Are we against coin doctoring done correctly or just bad coin doctoring or both?
ANACONDA
Posts: 4,692 ✭
Are we against coin doctoring done correctly or just bad coin doctoring or both?
Suggested definitions for this thread:
A coin that has been correctly doctored is
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say looks original and
2. is a coin that if it were in an inert holder would not change in appearance to look not original
A coin that has been incorrectly doctored is
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say doesn't look original or
2. a coin in an inert holder that eventually changes in appearance to look like #1 immediately above
Here is something else to consider: If a coin looks unnatural or ugly and can be changed into a coin that looks original and won't change in an inert holder, hasn't the coin doctor done the numismatic community a favor?
Suggested definitions for this thread:
A coin that has been correctly doctored is
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say looks original and
2. is a coin that if it were in an inert holder would not change in appearance to look not original
A coin that has been incorrectly doctored is
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say doesn't look original or
2. a coin in an inert holder that eventually changes in appearance to look like #1 immediately above
Here is something else to consider: If a coin looks unnatural or ugly and can be changed into a coin that looks original and won't change in an inert holder, hasn't the coin doctor done the numismatic community a favor?
0
Comments
It serves to make original coins rarer.
The thought of doctoring makes me sick. I guess it does not make everyone sick; I am not universal in this opinion.
Coin doctors do not serve the numismatic community. Coin doctors serve themselves.
<< <i>
<< <i>Are we against coin doctoring done correctly or just bad coin doctoring or both? ...............................Both!
Suggested definitions for this thread:
A coin that has been correctly doctored is..............................is bad no matter how good it looks!
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say looks original and
2. is a coin that if it were in an inert holder would not change in appearance to look not original
A coin that has been incorrectly doctored is...........................is also bad even though it truned out not as originally planned!
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say doesn't look original or
2. a coin in an inert holder that eventually changes in appearance to look like #1 immediately above
Here is something else to consider: If a coin looks unnatural or ugly and can be changed into a coin that looks original and won't change in an inert holder, hasn't the coin doctor done the numismatic community a favor? >>
........................................No he hasn't! >>
EAC 6024
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>and you want to go back into the coin trading business again? >>
I want to encourage people to think.
You seem to think it is unwise of me to simply pose the question.....
It might be that some forms of coin doctoring could be seen as beneficial restoration by experienced numismatists, and an open dialogue about it might lead to less nonbeneficial restoration being done.
The discussion of ideas are things not to be afraid of, (unless you are surrounded by dolts who can't distinguish between positions and ideas AND you have such low esteem that the opinions of these dolts matters to you. The opinions of dolts don't matter to me, if you haven't noticed, and I bet you haven't noticed......many things.)
I went there. The only thing worth mentioning is that someone bought a Barber from me that Gold CACed. There's also many lies made by people with no assets and no future, so hopefully people who read those forums consider the sources.
I do in fact though appreciate those decent people who tell the truth and defend me.
Some of asset-less lying people post there because they have been banned here.
<< <i><< Are we against coin doctoring done correctly or just bad coin doctoring or both? ...............................Both!
Suggested definitions for this thread:
A coin that has been correctly doctored is..............................is bad no matter how good it looks!
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say looks original and
2. is a coin that if it were in an inert holder would not change in appearance to look not original
A coin that has been incorrectly doctored is...........................is also bad even though it truned out not as originally planned!
1. a coin that the majority of experienced numismatists would say doesn't look original or
2. a coin in an inert holder that eventually changes in appearance to look like #1 immediately above
Here is something else to consider: If a coin looks unnatural or ugly and can be changed into a coin that looks original and won't change in an inert holder, hasn't the coin doctor done the numismatic community a favor? >>
........................................No he hasn't! >>
Agreeded, he's/she's done HIMSELF/HERSELF A FINANCIAL FAVOR.
<< <i>I'm not against coin doctoring if it is used to preserve the coin and is known and stated that way. It's when it's done to decieve others and or make a profit. >>
<< <i> am against someone intentionally and willfully deceiving me for their profit and at my expense. >>
I've collect coins for most of my 54 years. I haven't seen as many as many here have. The ugly coins are what they are... leave them alone. To me coin preservation is more for a coin brought up from the bottom of the ocean. Not a slightly darkened Morgan dollar that someone thinks should be dipped or chemically toned.
Another problem is our desire for only the best.......something that is beautiful that is totally natural or original is just that, beautifu, natural and original......what we want the most.
However, there are some really ugly original coins out there....and not everyone can afford the very best.......
Additionally, the market has spoken by supporting NCS in their "conservation" of coins.
And, whether you call it preservation, conservation or coin doctoring, it all comes down to changing the appearance of a coin rapidly through various means to "improve" the coin. And, if the marketplace didn't want it, it wouldn't happen.
So, my thinking is, why not encourage the coin doctors to come out of the woodwork, encourage them to share their techniques and then everyone can discuss it and those in the know (chemists - they are here on the board) can render their opinions on techniques with regard to the things that should be considered like stability, intensity, etc.
That way, with information widely disseminated, hopefully fewer coins would be ruined. And don't kid yourself, their are different levels of "ruined".
(And for your information, my advice is that you avoid any and all coins that look even remotely as AT, however, what is the hobbyist supposed to do when one of his coins changes from beautiful to ugly?)
Sticking your head in the sand and discouraging any discussion about how coin doctoring is done is like the censorship of books.
Finally, knowing how coin doctors do it and how the coins look after receiving whatever treatment they have received probably would serve to help people identify doctoring. And isn't that of great service to everyone?
Having said all of that, I think it is not moral to doctor coins to defraud people but, a coin doesn't travel with a diary, so the wide dissemination of information is truly what is needed so people can protect themselves.
Wouldn't it be good for infomation to exist about what techniques produce what characteristics? Who are you going to get that info from?
Is this a static factor, like say, the grading requirements of an MS65?
Eric
edited for spelling/doubled words.
Robert, let's try not to discuss Politics here and for the sake of discussion stick with coins.
no one is ever going to stop coin doctors [sorry, anyone who believes that they are is living in a total fantasy land......and no matter how offensively a person comes out against coin doctors (to promote their business and "ethics" to gullible people who fall for that kind of childish talk) wouldn't it be more persuasive of your ethics if you spent your time
educating the public with images, interviews, AND REAL INFORMATION......
so
so that you can to minimize the ruining of coins through stupidity?
.....or is it just easier to call people names and be aggressive to get attention....?
<< <i>I'm against changing coins. Dipping, Taco Belling, repairing, MS70ing, puttying, and whatever they do to make them look different than the way they receive them. >>
Yes, I am too, almost completely (for example, a coin that has been holed probably should be filled), however, it's not going to stop happening. That's why we all need to focus on education instead of just condeming it.
<< <i>(to promote their business and "ethics" to gullible people who fall for that kind of childish talk) >>
To promote their business?
I notice the link in your sign line, is that why you are posting so much lately?
<< <i>
<< <i>(to promote their business and "ethics" to gullible people who fall for that kind of childish talk) >>
To promote their business?
I notice the link in your sign line, is that why you are posting so much lately?
No, Caleb, a better use of my time would be spent doing other things to promote my business, so no, I'm not posting to promote a business that doesn't need promoting right now. Now, in a few weeks, it will neet promotion, but not yet. So, stay tuned.
I suspect you probably wouldn't ask me that question if you had not just gotton here.
<< <i>I am against someone intentionally and willfully deceiving me for their profit and at my expense. >>
So true.
No one will ever stop prostitution... sorry, anyone who believes that they are is living in a total fantasy land. You'll just have to accept that some of your daughters may become prostitutes.
No one will ever stop war... sorry, anyone who believes that they are is living in a total fantasy land. You'll just have to accept that some of your children may die for their country.
I love America... where else can you use misdirection to manipulate people to agree with you?
Edited to add: We live in a world where we are taught that we always HAVE to be right or we are failures. If someone disagrees with us, we try our best to discredit them. Why not sit back and look at both sides for once and try to learn something? Why does it always have to be black-and-white?
Following the idea that knowledge is power, I think that judiciously applied conservation has its place in numismatics.
As Adrian stated, coin doctors will always be with us. There are a few major factors in diminishing their influence:
1. Education. Not just in numismatics, but in other areas that affect the many apsects of numismatics.
2. Experience (a lot, not just a few years, or a few books. I mean literally many years viewing thousands of coins. I even think that experimenting on sacrificial coins to learn the results of known AT techniques. It is distinguishable, and noticeable.)
3. Ego and pride. Some folks just can't accept the fact that the "monster" they bought is AT. Instead of learning from the experience, and really getting those attributes into their bones, they stick their heads in the sand, and become obnoxious and defensive.
4. Never buying a toned coined without a return policy.
5. Clear cut policies on Ebay, ANA, Forums, etc. on what is acceptable, and what is not.
"original" is an appearance, not a process.
<< <i>If the doctoring is good enough to pass as "original", then the coin is effectively "original"
"original" is an appearance, not a process. >>
Your logic made me laugh... I agree with you.
People love their dipped coins so I send them to my competitors.
<< <i>If the doctoring is good enough to pass as "original", then the coin is effectively "original"
"original" is an appearance, not a process. >>
Can't "original" be a state of being?
<< <i>
<< <i>If the doctoring is good enough to pass as "original", then the coin is effectively "original"
"original" is an appearance, not a process. >>
Can't "original" be a state of being? >>
Yes, the state of being original!
<< <i>If the doctoring is good enough to pass as "original", then the coin is effectively "original" "original" is an appearance, not a process. >>
Wow. I can see how this is so logical yet so awful for the coin community. Its all about acceptance.
Its as if the "doctors" have established the groundrules and we have to live in their paradigm rather than vice versa.
TPGs are playing catch-up at this point.
"Bongo hurtles along the rain soaked highway of life on underinflated bald retread tires."
~Wayne
<< <i>If the doctoring is good enough to pass as "original", then the coin is effectively "original"
"original" is an appearance, not a process. >>
Then when the Chinese get good enough at counterfeiting no coin is worth more than the cost of stamping out a new one.
<< <i>
<< <i>If the doctoring is good enough to pass as "original", then the coin is effectively "original"
"original" is an appearance, not a process. >>
Can't "original" be a state of being? >>
'
Sure, but how do you know it is, other than appearance? Since for 99.9% of coins you only have a single point of time to judge it from.
Then you get into the murky definition of "original"
Coin cleaning to remove contanimates vs coin stripping to enhance appearance is another fine distinction.
Or, maybe we should micro-write on the side of the coin, the coin's history.......
or attach a toe tag.....
Sorry folks, disclosure is great between the doctor and purchaser but the coin's status as a doctored coin just isn't going to be passed on from owner to owner.
<< <i>A screwed up coin can only be changed into another form of screwed up coin. I take a hard line on this.
It serves to make original coins rarer.
The thought of doctoring makes me sick. >>
Why are people who improve things in fields other than in numismatics highly respected and their work highly desired?
<< <i>Why are people who improve things in fields other than in numismatics highly respected and their work highly desired? >>
Two differences:
(1) In other fields the work is done in the open and well documented. The restored work is not presented as original. In numismatics, often times doctors conceal their work and seek to deceive the TPGs and collectors into believing their altered coins are original. The deception may extend to violating legal contracts which is not often the case in other fields.
(2) The deception from doctors in numismatics often leads to real financial losses. If doctors documented their work and did not seek to deceive as in other fields, things may be different. Of course, it doesn't help when heads fall off or putty goes bad. You would imagine the doctors should make good on their work and offer warranties or something!
A few recommendations:
(a) have doctors be publicly known
(b) have worked coins be documented
(c) have warranties for worked coins
(d) have insurance for doctors for when their work goes bad
Basically, if you do good work, you should be willing to stand behind your work by putting your name on the project and back your work with a warranty, like any good service.
<< <i>
<< <i>A screwed up coin can only be changed into another form of screwed up coin. I take a hard line on this.
It serves to make original coins rarer.
The thought of doctoring makes me sick. >>
Why are people who improve things in fields other than in numismatics highly respected and their work highly desired?
Frank, I almost inhaled my coffee this morning when I got to the end of your post
Why are people who improve things in fields other than in numismatics open about their work while many numismatic doctors cloak their work in secrecy and do not stand behind their work?
<< <i>Yes, disclosure....information handed down from generation to generation......
Or, maybe we should micro-write on the side of the coin, the coin's history.......
or attach a toe tag.....
Sorry folks, disclosure is great between the doctor and purchaser but the coin's status as a doctored coin just isn't going to be passed on from owner to owner. >>
Simply attach the history it to the PCGS / NGC cert number. With computer scanning, TPGs will hopefully be able to positively identify coins when they are resubmitted. This is similar to cars where histories are attached to VINs.
They will say "I don't want doctored coins - coin doctors are criminals" but they always choose the coin with the best "eye appeal" which in MANY cases is a coin that has been "improved" in some way. Such a mindset means that coin doctors will work in secret, anonymously, with no peer review of best practices or even safe practices, lie about whether a coin has been worked on, even generate false pedigrees and running them through other parties to avoid detection of what the coin previously looked like or the amount it sold for before being "doctored."
Is plugging a holed coin considered "coin doctoring"? How about removing verdigris (dirt/grime)? What about dipping? Album toning? Taco Bell napkin toning?
Where does one draw the line?
Personally, in general I'd probably have to define coin doctoring as "adding to" a coin. Whereas conservation would be "removing from" a coin. Hence;
Plugging and intentionally toning are "coin doctoring" (both are additions), and removing verdigris and dipping are "conservation".
Right??? Hell, I dunno...
<< <i>Why are people who improve things in fields other than in numismatics highly respected and their work highly desired?
I think you make an excellent point. Actually, several and you make it visually which is even more impactful.
Things can be improved when properly restored, cleaned and enhanced. The question though remains is what is acceptable.
And the answer really, honestly, truly......is that it remains an opinion, like beauty.
Now, anyone who thinks that you can't quantify opinions, isn't familiar with statistics or committees.
Currently, the final arbiter on what is acceptable are the two grading services. What they need though is information. And with the rhetoric being "kill all the lawyers and while we're at it, the coin doctors...." no one wants to come out and share what they know about methodologies of coin doctoring.
<< <i>My post is to point out that numismatists need a reality check.
They will say "I don't want doctored coins - coin doctors are criminals" but they always choose the coin with the best "eye appeal" which in MANY cases is a coin that has been "improved" in some way. Such a mindset means that coin doctors will work in secret, anonymously, with no peer review of best practices or even safe practices, lie about whether a coin has been worked on, even generate false pedigrees and running them through other parties to avoid detection of what the coin previously looked like or the amount it sold for before being "doctored." >>
Personally, I think the real problem in the final analysis is
1. the problem of market acceptability and
2. stability of the changes that have been made to the coin.
<< <i>My suspicions are too, that this discussion of coin "conservation, doctoring, enhancement, cleaning, etc." has been going on in parallel in the art world.
Personally, I think the real problem in the final analysis is
1. the problem of market acceptability and
2. stability of the changes that have been made to the coin. >>
If coin restoration was as widely accepted as classic auto restoration the "how too" and "who" would not be hidden as it is now.
Not until collectors get past the stigma that coin restoration is evil and wrong (although, as pointed out above, most collectors are drawn to the prettier coin vs the original one) most information and instruction will not be forthcoming.