Cleaned coins
oneor11
Posts: 208
As I've been pouring through thousands of coins over the past two weeks, I have observed a huge amount that were slabbed genuine details because of cleaning. It's kind of sad really...that a wonderful AU coin with so much potential was cleaned and then is doomed to a cold life of low value and ridicule while all of its uncleaned "coin peers" find warm cozy homes in someone's collection. It's really a shame. But then it hit me that I don't know really why this is such a big deal. Why is it a big deal?
Many a coin's history has a human element to it. Someone in 1854 may have been bored and sat at the table and spun a cent for hours, scraped it along on a wooden table, ricocheted it off the wall in hopes that it would land in a tin can, or skipped it along a road as they walked to the general store. Others in 1915 may have carried it around as a luck charm with the rest of thier pocket change, slowly grinding the detail away. Still others may have admired the design of an old coin and rubbed or scrubbed the dirt away. My question is, why is cleaning a coin such a faux pas in the numismatic community- so much so that it can't even be graded when clearly there is detail there for grading? Not that I'm endorsing cleaning at all; I am rather just curious why a coin of historical and aesthetic value gets the death sentence because of cleaning- an action in the coin's history that may not be as destructive as other actions in the coin's history.
I'm looking forward to your take on it. Thanks.
Many a coin's history has a human element to it. Someone in 1854 may have been bored and sat at the table and spun a cent for hours, scraped it along on a wooden table, ricocheted it off the wall in hopes that it would land in a tin can, or skipped it along a road as they walked to the general store. Others in 1915 may have carried it around as a luck charm with the rest of thier pocket change, slowly grinding the detail away. Still others may have admired the design of an old coin and rubbed or scrubbed the dirt away. My question is, why is cleaning a coin such a faux pas in the numismatic community- so much so that it can't even be graded when clearly there is detail there for grading? Not that I'm endorsing cleaning at all; I am rather just curious why a coin of historical and aesthetic value gets the death sentence because of cleaning- an action in the coin's history that may not be as destructive as other actions in the coin's history.
I'm looking forward to your take on it. Thanks.
0
Comments
Point two: some collectors will buy the cleaned coins. They might put them in an album, or retone them. Docs will sometimes methodically tone them up and try the game again. Cleaning and other techniques have been around as long as there has been a hobby.
Point three: Faux original is a popular look and these coins often sell for strong money, especially if the coin is in a TPG holder. A dipped coin that has retoned and now has a natural looking skin. Especially for older coins, there are very few original coins that have never been messed with, that have been properly stored for their 100+ years. Provenance and old catalogs are some tools that can help.
As always, collect what you like and can afford and enjoy the hobby. Do understand that cleaned, dipped, conserved coins are a grey area. Ask 100 experts and only in obvious cases will all 100 agree on a coin. Understand that there are many coins where votes may go 90/10, 80/20 or even 50/50 as far as thumbs up or thumbs down for market acceptability.
<< <i>This is just my opinion only. When you clean a coin it is like washing away all the history of the coin, it is just a metal disk then. Is that a dumb way to look at it or what? >>
I agree completely.
I highly recommend that any collector watch the movie "The Red Violin". It's about a violin's journey through time. You see how the handling of the object created its "character". Coins gather character in the same way. Then sit back and think about the hands that a circulated southern mint gold coin passed through in the mid-1800's (or whatever coin strikes your fancy). Once that patina and "dirt" is removed, the history and character is lost.
<< <i>Red Tiger has stated it well. Purists will decry cleaning in any form as detrimental to the coin. In reality, some cleaning is not. For example, an acetone dip to remove organics will not touch the metal, but some still rail against it. Harsh cleaning, that leaves scratches or deteriorates the elements is certainly undesirable, but still accepted on very old or rare coins. This is a hobby, and no matter how hard some may try to make universal standards, it is still an individual hobby. Collect what you like. Remember, a collection can be to please yourself, or it can be an investment (this is a tricky area). Coins are worth only what a buyer will pay at any given time. Enjoy your coins. Cheers, RickO >>
I agree with Red Tiger and Rock-o.
A lot of the coins that some purist collectors think are "original" are re-toned coins that went back to that color after they were dipped. I think that people should collect what they like. One thing I don't like is when the purists take it upon themselved to have the standards changed for everyone so that only "original" coins will be market acceptable. You have no right to down grade the value of other people's collections, especially where there are experts who dsagree with you. If you don't want dipped coins, don't buy them, but leave other people's collections alone.
<< <i>
<< <i>Red Tiger has stated it well. Purists will decry cleaning in any form as detrimental to the coin. In reality, some cleaning is not. For example, an acetone dip to remove organics will not touch the metal, but some still rail against it. Harsh cleaning, that leaves scratches or deteriorates the elements is certainly undesirable, but still accepted on very old or rare coins. This is a hobby, and no matter how hard some may try to make universal standards, it is still an individual hobby. Collect what you like. Remember, a collection can be to please yourself, or it can be an investment (this is a tricky area). Coins are worth only what a buyer will pay at any given time. Enjoy your coins. Cheers, RickO >>
I agree with Red Tiger and Rock-o.
A lot of the coins that some purist collectors think are "original" are re-toned coins that went back to that color after they were dipped. I think that people should collect what they like. One thing I don't like is when the purists take it upon themselved to have the standards changed for everyone so that only "original" coins will be market acceptable. You have no right to down grade the value of other people's collections, especially where there are experts who dsagree with you. If you don't want dipped coins, don't buy them, but leave other people's collections alone. >>
Well said.
<< <i>If a 100 year old coin was dipped 50 years ago - isn't that dipping as much a part of its life as the 30 years it spend in a Dansco album? >>
Yep. Every bit as much.
Collectors need to have an eye, the ability to grade and make a determination as to what it is that they want in a coin. As an example, there was a thread posted in connection with a 1799 and 1803 Bust Dollar- neither coin is original and the 1799 was enhanced to at some point whereby the lustre is looks vibrant. Unfortunately, the lustre was always present even before it was enhanced, its just that lustre is associated with reflectivity instead of the actual surface of the coin. That thread is a classic example of perception and misplaced views as to what is important in the evaluation of a coin. The 1803 is not original either but it is closer to what a lightly circulated example should look like.
Sadly, the biggest issue for this hobby is that there are clear contradictions in terms of what is market acceptable at various grades. Unless and until this question is tackled by TPG, the enhanced coin will remain a thorn in the side of this hobby.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
what is the general consensus?
i personally see cleaning and dipping as two separate methods.
cleaning - putting PLS on the coin surfaces as to cause extensive damage with rough abrasion
dipping - if done somewhat properly removes a much more even and less distracting layer of the coin sometimes a lot, sometimes a little.
i still hope to see somewhere down the road some set registries including the new pcgs details option with say only .92 code or maybe a couple others being accepted that would allow some people
to share and compete in a friendly manner with the massive availability of PLS coins but wouldn't be accepted into regular set registry unless the points would be significantly reduced for .92.
it would be a way to open up the middle and lower end of numismaticly valued coins and also bring some more income to the TPG for their cost to add new registries and information.
but i am just 1 person and that is my view on how to recapture a significantly large part of the hobby that has been lost due to lack of education.
.
<< <i>cleaned coins suck - people want "original" coins , with original skin, tone,..... I dont even care for MA dipped coins personally >>
Used to be cleaned coins were the "in" thing to have. It explains why there are so many today.
What's the difference if you put it in your pocket and it rubs against the side of your pocket when you reach in to take it out? Is this coin now cleaned?
This argument can go on forever. If you go metal detecting and find a coin encaked with mud and you hold it under a faucet-to clean the dirt off it, does this count as cleaning? It is only cleaning if it can be spotted? The acetone cleaning cannot be easily detected so it does not count as cleaning if done properly. The truth is that most circulated coins and even a lot of uncirculated and proof coins, especially pre-1900 coins in collections today have been cleaned in one way or another. You just have to decide the amount or nature of cleaning that is ok with you.
True- cleaned coins are not worth as much as uncleaned coins in most instances, however, If anyone here wants to dispose of a 1873 two cent proof or 1878 Proof trade dollar because it has been cleaned and thus devalued to almost nothing and are very shunned by many here-Please sell them to me. I still think that many coins are very desirable even if they are cleaned simply because they are not available or too expensive in better grades.
"Cleaned" does mean worthless or uncollectable--just less desirable.
Bob
<< <i>
<< <i>cleaned coins suck - people want "original" coins , with original skin, tone,..... I dont even care for MA dipped coins personally >>
Used to be cleaned coins were the "in" thing to have. It explains why there are so many today. >>
This explains why so many Bust dollars are "white," have blotchy toning, are re-toned or have a layer of AT on them. Back when I was young collector in the late 1960s and early ‘70s, “white” was THE color for Bust dollars. Many pieces in grades from Fine to Mint State got the treatment to make them white. Now that their original skin as been removed, you see the results.
<< <i>Collectors need to have an eye, the ability to grade and make a determination as to what it is that they want in a coin. As an example, there was a thread posted in connection with a 1799 and 1803 Bust Dollar- neither coin is original and the 1799 was enhanced to at some point whereby the lustre is looks vibrant. Unfortunately, the lustre was always present even before it was enhanced, its just that lustre is associated with reflectivity instead of the actual surface of the coin. That thread is a classic example of perception and misplaced views as to what is important in the evaluation of a coin. The 1803 is not original either but it is closer to what a lightly circulated example should look like. >>
The thread to which you are referring is mine. I later explained that the 1799 had been cleaned with soap and water and that the 1803 was essentially original. I'll let in on another fact. The 1803 dollar is in a "Secure Plus," gold shield PCGS holder.
<< <i>This is a disturbing thread in that we again read about the tragedy of cleaned coins ...
Sadly, the biggest issue for this hobby is that there are clear contradictions in terms of what is market acceptable at various grades. Unless and until this question is tackled by TPG, the enhanced coin will remain a thorn in the side of this hobby. >>
The TPGs have tackled the issue and lets the market decide for them. Let me play devil's advocate: the docs give collectors what they want. You use the term enhanced, which in the dictionary definition means better. Docs supply the demand, they don't create the demand. Virtually no one wants ugly original coins. The highest demand right now, the in vogue look is retoned original looking coins in TPG holders. The emphasis on original looking, because not many of them are actually original. Bust dollars? What percentage of Bust Dollars have been messed with during their 200+ years? 25%? 50%? 80%? 95%?
Develop an eye? If everyone had that refined an eye, there wouldn't be a need for TPGs or sticker companies. There was a recent thread about the grading contest at FUN where the winner got 8 out of 20 grades correct. That's 8/20 for the winner from a field with 30 expert collectors. Take the contest to the bourse floor population of all collectors, and the median score might be 3 out of 20. The disclaimer is that with plus grades, it has become that much more difficult to get a high percentage correct. My guess is that maybe half of active collectors can grade where their opinion is worth listening too, and maybe 15% can distinguish quality for grade. What percent can tell faux original from really original? I would guess about the same 15%. I see what I believe are faux original (dipped and expertly retoned) coins going for strong money at auction. They might be in a holder and might have a sticker too. Again, back to point one. the issue of enhanced coins has been tackled and the TPGs tend to let the market decide.
There are so many shades of gray here, and differences of taste among collectors, that threads about cleaning will always generate interesting debate.
I believe that it is without a doubt market acceptable and I would except the coin to be graded by any service- PCGS, NCG or PCGS secure plus and it is even wothy of a CAC sticker at 45-
Others in this thread comment on collectors being fooled as to what is original. The 1803 has what looks to be an original look- I like the contrast in color on the high points which reflect the pattern of wear.
Could the coin have been dipped- perhaps in the 1930s or 40s? Its possible and I say that in part because of the halo effect around the letters with the complete absence of any type of dirt-
Please understand that I think the 1803 is a terrific coin-- is it completely original? I think that is a different question
edited to add- I went back to the other thread to see that the 1803 Dollar was graded 53 which is fine- Higher than I anticipated but it is still a very attractive coin regardless of grade
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I diligently rubbed that coin HARD about every other month when I was a kid. Got it BRIGHT, man. We are talking BAKING SODA! DRY BAKING SODA!
Then put it away til it needed it again. (see, it would turn kinda green where I didn't get all the baking soda)
It was so ....PURDY.
Then I forgot about it and just let it sit for years.
It's now in a 53 slab.
<< <i>that goes to show that just because its in a slab, does not mean its 100% original. >>
I don't think many folks thought that. I hope not.
Eric
<< <i>you may be surprised at how many people wont buy a raw coin because of thier belief that if it isnt slabbed, there is something "wrong" with it, but those same folks dont realize that many slabbed coins have something "wrong" with them >>
I buy raw tokens and medals regularly. In fact I want my tokens and medals raw and only buy certified pieces when I can't get a raw one.
With coins, it's a different story. Usually I am buying for my registry collection. Getting coins certified is a hastle for a collector. For a dealer it can work out great because you sent a lot of coins in, and on average you do well. Sure some coins don't work out the way you might have hoped, usually others do. I know that from personal experience.
BUT for the collector you are often sending in one or two pieces. So if you get a "genuine" holder, or if you get a grade lower than you thought you should have gotten, it's a hastle. For that reason I buy coins in the holder I want from the get-go.
Most of the time when I take the time to look at raw coins at shows I see mostly problems. Most of the coins won't grade. Quite often there IS a reason why many of these pieces are not in holders.
I'm 33 years old now. I remember going to my first coin show when I was 16. I picked up many "raw" coins and it was quite a magical experience. I didn't know much about grading other than what was published by the ANA and generally took a dealer's word for it that it was "BU" or "XF". I would imagine in retrospect some of those were cleaned. But I would come home and show everyone my new purchases and proudly accepted the "wows" and the "how beautifuls". I sat with those coins and wondered what the lives were like for the many generations of people who held that coin before me. A couple of years later I had to sell my collection and I was out of numismatics until now.
Now I have much more (relative to when I was 16) disposable income though I find it is no longer 'magical' for me to buy a raw coin. I am re-entering a seemingly foreign world from what I once knew. I fear I'm getting scammed or that in order for my coin to be taken seriously by others it needs to be slabbed. But if that coin comes back as being cleaned, I feel I am unable to share it with anyone else, including those in my newfound numismatic community. It's not counted as a true coin that completes a collection and am left with a feeling that the magic (and my money) are gone. Or if in 1865 a Union soldier was riding his horse so hard to get back home that his quarter fell out of his pocket and rolled into some dirt, its legacy and rarity may not be respected because it is deemed to have environmental damage when the spectacular metal detector find is sent in for grading. Those coins, regardless of whether they were cleaned or not, damaged or not- were designed by a spectacular person, came from a spectacular mint, witnessed some of the most spectacular events of an era that none of us today will ever be able to revisit. That has to be worth more than the $1 minimum bid on Heritage.
I respect the way the market defines things though I suppose. I suppose without those controls in the market people could have an incentive to intentionally deface or degrade a coin. This is beneficial, albeit much less magical.
Jacob
P.S. I forget who mentioned the Red Violin, but you're right. That is one incredible movie.