, we often have to guess or go with a gut reaction. (Although I think this isn’t 100% original, I would still consider acceptable, unlike the other ones I’ve posted so far.)
Here’s one I bought a while back and posted here. Although it has a nice look to it, as some board members pointed out, it looks to have some hairlines in the fields. Hard to tell from the photograph, but once I got it, I could tilt it in the light to check for reflectivity and hairlines. While I don’t think it is 100% original, it looks nice, which is sometimes all you can ask for in bust coinage:
Here’s one I think is original:
The fields look richer and like graphite on a piece of paper; compare them to the first 1834 half above and you’ll see that the one that I think is retoned has lighter, more washed-out fields.
This coin has a great look to it, and I wouldn’t hesitate to call it original based on the pictures. Again, note the warmer, graphite-like fields:
Finally, if you can sometimes judge warmness from photographs but not necessarily hairlines, here is a coin that I have little doubt is original:
The fields and the devices have a richness and depth to them that would have been washed out if it were cleaned. Of course, this particular coin presents some other problems that are par for the course when surfing eBay, but that’s the challenge in collecting bust coinage.
Anyway, I hope the range of coins presented here helps people who are interested in finding original or original-looking coins. Remember, I'm not a dealer or an expert, I'm just a schlub who likes bust coins, so please add your own tips and amendments!
0
Comments
Mojo
-Jim Morrison-
Mr. Mojorizn
my blog:www.numistories.com
Lane
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
42/92
The 1831 looks okay to me--the obverse shot is kind of bright, but it might just be the flash since the reverse looks much "warmer," and has the overall look I like. The 1834 is harder to call--maybe it was cleaned and has been retoned, but it looks pretty good to me.
42/92
42/92
This Bust half is in a Anacs slab stating cleaned and re-toned AU details net xf45. I bought this for the simple reason to just study it and how the secondary tone sits on the surface and such. When going to shows I see these all the time and just rifle through real quick knowing I'm not interested and they've been played with.
As you can see it just don't look original. Flat appearance and the toning kind of floats on the surface. The center of obverse looks cleaned and just some unnatural looking toning around the stars. The reverse looks very bad and just a mottled mess.
I believe it's a good idea for folks to have something like this to study and learn from. Nasty nasty
Really Nasty reverse
A twist on Twain
<< <i>A man who doesn’t read good books has no advantage
over the man who cannot read them >>
-Mark Twain
I now have the advantage over everyone who skipped this thread.
Thanks for taking the time to post
--------T O M---------
-------------------------
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Anyone have any for sale please pm me.
Rgrds
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
42/92
K S
<< <i>your 1834 bust half, "xf some old scratches", that looks like chuck furjanic's handwriting. coins from him , the chances of it being doctored are much higher than from many other sellers. did someone call the doctor?
K S >>
I think you might be right about that. I just went through what was on eBay the other day and looked for coins that had "original" in the title or the description (to be fair, not every single one of these did).
i'm sorry if this is confusing
Tyler
Regarding the question about older cleaning versus newer cleaning: clearly something with the "Turtle Wax" shine is less desirable than something that has been cleaned maybe 100 years ago when, it's true, cleaning was in general more acceptable. I would say that some of the examples that are at the bottom of my original post were cleaned in some form quite a while ago. I personally find this more acceptable (like the 1834 I actually own) than the bright white VF coin. But I'd still rather have ones that look like Arco's.
Other thoughts or examples?
09/07/2006
42/92
Yes, what you wrote is correct. Nice observation!
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
42/92
<< <i>Heres an original Bustie, 1817/3 later die state. >>
RR, neat coin! Your eagle seems to be missing something, though...hmm. Can't quite decide what's wrong with the picture...oh yeah! He's missing his head!
Understand that no offense is intended. I would've bought the coin for that reason alone.
42/92
<< <i>Yeah Rotated Rainbows has a fairly late die state there... notice how the points of the star stretch towards the rim... that's usually a sign of gradual die wear, if I remember correctly from my readings... and even the letters on the reverse, some of the serifs it looks like are stretching towards the rims... >>
Here is another late die state that shows the stars drawn to the edge better then the above example, also it has a die chip on the nose that makes it look like Liberty has a wart. I call it my Witch Head coin, its variety 107 sub variety A (O-107a)
less original:
more original:
less original:
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
42/92
<< <i>
<< <i>Heres an original Bustie, 1817/3 later die state. >>
RR, neat coin! Your eagle seems to be missing something, though...hmm. Can't quite decide what's wrong with the picture...oh yeah! He's missing his head!
Understand that no offense is intended. I would've bought the coin for that reason alone.
Don't worry about it, I learned long ago to take anything you read on a message board with a grain of salt so it would be hard to offend me. Actually that is the only reason why I bought that coin, I already owned an early die state so having a chance to get a piece that is such a late die state with severe die buldge in the centers (not only does it not have a eagle head but there is also no drapery clasp on the obverse).
My other example of this variety is one that was cleaned long ago but still maintains a good look, it is an early die state that still shows the die rust lumps (the die rusted sitting at the mint between 1813 to 1817) one big lump is between the 7 and the last star. A second one is above Liberty's cap before star 8, there are also a few more but they are not very visible in the picture.
42/92