In search of the Blast White Arkansas

Iwog

In Q. David Bowers' book "Commemorative Coins of the United States", there is the following paragraph:

"The Arkansas sets were produced with a satinlike, almost "greasy" finish, which many collectors and others found to be unattractive...........The satiny 'greasy' surface is such that even freshly minted coins appeared as if they had been dipped and cleaned repeatedly."

To be uncharacteristicly blunt, I think this is pure conjecture on the part of the author and isn't true. He's correct that almost all Arkansas coins do look blah, greasy, and gray but I believe this is the result of the coins being issued in leather and paper packaging, then being subjected to toning/dipping over 60+ years. I also can't believe the mint would take any special steps to make a coin look ugly when the usual minting process of steal dies on silver makes coins look wonderful hot off the press. Another reason that I differ with this theory is that Arkansas coins are far from uniform in appearance and most look like typical over-oxidated dogs of other issues.

I have a single example of a blast white Arkansas, but would like to know if there are more; especially near the beginning of the series. I think an entire set of these coins would put this myth to rest, so if anyone knows where they are hiding I'd like to see photographs. I'll also pay a nice bounty to aquire them

MFH

PC:
You must love blast white Arkansas commems as much as I do. I have the entire series in MS 65 and they are all as white as the one you sold me at auction last October.

I have always felt that these coins were over dipped causing the luster to turn grey. Yet, Dave Bowers has seen more of these coins than we'll ever see and he has done extensive research in the field. It could very well be that a great number of these coins had grease on them when they were struck. Remember there was a large number of commems being struck back in the 1930's, and the workers at the mints may not have cared about the product they were producing. It seemed to them that there was a new design coming out every six weeks or so. The early commem abuse caused this worthwhile idea to be abandoned in 1954 only to be resurected again in the early 1980's. If it weren't for Congress to put a cap of two commems per year, we'd have fallen into the same trap all over again.

Iwog

I don't buy it. Even if the dies did have grease on em, they would have been clean after a few strikes. All silver coins are minted by the same method. Some may have satin luster, and some may have brilliant depending on how much the dies are polished, but in my experience ALL silver coins leave the mint bright and frosty. I just can't imagine an entire series issued dull and greasy, I find it much more likely that they were wrecked after they were minted.

I still have the photograph of your coin by the way. It was nice but at the time I wasn't going to put together a whole set. So give it back bub!

dragon

<<< but in my experience ALL silver coins leave the mint bright and frosty. >>>

That may not be 100% correct for all siver coins, as there are a few 1900's era Morgan dates that nearly always have a grey washed out look, even high grade MS examples. And they pretty much came that way right out of the bags.

Iwog

I'm guessing they are a small minority of coins. I can't see an entire series from 1935-1939 being intentionally made to look like this.

au58

While the minting "process" is basically the same issue to issue, the number and range of variables can produce much different results. Compare the early S-mint Morgan dollars to early O-mint dollars. Clearly there are wide differences. Also, compare different commem issues to others. Besides Arkansas, a number of other issues do not "typically" come "flashy". In general, Bowers is correct, but there are exceptions.

Iwog

The differences you are talking about are in the characteristics of mint luster, not the absence of it. Most Arkansas examples are missing cartwheels altogether meaning that either the coin was minted without flow lines (impossible) or that the flow lines were removed by oxidation/dipping.

Crazy4Coins

Here is what my 35 PDS set looks like.All PCGS MS65. Is this what you would consider greasy looking or gray?

Randy

scher

Iwog I sure dont want to be difficult but...I like the one ya sold better than the one ya kept..pictures hide a lot but that coin looks a little too clean(ed) to me...original is usually best, at least in my opinion virtually any high grade coin can "become" blast white...but is it worth it?
Bruce Scher

Iwog

Hard to tell from the photo Randy. My rule is if you can't see something flashing at you from across the bourse table, it's not blast white.

The difference between the two coins is mostly in the lighting Bruce, they are very similar. One is yellow incandescent and one is halogen.

I have a lot of experience with dipping coins, and making a coin "blast white" is impossible. Luster cannot be created, it can only be destroyed. (contrast this with toning that can be created, knocked off, created again, etc.) Here's another picture of my 38 in different light.

classiccoin

every pic that iwog has posted looks like a dipped out artificially bright unnatural appearing coin, some people confuse the words luster and jeweluster

Iwog

None of my coins are dipped out, all of the coins I post have exceptional and original mint luster. There's a great ANA video on the subject if you need some help identifying it. Dipping a coin can never add mint luster to a coin.

classiccoin

you just keep telling yourself that iwog, i heard that jeweluster now comes in one and five gallon jugs

Iwog

I'm sorry, my mistake. At first I assumed that you were simply uninformed so I was trying to be helpful.

Now it's obvious that you're hostile and only want to pick a fight. If you know anyone who has a dipped out Arkansas that looks like the picture above, I'll pay significantly over bid to take it off your hands. I'll even pay a finders fee. This is a serious offer.

classiccoin

iwog your understanding of chemistry is elementary and your understanding of numismatics is even less in my opinion, any jacka$$ can sit and dip coins in jeweluster to make them appear artificially bright and unnatural looking, thats not what the hobby is about, thank goodness you dont collect large cents by variety

Iwog

I tutored chemistry while I was at the University of California. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. As I already said, luster isn't about being bright it's about how the flow lines on the surface of the coin reflect light directionally. I know you're upset, but spreading false information doesn't help anyone.

I actually do collect large cents and have quite a few.

classiccoin

not upset at all iwog, just amused by your twisted views and understanding of numismatics and what makes a coin desirable

Myqqy

but in my experience ALL silver coins leave the mint bright and frosty.

I don't know about commems, but this statement is certainly not true for morgan dollars....

To be uncharacteristicly blunt,

That's pretty funny......

sliderider

Speaking of Arky Commems, have you guys seen this toned monster yet??

Nice toning.

Iwog

Classiccoin, it's been said numerous times on this board that you're a coward who only signs on under "classiccoin" to spew hatred and attack people. A quick check of your posting history proves it. Apparently you're too scared to use your regular screen name, and refuse to back up your own points with your own reputation. Pretty pathetic, but I guess some people need to hide to protect themselves from emotional damage. Keep hiding little one.

There are a tiny number of Morgan dollars that are found rather dull, but the vast majority are blast white and brilliant when found in original rolls or bags. As I said previously, it's impossible for a coin to be minted without flow lines, and luster is simply microscopic flow lines. Besides, I'm not convinced that coins stored in bags for 100 years are a good test of how coins leave the mint. Certainly all silver coins minted in the last 50 years leave the mint blast white with a possible few very rare exceptions.

According to Bowers, the entire Arkansas series was issued wth a blech finish. The obvious question is WHY since the other issues of 1935 looked fine. (San Diego, Boone, Hudson, Texas, etc.) You can't blame a specific mint since these coins were being made at all three, and were minted from 1935 - 1939. To cap it off, there ARE some Arkansas coins that DO look like the other issues. MFH and myself have some. I think what we have is a commemorative issue that was not stored in rolls (the best way back then to avoid oxidation), and was subjected to surface damage more than most. I think Bowers is wrong and I'd like to see more evidence one way or the other.

Kennewickman

Iwog, after reading the Bowers quote about the blech finish I thought for a minute my set wasn't dipped as I had figured they were. But no, they are blast white with little or no luster and don't resemble the luster on the two pics you posted.

Wally

Iwog

I'm guessing that most Arkansas coins were heavily oxidized in their leather/paper packaging and dipped during the cleaning craze of the 50's and 60's. The few that have exceptional luster may have been stored differently. I'm just guessing however and would love to have more information. I've seen two original sets in the original holders and in both cases all of the coins were heavily toned, almost black.

Bear

Most interesting thread. Iwog ,thank you for your insight

on this particular commemorative.I happen to own a specimin

with beautiful toning. I will see if I can pull the picture from the files.

Bear

Iwog

Nice to see ya again Bear, don't let any gunk get on those coins I gave you.

MFH

Iwog seems to know chemistry and I have looked at hundreds of Arkansas commems over the last forty years. Most dull grey coins were overdipped to remove toning. These coins are a major turn off to me. I have always looked for a blast white coin with a faint golden tone at the rims, although my 1935-D in a PCGS 65 holder lacks the rim toning, I feel that the coin is original and not dipped. I recently got a 1937-D Arkansas from Pinnacle in a PCGS 66 holder; its also blast white with the faintest of rim toning.

This series has been the toughest one to find in original white, as is the Washington Carvers. (Although the W/C's are a tone-lovers dream coin ! )

The nicest set, in my humble opinion, of Arkansas commems was the JFS set, recently auctioned at the ANA by Heritage. Look at the 1935-P (PCGS MS67) as well as the 1935-S (also a PCGS 67), these two coins are blast white. The others are also blast white in the centers with beautiful rim toning. None are dull grey, and they all are original, and undipped. This is "the look" as far as I'm concerned; regrettably most Arkansas commems fall far short.

As far as classic coppers, anyone who knows anything about them knows in an instant if the coin was messed with. Noone in their right mind would ever attempt to "brighten" up an early copper, because they know the coin would never come out looking original. Cleaned/dipped copper becomes a strange pinkish red. Not very attractive at all. I'm sure that the "experts" at NCS have devised a way to "conserve" copper but I sure as heck would never attempt it.

Now, boys, play nice. We're all here to learn. Remember its not what you say, but how you say it.

scher

Nicely said Mike and I agree with you completly on how that ideal Arkansas looks..those JFS examples were nice..
Bruce Scher