<< <i>thank you for a much needed post, Tommy. I once posted before/after pictures of a Copper SC$ that went through NCS much to its improvement and a member actually stated that he liked the before pictured medal......................not realizing he had mixed them up and really liked the conserved picture.
soapboxes can be dangerous. -----BTW, a member in this thread now owns that medal. >>
keets, Since the spot removal wasn't disclosed upfront I moved that SC$1 quicker then a hot potato once I discovered it had been conserved by surfing the web and finding that old thread. Since NCS didn't just spot treat it and not knowing what type of chemicals they used owning that long term would have been like sitting on a ticking bomb awaiting it to turn in the holder.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
<< <i>thank you for a much needed post, Tommy. I once posted before/after pictures of a Copper SC$ that went through NCS much to its improvement and a member actually stated that he liked the before pictured medal......................not realizing he had mixed them up and really liked the conserved picture.
soapboxes can be dangerous. -----BTW, a member in this thread now owns that medal. >>
keets, Since the spot removal wasn't disclosed upfront I moved that SC$1 quicker then a hot potato once I discovered it had been conserved by surfing the web and finding that old thread. Since NCS didn't just spot treat it and not knowing what type of chemicals they used owning that long term would have been like sitting on a ticking bomb awaiting it to turn in the holder. >>
That brings up an interesting topic. Should a seller disclose that a coin has been "conserved"?
That brings up an interesting topic. Should a seller disclose that a coin has been "conserved"?
just so there is no misunderstanding, it was well known that I had sent it to NCS. here's the original thread, I apologize if I've let the facts get in the way of a good lynching.
Interesting discussion for sure. In the case of the WLH in the video, I don't find it having much eye appeal. I would say it's original for sure, and many take pride in that, so much so they would never want to partake in a process that converted the coin to something that displays having been dipped (or as they say, "Messed with").
I show my 1940 truck. I keep it polished and as clean as I can. I have a friend who's engine compartment is full of grim and grease, but he always says, "It"s 100% orignal". He never wins anything, but takes pride in the original idea. Myself and most others prefer an engine compartment that looks like the vehicle just rolled off the show room floor.
I don't think coins and cars are exactly comparable, but it does get back to personal preference. I'm not a dipper, nor have I sent coins in for restoration. I have dipped no more than 10 or 12 coins all the many years I have been a collector....the key for me is to not buy coins that I think need to be dipped.
Just a different slant on the subject. Pete
"Ain't None of Them play like him (Bix Beiderbecke) Yet." Louis Armstrong
<< <i>I get the feeling some are standing on the soapbox just to show their purity.
If I were to take that WLH, put a picture on these boards as a NEWP, and ask for opinions, there would be a whole lot of people who would say:
"I don't like that type of toning" "You should have held out....better coins are available" "Just doesn't do anything for me" "Looks AU to me"
The poor thing would probably sit in some dealer's inventory for a few years, until he broke out the dip on his own...and possibly screwed it up.
I don't think I'm being overly pessimistic, either. If I am, I invite you to post pictures of your similar WLH's right here....
Now....assuming you agree that this coin would probably end up being dipped at some point anyway, would you rather it be by experienced professionals? Or by the first guy with enough nerve to say, "Oh, I'll give it a shot! A 10 minute soak aughta clean this right up!" *shiver* >>
I'm not sure what forum you'd be asking that on, but if you posted the "before" of the 1921-S half in question, I sincerely doubt anyone knowledgeable on these boards would deem it "AU" or say "better coins are available."
<< <i>Agreed, that was a pretty poor choice of an example to show. Um, the "before" was much nicer.
Might as well have showed the stripped-and-dipped Norweb '93-S Morgan. Yeeech. >>
Let's keep the facts straight please. The abortion on the Norweb '93-S was performed ATS, but even so the head honcho over there bought it and has kept it off the market, so it is presently irrelevant to this discussion. >>
Appreciate the input, Mr. Friday. As I noted, PCGS didn't perform that particular abortion.
The difference that may be hard for some to quantify: it's fine to dip to remove crud and especially PVC. Some coins need it, no doubt. However the 1921-S half shown as an example of "improvement" was very likely a poor choice to showcase the service, as quite a few savvy collectors would consider the work to have been unnecessary.
I will never cease to be amazed at what collectors and dealers think is okay or not okay for someone to do with their property,their bought-and-paid-for coin.The representations being made about the coin are what is important when it comes time to sell.One who is trying to sell a Morgan Dollar that they absolutely KNOW has been dipped (they did it themselves or had someone do it for them) and represents the coin as original,never been dipped is bankrupt in the integrity department,in my opinion.
Don't blame the services for doing to a coin what the customer wants.It's just business.At least,the professional services are not so likely to botch a dip as the amateur dipper who doesn't even have the sense to rinse the freshly dipped coin properly by doing multiple rinses in distilled water.Skipping a proper rinse in distilled water or rinsing with tap water will often result in a non-pleasing and mostly unacceptable appearance of the coin given enough time. The "fix" is to dip again...
Thought for the day: Dip if you must but do so with integrity.
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."
---Will Rogers (Nov 4, 1879-Aug 15,1935)
However the 1921-S half shown as an example of "improvement" was very likely a poor choice to showcase the service, as quite a few savvy collectors would consider the work to have been unnecessary.
I think it was a very good choice to showcase the service if you are interested in allowing a potential customer see what can be accomplished by using the service. the trouble arises only when THE SAME COIN is shown before/after side-by-side for a critique by collectors who may have different ideas of what they prefer. it's likely that if a nice picture of the "after" coin were shown in a thread that collectors would like the coin and the same is probably true for the "before" pictured coin.
I'm not gonna read this entire thread but I received that email and can only say that the subject coin looked way better than the end result. If it were my company, I would have been embarrassed to release such a "clip".
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
From another perspective, a science kit given to my son, during one of the experiments there was a chemical that would clear up color water. One drop would eliminate the color in the test tube. I don't know if such a chemical is used in removing the toning from coins. I'm under the impression a layer of corrosion forms on the coin when it interacts with the chemicals that exist in the environment it was store in over a period of time. Color is not added to a coin in the way of a paint brush. Chemicals interact with the copper or silver in the surface of coin and transforms the surface into a layer of colored crystals we call toning. IMO, dipping removes that layer and along with it, some luster. This change in the surface can be observed through a loupe. The alteration of a coin's surface can easily be seen with dipped proofs. Granted, coins do get dirty and pick up the oil from our fingers. Cleaning a coin in the manner that does not affect the toning, I'm all for.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>Let's keep the facts straight please. The abortion on the Norweb '93-S was performed ATS, but even so the head honcho over there bought it and has kept it off the market, so it is presently irrelevant to this discussion. >>
Hummm . . . Wonder if he has that puppy wrapped in a Taco Bell nappy, basking in a sunny windowsill ? ! ? !
HH
Need the following OBW rolls to complete my 46-64 Roosevelt roll set: 1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S. Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
Sure it is... but that doesn't necessarily make it always a bad thing. Too many people here think in absolutes. And...whether they want to admit it or not, most people here have dipped something at one time or another. I'm fairly certain that folks here should agree with the following:
1. Some coins need conservation to save them from future problems/damage caused by existing contaminants. 2. Some coins benefit from conservation; some coins don't and should have been left alone. 3. Conservation means different things to different people, and always will. 4. Not all coins can be "saved" by conservation. 5. It takes experience to know which ones can and can't be helped. See 7. 6. When in doubt, don't. 7. Even experts mess up sometimes. 8. If you think you can always recognize a conserved coin...you're wrong. 9. If you think that TPGs can always recognize one...you're wrong. 10. If you think numismatists will ever agree on this issue... you're wrong.
This thought has just crossed my mind while updating my website because I don't dream of dipping any of my coins. But after our host dip a coin do they knock the coin a point down due to it's loss of eye appeal or do they let it ride and overgrade the coin. Because there's just no way of improving the original look of a coin by erasing its history of patina that took so many years to create. Yes, not only does the coin lose a layer of it's metal, the luster is diminished as well and so does the fact that it will never grade MS66 or 67. It would be somewhat comforting to know that our host do offer consultation in these dipping matters and that most are talked out of having their coins dipped.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
PCGS showed, by conserving a $25,000 to $40,000 coin, that it has that much confidence is its processes. Consider what the ad demonstrates. PCGS does this with confidence on the very expensive key date of a very popular series. Otherwise they're throwing $25,000 out the window. Potential PCGS customers who don't want "dipped" coins will NOT be offended. They will not stop buying coins. They will not swoon at the inhumanity of it all. They will just hit "delete"
Putting theological issues aside, it's a great service at a great price. The coins of mine they passed on were ones I didn't have the stones to dip myself. Almost always with good reason. Seeing these analyzed as "not to be helped" has guided me select better quality candidates that, perhaps, I can "do" myself. Even so, my pride in my conservation skills is less than that in my greed/risk analysis. They do excellent work on silver, and have gotten results on copper I haven't been able to contract for anywhere else. I saw what they took off and what they left on a '64 SM 2c PR63BN ($30,000+). Remember, copper "can't be dipped". The process didn't generate an upgrade or CAC, but the work itself was better than I would ever have expected and added value worth multiples of the roughly $1,000 cost to the owner.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
<< <i>Yes, not only does the coin lose a layer of it's metal, the luster is diminished as well and so does the fact that it will never grade MS66 or 67.
Leo >>
There are hundreds of thousands of graded 66, 67, 68, or higher pure white coins.
<< <i>Yes, not only does the coin lose a layer of it's metal, the luster is diminished as well and so does the fact that it will never grade MS66 or 67.
Leo >>
There are hundreds of thousands of graded 66, 67, 68, or higher pure white coins. >>
Conservation done properly by experienced people should result in a coins surface being returned to as close to mint state as possible with very little if any disturbance of the actual original surface.
Edit to add: There are many coins out in the market that have not been conserved properly by those that have very little to no experience and those I would agree have been damaged. It is a fine line between successful conservation and damage and one needs to know where that line is for every coin that they conserve or attempt to conserve. One also needs to know what coins can be helped and what coins will be damaged before doing anything to a coin, even an acetone bath.
Sure it is... but that doesn't necessarily make it always a bad thing. Too many people here think in absolutes. And...whether they want to admit it or not, most people here have dipped something at one time or another. I'm fairly certain that folks here should agree with the following:
1. Some coins need conservation to save them from future problems/damage caused by existing contaminants. 2. Some coins benefit from conservation; some coins don't and should have been left alone. 3. Conservation means different things to different people, and always will. 4. Not all coins can be "saved" by conservation. 5. It takes experience to know which ones can and can't be helped. See 7. 6. When in doubt, don't. 7. Even experts mess up sometimes. 8. If you think you can always recognize a conserved coin...you're wrong. 9. If you think that TPGs can always recognize one...you're wrong. 10. If you think numismatists will ever agree on this issue... you're wrong.
>>
All of this talk so reminds me of the arguments between "uncirculated" and "circulated" where a coin pulled from a cash drawer would NEVER be considered "Uncirculated" by some.
They have their reasons which simply cannot and will not change.
Virtually every one of telephoto1's points are exactly correct!
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Comments
<< <i>thank you for a much needed post, Tommy. I once posted before/after pictures of a Copper SC$ that went through NCS much to its improvement and a member actually stated that he liked the before pictured medal......................not realizing he had mixed them up and really liked the conserved picture.
soapboxes can be dangerous.
-----BTW, a member in this thread now owns that medal. >>
keets, Since the spot removal wasn't disclosed upfront I moved that SC$1 quicker then a hot potato once I discovered it had been conserved by surfing the web and finding that old thread. Since NCS didn't just spot treat it and not knowing what type of chemicals they used owning that long term would have been like sitting on a ticking bomb awaiting it to turn in the holder.
<< <i>
<< <i>thank you for a much needed post, Tommy. I once posted before/after pictures of a Copper SC$ that went through NCS much to its improvement and a member actually stated that he liked the before pictured medal......................not realizing he had mixed them up and really liked the conserved picture.
soapboxes can be dangerous.
-----BTW, a member in this thread now owns that medal. >>
keets, Since the spot removal wasn't disclosed upfront I moved that SC$1 quicker then a hot potato once I discovered it had been conserved by surfing the web and finding that old thread. Since NCS didn't just spot treat it and not knowing what type of chemicals they used owning that long term would have been like sitting on a ticking bomb awaiting it to turn in the holder. >>
That brings up an interesting topic. Should a seller disclose that a coin has been "conserved"?
just so there is no misunderstanding, it was well known that I had sent it to NCS. here's the original thread, I apologize if I've let the facts get in the way of a good lynching.
I show my 1940 truck. I keep it polished and as clean as I can. I have a friend who's engine compartment is full of grim and grease, but he always says, "It"s 100% orignal". He never wins anything, but takes pride in the original idea. Myself and most others prefer an engine compartment that looks like the vehicle just rolled off the show room floor.
I don't think coins and cars are exactly comparable, but it does get back to personal preference. I'm not a dipper, nor have I sent coins in for restoration. I have dipped no more than 10 or 12 coins all the many years I have been a collector....the key for me is to not buy coins that I think need to be dipped.
Just a different slant on the subject.
Pete
Louis Armstrong
<< <i>PCGS is the biggest hypocrite in numismatics regarding coin doctoring.
First they file a lawsuit against people that engage in such activities, then shortly thereafter they turn it into a business model! >>
That is a bad quote for a PCGS owned fourm
<< <i>I get the feeling some are standing on the soapbox just to show their purity.
If I were to take that WLH, put a picture on these boards as a NEWP, and ask for opinions, there would be a whole lot of people who would say:
"I don't like that type of toning"
"You should have held out....better coins are available"
"Just doesn't do anything for me"
"Looks AU to me"
The poor thing would probably sit in some dealer's inventory for a few years, until he broke out the dip on his own...and possibly screwed it up.
I don't think I'm being overly pessimistic, either. If I am, I invite you to post pictures of your similar WLH's right here....
Now....assuming you agree that this coin would probably end up being dipped at some point anyway, would you rather it be by experienced professionals? Or by the first guy with enough nerve to say, "Oh, I'll give it a shot! A 10 minute soak aughta clean this right up!" *shiver* >>
I'm not sure what forum you'd be asking that on, but if you posted the "before" of the 1921-S half in question, I sincerely doubt anyone knowledgeable on these boards would deem it "AU" or say "better coins are available."
<< <i>
<< <i>Agreed, that was a pretty poor choice of an example to show. Um, the "before" was much nicer.
Might as well have showed the stripped-and-dipped Norweb '93-S Morgan. Yeeech. >>
Let's keep the facts straight please. The abortion on the Norweb '93-S was performed ATS, but even so the head honcho over there bought it and has kept it off the market, so it is presently irrelevant to this discussion. >>
Appreciate the input, Mr. Friday. As I noted, PCGS didn't perform that particular abortion.
The difference that may be hard for some to quantify: it's fine to dip to remove crud and especially PVC. Some coins need it, no doubt. However the 1921-S half shown as an example of "improvement" was very likely a poor choice to showcase the service, as quite a few savvy collectors would consider the work to have been unnecessary.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Don't blame the services for doing to a coin what the customer wants.It's just business.At least,the professional services are not so likely to botch a dip as the amateur dipper who doesn't even have the sense to rinse the freshly dipped coin properly by doing multiple rinses in distilled water.Skipping a proper rinse in distilled water or rinsing with tap water will often result in a non-pleasing and mostly unacceptable appearance of the coin given enough time. The "fix" is to dip again...
Thought for the day: Dip if you must but do so with integrity.
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."
---Will Rogers (Nov 4, 1879-Aug 15,1935)
I think it was a very good choice to showcase the service if you are interested in allowing a potential customer see what can be accomplished by using the service. the trouble arises only when THE SAME COIN is shown before/after side-by-side for a critique by collectors who may have different ideas of what they prefer. it's likely that if a nice picture of the "after" coin were shown in a thread that collectors would like the coin and the same is probably true for the "before" pictured coin.
The name is LEE!
Granted, coins do get dirty and pick up the oil from our fingers. Cleaning a coin in the manner that does not affect the toning, I'm all for.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>Let's keep the facts straight please. The abortion on the Norweb '93-S was performed ATS, but even so the head honcho over there bought it and has kept it off the market, so it is presently irrelevant to this discussion. >>
Hummm . . . Wonder if he has that puppy wrapped in a Taco Bell nappy, basking in a sunny windowsill ? ! ? !
HH
1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S.
Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
A chip off the old block.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>Dipping is NOT doctoring. >>
Sure it is... but that doesn't necessarily make it always a bad thing. Too many people here think in absolutes.
And...whether they want to admit it or not, most people here have dipped something at one time or another.
I'm fairly certain that folks here should agree with the following:
1. Some coins need conservation to save them from future problems/damage caused by existing contaminants.
2. Some coins benefit from conservation; some coins don't and should have been left alone.
3. Conservation means different things to different people, and always will.
4. Not all coins can be "saved" by conservation.
5. It takes experience to know which ones can and can't be helped. See 7.
6. When in doubt, don't.
7. Even experts mess up sometimes.
8. If you think you can always recognize a conserved coin...you're wrong.
9. If you think that TPGs can always recognize one...you're wrong.
10. If you think numismatists will ever agree on this issue... you're wrong.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
It would be somewhat comforting to know that our host do offer consultation in these dipping matters and that most are talked out of having their coins dipped.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
PCGS showed, by conserving a $25,000 to $40,000 coin, that it has that much confidence is its processes. Consider what the ad demonstrates. PCGS does this with confidence on the very expensive key date of a very popular series. Otherwise they're throwing $25,000 out the window. Potential PCGS customers who don't want "dipped" coins will NOT be offended. They will not stop buying coins. They will not swoon at the inhumanity of it all. They will just hit "delete"
Putting theological issues aside, it's a great service at a great price. The coins of mine they passed on were ones I didn't have the stones to dip myself. Almost always with good reason. Seeing these analyzed as "not to be helped" has guided me select better quality candidates that, perhaps, I can "do" myself. Even so, my pride in my conservation skills is less than that in my greed/risk analysis. They do excellent work on silver, and have gotten results on copper I haven't been able to contract for anywhere else. I saw what they took off and what they left on a '64 SM 2c PR63BN ($30,000+). Remember, copper "can't be dipped". The process didn't generate an upgrade or CAC, but the work itself was better than I would ever have expected and added value worth multiples of the roughly $1,000 cost to the owner.
It is now CAC stickered and is 90% white. It was slabbed by PCGS back in 1996 or 1997.
i do like this kind of coin as well as the toned walkers.
<< <i>Yes, not only does the coin lose a layer of it's metal, the luster is diminished as well and so does the fact that it will never grade MS66 or 67.
Leo >>
<< <i>
<< <i>Yes, not only does the coin lose a layer of it's metal, the luster is diminished as well and so does the fact that it will never grade MS66 or 67.
Leo >>
Conservation done properly by experienced people should result in a coins surface being returned to as close to mint state as possible with very little if any disturbance of the actual original surface.
Edit to add: There are many coins out in the market that have not been conserved properly by those that have very little to no experience and those I would agree have been damaged. It is a fine line between successful conservation and damage and one needs to know where that line is for every coin that they conserve or attempt to conserve. One also needs to know what coins can be helped and what coins will be damaged before doing anything to a coin, even an acetone bath.
<< <i>
<< <i>Dipping is NOT doctoring. >>
Sure it is... but that doesn't necessarily make it always a bad thing. Too many people here think in absolutes.
And...whether they want to admit it or not, most people here have dipped something at one time or another.
I'm fairly certain that folks here should agree with the following:
1. Some coins need conservation to save them from future problems/damage caused by existing contaminants.
2. Some coins benefit from conservation; some coins don't and should have been left alone.
3. Conservation means different things to different people, and always will.
4. Not all coins can be "saved" by conservation.
5. It takes experience to know which ones can and can't be helped. See 7.
6. When in doubt, don't.
7. Even experts mess up sometimes.
8. If you think you can always recognize a conserved coin...you're wrong.
9. If you think that TPGs can always recognize one...you're wrong.
10. If you think numismatists will ever agree on this issue... you're wrong.
All of this talk so reminds me of the arguments between "uncirculated" and "circulated" where a coin pulled from a cash drawer would NEVER be considered "Uncirculated" by some.
They have their reasons which simply cannot and will not change.
Virtually every one of telephoto1's points are exactly correct!
The name is LEE!