Dipping is not doctoring.......if you're the current owner or seller of said dipped coin.
The opinion varies with each coin and each grade....as well as the owner.
Most butt ugly coins that "needed" to be dipped, will probably once again someday return to a butt ugly state. If you push that string far enough, everything will again be dipped multiple times over the next 50-150 yrs. The end result will still be a lot of butt ugly and lifeless looking coins.
I got a common date Peace ( 1923 or 1922 etc ) its MS66 with green bean and the thing looks as if it was hit with some sort of buffer. The coin came from a supposedly top notch Dealer, one of the most vocal out there. Amazing how this Coin just looks all wrong. If I figure how to post pics, I'll do that one day.
As I collect mostly foreign coins now I very seldom get to the US forumn. Most of the time all I see is a lot of bickering. However-I have a question regarding dipping. How about the mints proofs coins? I just bought about 60 proof halves, quarters, dimes and nickles from the 60's to the 80's. I bought them cheap because they were all covered with spots, finger prints, splotches and bad toning. These were just plain ugly in anyone's description. I dipped them all and brought them back to there "original" proof surfaces. All of the uglyness is gone and all of the full luster of proof coins is back. To look at them you cannot tell the difference between them and looking at another proof still in its original set. Is this wrong to dip them? By the way one of the coins had tarnished so bad that it had gone into the coin. Oh yeah! Have a great holiday everyone. Olmanjon
<< <i>As I collect mostly foreign coins now I very seldom get to the US forumn. Most of the time all I see is a lot of bickering. However-I have a question regarding dipping. How about the mints proofs coins? I just bought about 60 proof halves, quarters, dimes and nickles from the 60's to the 80's. I bought them cheap because they were all covered with spots, finger prints, splotches and bad toning. These were just plain ugly in anyone's description. I dipped them all and brought them back to there "original" proof surfaces. All of the uglyness is gone and all of the full luster of proof coins is back. To look at them you cannot tell the difference between them and looking at another proof still in its original set. Is this wrong to dip them? By the way one of the coins had tarnished so bad that it had gone into the coin. Oh yeah! Have a great holiday everyone. Olmanjon >>
Of course it's not wrong to dip them! They are your coins after all. Hit them with a wire brush if you want. But it is absolutely wrong to turn around and sell them as problem-free proof coins, which they are not.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
I guess what puzzles me is the zealots on each side. It certainly seems to be a grey area and I can't fault anyone for taking a particularly side. However, those that seem to have righteous indignation towards those with a differing opinion doesn't make sense to me.
Comments
The opinion varies with each coin and each grade....as well as the owner.
Most butt ugly coins that "needed" to be dipped, will probably once again someday return to a butt ugly state. If you push that string far enough, everything will again be dipped multiple times over the next 50-150 yrs.
The end result will still be a lot of butt ugly and lifeless looking coins.
The coin came from a supposedly top notch Dealer, one of the most vocal out there. Amazing how this Coin just looks all wrong.
If I figure how to post pics, I'll do that one day.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Oh yeah! Have a great holiday everyone.
Olmanjon
http://bit.ly/bxi7py
<< <i>As I collect mostly foreign coins now I very seldom get to the US forumn. Most of the time all I see is a lot of bickering. However-I have a question regarding dipping. How about the mints proofs coins? I just bought about 60 proof halves, quarters, dimes and nickles from the 60's to the 80's. I bought them cheap because they were all covered with spots, finger prints, splotches and bad toning. These were just plain ugly in anyone's description. I dipped them all and brought them back to there "original" proof surfaces. All of the uglyness is gone and all of the full luster of proof coins is back. To look at them you cannot tell the difference between them and looking at another proof still in its original set. Is this wrong to dip them? By the way one of the coins had tarnished so bad that it had gone into the coin.
Oh yeah! Have a great holiday everyone.
Olmanjon >>
Of course it's not wrong to dip them! They are your coins after all. Hit them with a wire brush if you want. But it is absolutely wrong to turn around and sell them as problem-free proof coins, which they are not.
http://macrocoins.com