Options
Results from my first NCS submission
jonathanb
Posts: 3,741 ✭✭✭✭✭
I know that there are some strong feelings about NCS. I've been meaning for a while to check out for myself what NCS can do. Towards the end of last year I bought a few pieces that I decided were worth the risk. In some cases I had no worries. In other cases I had no cares. And for a change I remembered to take "before" pictures before packing up the boxes!
Except where noted, the before and after pictures were taken under pretty much the same lighting conditions -- as much as possible 2 months apart, anyway.
1) HK-753, Disneyland So-Called Dollar in silver
This is a piece that I figured I would never own. There were only 30 struck in silver, and they're seriously fought over not only by So-Called Dollar collectors but also by Disney collectors. And there are a LOT of Disney collectors! To my shock, I picked this up pretty much as scrap silver in a group lot with other silver medals.
As you can see from the "before" pictures, this suffered a bit from being treated as scrap. The fields were very hazy, with smudges and fingerprints. Still, treatment of modern silver proofs is one area where everyone seems to agree that NCS does a pretty good job, and what little toning there was, I simply didn't care about.
My feeling was that they would do a fine job here. As you can see from the first set of "after" pictures, they sure did. The second set of "after" pictures were taken from a slightly off-center angle to emphasize the deep mirrors that NCS revealed. I am VERY happy with the results of this one!
Before:
After:
After, off-angle:
2) 1897 Philadelphia Museums medal, Rulau Phl A78, in silver
This is actually a US Mint medal, although post-Julian given the 1897 date. I have a really nice specimen of this, cameo proof and blast-white. This one was the polar opposite, toned gunmetal black. It also came in its original case. Unfortunately, something about the case left a nasty surface residue on both sides of the medal. You can't really see it in the "before" pictures, but those darker areas in the field were actually some sort of crud that was very obvious when you caught the light right. To make matters worse, I had no idea whether the crud was on top of the toning or under it.
I sent this to NCS with the specific instructions NOT to remove the dark toning. Based on these pictures, they may have lightened it a bit. I'm not even sure of that, given that I took the pictures at different times.
In the end, I think they did a fine job. The crud is gone, and the toning is mostly still there. It's a little splotchy. I'm not blaming NCS for that. This was maybe the biggest risk of the whole submission, considering that it could have come out VERY poorly.
Before:
After:
3) 1893 World's Candy Exposition
I think this is just a great looking medal. A candy exposition? Who woulda thought! Plus, I like the idea that there was a second WCE event in 1893 that wasn't the World's Columbian Exposition.
This is a large medal, 2 inches in diameter. It's also very light. Based on the weight and the color, I'm pretty sure it's silver-plated white metal. That means it's also fairly fragile. This one had a thick green crud covering most of the surfaces, which you can see most easily on the bottom of the reverse in the "before" pictures. I started working on it myself and got a lot off, but there still a lot left that was being stubborn. I figured that I was better off letting NCS have a go than to risk ruining it myself. I think they did a fine job.
Before:
After:
4) Julian CM-12, Charleston Centennial
This medal is a great example of why I like US Mint medals. There were only 161 of these struck, making it pretty rare in an absolute sense. Also, unlike some medals with similar mintages that seem to keep turning up, this one is rare in a real sense. I have only four records of auction appearances, none since 2004. It was not represented in the Ford sales, for example (unless I missed one!). And for all that rarity, I probably overpaid at $150. Supply, meet demand. No demand. Fine by me.
Unfortunately, the condition was horrible, with nasty active corrosion over much of the surfaces. I bought it for the rarity, and I was comfortable with that. I was also comfortable that NCS couldn't make it look any worse than the bright fluorescent green where it started.
I was floored by the results. Not only is the green gone, but the surfaces are... well, they're ok. This wasn't an Unc specimen to start with. NCS couldn't possibly do anything about the scratches, or the real wear. But given that, I'm thrilled. I can look at this without cringing now!
Before:
After:
Enlarged Before:
Enlarged After:
5) Julian AC-100 United States 1956 Annual Assay
Like the Charleston Centennial piece, this is a US Mint medal that is both super-rare (I only have records for two auction appearances) and super-cruddy. I think it was in a fire. There are actually little blobs of metal in various places, including sticking off the edge near 2:00 on the reverse. I think those must have been melted bits of something else.
I figured that NCS couldn't possibly make this worse. I was right -- they didn't even try to tackle it. Oh, well. I guess they have their limits!
In all, I'm very pleased!
Except where noted, the before and after pictures were taken under pretty much the same lighting conditions -- as much as possible 2 months apart, anyway.
1) HK-753, Disneyland So-Called Dollar in silver
This is a piece that I figured I would never own. There were only 30 struck in silver, and they're seriously fought over not only by So-Called Dollar collectors but also by Disney collectors. And there are a LOT of Disney collectors! To my shock, I picked this up pretty much as scrap silver in a group lot with other silver medals.
As you can see from the "before" pictures, this suffered a bit from being treated as scrap. The fields were very hazy, with smudges and fingerprints. Still, treatment of modern silver proofs is one area where everyone seems to agree that NCS does a pretty good job, and what little toning there was, I simply didn't care about.
My feeling was that they would do a fine job here. As you can see from the first set of "after" pictures, they sure did. The second set of "after" pictures were taken from a slightly off-center angle to emphasize the deep mirrors that NCS revealed. I am VERY happy with the results of this one!
Before:
After:
After, off-angle:
2) 1897 Philadelphia Museums medal, Rulau Phl A78, in silver
This is actually a US Mint medal, although post-Julian given the 1897 date. I have a really nice specimen of this, cameo proof and blast-white. This one was the polar opposite, toned gunmetal black. It also came in its original case. Unfortunately, something about the case left a nasty surface residue on both sides of the medal. You can't really see it in the "before" pictures, but those darker areas in the field were actually some sort of crud that was very obvious when you caught the light right. To make matters worse, I had no idea whether the crud was on top of the toning or under it.
I sent this to NCS with the specific instructions NOT to remove the dark toning. Based on these pictures, they may have lightened it a bit. I'm not even sure of that, given that I took the pictures at different times.
In the end, I think they did a fine job. The crud is gone, and the toning is mostly still there. It's a little splotchy. I'm not blaming NCS for that. This was maybe the biggest risk of the whole submission, considering that it could have come out VERY poorly.
Before:
After:
3) 1893 World's Candy Exposition
I think this is just a great looking medal. A candy exposition? Who woulda thought! Plus, I like the idea that there was a second WCE event in 1893 that wasn't the World's Columbian Exposition.
This is a large medal, 2 inches in diameter. It's also very light. Based on the weight and the color, I'm pretty sure it's silver-plated white metal. That means it's also fairly fragile. This one had a thick green crud covering most of the surfaces, which you can see most easily on the bottom of the reverse in the "before" pictures. I started working on it myself and got a lot off, but there still a lot left that was being stubborn. I figured that I was better off letting NCS have a go than to risk ruining it myself. I think they did a fine job.
Before:
After:
4) Julian CM-12, Charleston Centennial
This medal is a great example of why I like US Mint medals. There were only 161 of these struck, making it pretty rare in an absolute sense. Also, unlike some medals with similar mintages that seem to keep turning up, this one is rare in a real sense. I have only four records of auction appearances, none since 2004. It was not represented in the Ford sales, for example (unless I missed one!). And for all that rarity, I probably overpaid at $150. Supply, meet demand. No demand. Fine by me.
Unfortunately, the condition was horrible, with nasty active corrosion over much of the surfaces. I bought it for the rarity, and I was comfortable with that. I was also comfortable that NCS couldn't make it look any worse than the bright fluorescent green where it started.
I was floored by the results. Not only is the green gone, but the surfaces are... well, they're ok. This wasn't an Unc specimen to start with. NCS couldn't possibly do anything about the scratches, or the real wear. But given that, I'm thrilled. I can look at this without cringing now!
Before:
After:
Enlarged Before:
Enlarged After:
5) Julian AC-100 United States 1956 Annual Assay
Like the Charleston Centennial piece, this is a US Mint medal that is both super-rare (I only have records for two auction appearances) and super-cruddy. I think it was in a fire. There are actually little blobs of metal in various places, including sticking off the edge near 2:00 on the reverse. I think those must have been melted bits of something else.
I figured that NCS couldn't possibly make this worse. I was right -- they didn't even try to tackle it. Oh, well. I guess they have their limits!
In all, I'm very pleased!
0
Comments
ty for posting
as i expected, some pretty nice results
i have a few going out to them sometime this year and looking forward to it
.
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
Click on this link to see my ebay listings.
I've used NCS a time or two and have been happy with the results also.
I would be pleased at the results.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
<< <i>What did they charge for all of this? >>
Their fees are reasonable -- 1% of the value for an evaluation, then 4% of the value of the piece for the actual work (if they do anything), with minimums of $5 and $15. Plus shipping, of course. That means that I paid $20 each for the work on the Philadelphia Museums, World's Candy Expo, and Charleston Centennial pieces. The Disneyland piece was worth a lot more even in its original condition; I paid $75 and if I knew I was going to get results like that I probably would have given a higher value estimate to start with. The AC-100 was always going to have serious problems even if they improved it, so I listed its value at only $1,000 and I paid $10 for them to look at it and say, "Uh, no."
Including shipping, it was a bit under $200 in total. Processing time took about a month and a half door to door (there was a rush option that I didn't pay for).
<< <i>Interesting results, but isn't it a bit telling about how NCS avoided liability on the one piece that had significant value by declining to attempt the conservation work on the Assay Commission medal? Don't you wonder what might have been if they offered a waiver in that regard? In perspective for those who might not know what I'm alluding to, there is a Mint State 1956 AC-100 currently on the market at $5,000. >>
I don't hold anything against them on that piece. There's no question it has serious problems. I was frankly surprised that they attempted anything with the Charleston piece, let alone that they did as well as the did.
FWIW, I kinda sorta did give them a waiver for the AC-100. My instructions on that piece were, "Ugh. No, I don't know what happened to it. Do whatever you can to make it look less hideous?" That might not count legally, but I think it got my feelings across pretty clearly! :-)
jonathan