Is this the look of a proof that has been dipped and retoned or is this original?
TheLiberator
Posts: 1,023 ✭✭✭
This is graded ngc pf-63 cam and I am trying to learn more about toning and originality. ANY help would be appreciated!
0
Comments
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
A past dip is not unlikely, since "original" proof Barbers before the early 1900's are often a mottled algae-green and/or black. I've seen 'em black as lumps of coal. I believe it had something to do with the tissue paper or whatever it was they packaged them in- it had sulfur in it.
That being the case, I wouldn't care a bit if that had been dipped or not. I would rather have a coin that looked like that than a black or green-black, splotchy "original".
Just my opinion. I don't think an undipped original would display those wispy cloud-like areas, as seen on this coin, in the toning.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
but the coin is definately is not original most probably dipped blast white about twenty five--thirty five years ago?? as evidenced by the white centers and put in an album and toned and since the coin was dipped and not properly rinsed you get this mottled rim toning from the improper dip residue when the coin tones along the rims in the album it creatsthis coloration and also this mottling from the album
also if it is proof63 i am assuming that in person if you tilt the coin it has more heavier than average hairlines from the dip/wipe combination seen on mostly many of these dipped barber coins
this does not mean it is a bad or good coin just the way it is
but the scan does not show the true meaning of this coin and from the scan it looks like proof67/68 but in person i am sure it will have heavy patches of wispy hairlines usually on the right obverse open fields
and possibly the left obverse field and less on the reverse keeping this coin in the proof63 grade
and AGAIN THIS IS FROM THE PHOTO AND THE GRADE GIVEN AND WHAT my experiences have been with such coins sight seen in hand could be different but i doubt it
but anything is possible
it is more the exception rather than the rule that proof63 coins have good eye appeal in hand sight seen and usually proof63 coins like this one are all marked up and if not marked nicked up then heavy hairlined from a wipe due to cleaning and not a good or bad thing just the way it is and some proof 63 are really great eye appealling coins and some with jmust some patches of hairlnes and are still great coins but this again is rather the exception rather than the rule
i do not like to see this on proof barbers and many high grade barbers have this weak part of the shield well the quarters and halves in proof and lots more often than not have this weakness due to the opposite placement from the highest points on the obverse
these proof barber halves where struck in the newly formed proofing department of the philly mint and where struck on hydrolic presses
was this coin also struck with worn dies?? i do not know but many proof barber quarters and halves were struck with worn dies and you can tell this if you have the coin in person sight seen in hand where the devices meet the fields of the coin it is muchy and not crisp and clean where they meet each other
i would love to see this coin in person as you cant really tell much if anything from the scan and again my comments as per the above are based on the scan and what little i know of these coins so sight seen might be different but i doubt it
In your opinion, is a coin like this very liquid or is the old dipping (assuming it has been dipped) a turn-off to most? I think it is pretty!
And for the record, I oppose dipping.
<< <i>I think the coin would look quite different in-hand. >>
I agree with that. It's a 63 so will probably have quite a few hairlines and such that will not show on an angled pic such as that. still a nice looking coin.