There has been a lot of accusations that most IHC proofs that have blue toning are AT and should not be even graded. When I review the PCGS Registry for IHC PR Basic set, I observe the following..... the number one set, EDM, is RD and CAM. The next nine sets are predominately BR/RB sets that contain many or a majority of RB and BN coins.
What should this tell you???? Serious colectors have eschewed highly priced RD and CAM coins for BN and RB coins that have color and in many cases greater eye appeal than RD coins. The market is not idiots. The market questions the value of RD coins that have been enhanced over the years to "make" them RD whereas most BN and RB coins are much more original. There may be totally original IHC PR coins that are RD, the number that are original is significantly less than the POP report. And I would not be surprised if Stewart Blay owns ALL of the Original coins that are graded RD.
Clearly Mr. Blay would like to establish himself as the market maker for high end copper coins? But the market will define the market. Not Mr. Blay. There are other dealers, such as Rick Snow that have proved to make market in these coins on a much more neutral basis. If you desire to be a dealer in TPG coins, you need to reserve your opinion on not only grade, but also as to AT/NT. Blay is clearly trying to embelish his inventory/collection to enhance it's value. I have no problem with that, but I think that I would rather buy from a dealer who is not also a collector.
@ADG said:
Wow. I've read through this "chemistry" discussion, and can't resist making a few polite comments.
Copper is found in nature both in its elemental metallic form and in a number of common minerals or salts.
Many, but not all, copper salts are blue to blue green in color. These include common copper salts such as the carbonate, sulfate, hydroxide, nitrate, and both chlorides.
Copper is a reactive element, and forms a protective patina with outdoor exposure. The exact composition can vary, but consists of a mixture of salts including copper carbonate, copper chloride, and copper sulfate.
Common brown patina of coins is due to a mixture of copper oxides which are actually either red or black. Such oxides are very stable, and generally preclude formation of other copper salts in the absence of strong chemical exposure.
Exposure to other substances such as moisture, sweat, air, etc. can result in formation of other copper salts which will alter coin appearance either positively or negatively. Formation of blue / green compounds is very common with copper.
Coin collectors in general didn't do well in chemistry class in school. There are exceptions though.
ADG, this is the best post of them all. I think you nailed it as succinctly as it can be told. I hope folks read this, and then read it again!
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
Recently, there has been an explosion of blue copper coins
Recent blue copper coins are created using MS70 which strips the coin and results in a blue color. The blue color can be either permanent or temporary (going away in a few years).
So is the result to be beware of blue copper unless you can trace it back a few decades, e.g. in an OGH?
If anyone wishes they can contact many
Mettalurgical analysis labs in the country to ascertain what is on their coinsPCGG uses a lab. I would wager Bookoo bucks
That the coin in the OP's image has chemical residue on it
Recently, there has been an explosion of blue copper coins
Recent blue copper coins are created using MS70 which strips the coin and results in a blue color. The blue color can be either permanent or temporary (going away in a few years).
So is the result to be beware of blue copper unless you can trace it back a few decades, e.g. in an OGH?
Zoins, let me address your point:
"in the past there were few blue copper coins" Rick Snow's research would seem to indicate that the Proskey hoard of IHC proofs contained hundreds of coins in each date. And most all of these coins were toned brown, but had iredescent properties when angled to the light. So, in the past there were likely many coins with bluish (and redished, yelowish etc.) toning that was created over many years.
And after eliminating surface contamination on these coins with a mild dip in acetone, the underlying toning was resultant.......many of which happened to be bluish toning. The toning was not caused by the dipping agent, it was existant on the coins prior to dipping in acetone. Acetone will not remove toning from a coin. I have had a purple 1881 IHC PR in acetone for the past two weeks, and there has been NO CHANGE. Acetone as a dipping agent has no effect on existing toning. Understand that Acetone is a solvent and not an acid. But in the case of the Proskey coins, acetone revealed the underlying toning. I have also dipped MS 1961 Lincoln cents in acetone and there was not only any change in color, they did not become blue as a result of this process. I also treated the same 1961 coins with MS70 and the MS70 did reduce the slight degree of toning from the coin. But I see no evidence of the coins becoming blue after the application of MS70.
A coating of MS70 seems to eliminate minor toning on copper coins ans make the copper look fresh from the mint. But I see no bluish residual toning as a result. But possible in a month or two?
Stewart Blay is totally correct when he assets that copper coins that are toned blue are chemically altered. Pure copper is NEVER Blue. Other elements combine with copper to create compounds that have many different colors, including, but not exclusively, blue. The QUESTION is: are these coins toned naturally or were they doctored for that bluish look?
Mr. Blays' concerns are valid. To date there has been no convincing evidence that the Proskey coins attained blue toning as a result of their storage medium. It could have been that Proskey used coin envelopes that contains sulfur or other elements that will chemically react with copper.
My experience with IHC PR coins is that I have submitted 10-12 RD coins and all have come back as code .91 Questionable
Color. I have submitted a similar number of BN/RB IHC PR coins and with only one exception they all graded from 63 to 66.
My conclusion is that enterprising coin doctors are turning IHC PR BN to RD, not to BL(blue).
OINK, I'll ask again...what dip or treatment is used to turn a BN cent RD...one that would fool professional graders? Not eZest. Not MS70, not acetone. Not bleach, not ammonia. Just what is this magic chemical you are sure has been used many, many thousands of times to trick graders, dealers and collectors?
Lance.
@lkeigwin said:
OINK, I'll ask again...what dip or treatment is used to turn a BN cent RD...one that would fool professional graders? Not eZest. Not MS70, not acetone. Not bleach, not ammonia. Just what is this magic chemical you are sure has been used many, many thousands of times to trick graders, dealers and collectors?
Lance.
Lance, I know that you understand that a BN coin has color due to just the surface of the coin. If you take sandpaper to a BN coin you will find RD copper underneath. The coin will not ever be BN throughout. An old BN coin cannot be turned RD with acetone, MS70, NH3, and some others that I have never used. You can take if off with Brasso, but not sure that will pass muster at PCGS.
But you are missing my point. There are many apparently RD IHC PR coins that will grade Questionable Color. One can only think that the graders have determined that the color of the coins have been enhanced to make them look RD. These coins were probably RB in a prior life. But for a coin doctor there is a lot more money in making a RD coin than a blue coin.
IHC's toned blue have been well understood for many years and accepted by PCGS since about 1996 or the time of the Eliasberg sale which had a number of them. Perhaps this thread is just a smokescreen to divert attention from RD coins that have been "doctored". There seem to be a lot of true believers that think copper will be RD after 100 years without a lot of help. I had a copper flashing installed on the chimmeny of my house 3 years ago, and it is now totally brown. And as I previously posted, I have never been sucessful in grading a RAW RD IHC PR.
I will acquire some Brasso and post a pic of copper enhanced when I can acquire a new can. Cannot find the can I had in the Army about 45 years ago.
My question was about how to make a convincing RD cent from one with BN surfaces...such that it would fool experts. Brasso, lemon juice, erasers and sandpaper obviously don't cut it.
Many thousands of hundred year old RD cents are original, undoctored. As I said earlier I have 50, 60, and 70 year old cents I've owned most of my life, sitting in albums and they are still red.
So, with all due respect, I object to the notion that all old red cents have been messed with. It just isn't so.
Lance.
Lance, I do not mess with coins except to understand the difference between one that will grade and one that will not. Obviously, all of the RAW IHC PR coins that I purchased that looked RD were graded code .91 Questionable Color. The color on some was identical to RB coins and when submitted together, the coin in the holder came back 65RB and the RAW coin came back .91. Obviously, but not to me, this coin has been messed with to deserve the .91 (three times)?
I suspect that there are a lot more RD coins in slabs that are messed with than BN coins toned blue. The RD coins are worth much more so it only makes sense to make one red than to make one blue which is much more difficult to do. I am currently trying to turn a test strip of copper blue with ammonium hydroxide. The first run just turned it brown. But then I learned that you need to pretreat the copper with NaCl before the NH3. But that somewhat blows my theory, previously posted, that ammonium hydroxide, a predominate cleaning solution prior to about 1960 could cause the blue toning that was experienced with the Proskey hoard. The POP of the Proskey coins was estimated to be over 100 per each date. Might have been ammonium chloride in the building where Proskey stored the coins? But sulfur ini the paper in the envelopes sounds questionable as well to achieve the blue color.
When Rick Snow asserts that creating blue on IHC proofs is almost impossible........does not mean that God cannot do it with His assistant, Mother Nature.
@lkeigwin said:
OINK, I'll ask again...what dip or treatment is used to turn a BN cent RD...one that would fool professional graders? Not eZest. Not MS70, not acetone. Not bleach, not ammonia. Just what is this magic chemical you are sure has been used many, many thousands of times to trick graders, dealers and collectors?
Lance.
Years ago coin doctors would use cyanide compounds. My understanding is that the coins initially have an unnatural pink color, but look much more natural with the passage of time. Don't try it at home. If you mix the wrong ingredients together, you will turn your home into a gas chamber.
Edited: I don't dispute your conclusion concerning the existence of original red copper. I'm only answering your question about turning a BN cent RD.
@STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
If anyone wishes they can contact many
Mettalurgical analysis labs in the country to ascertain what is on their coinsPCGG uses a lab. I would wager Bookoo bucks
That the coin in the OP's image has chemical residue on it
I doubt you will get any takers on that bet.
"May the silver waves that bear you heavenward be filled with love’s whisperings"
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
@STEWARTBLAYNUMIS said:
A coin with its ORIGINAL SKIn on it will never look like the color that is displayed on this coin.
A knowledgeable collector or dealer knows the TRUEcolors of coins that were stored in tissue paper from the mint . I will state 100% that this coin was chemically treated to achieve this color.
It SHOULD be graded AT ( artificial toning) but I don't run the grading company.
IMO a naturally toned coin must have never been chemically cleaned with Blue ribbon , MS 70 or any other oils to change the appearance of the coin
True original coins are scarce if not rare not matter what the population stated .They are worth a premium every time.
The coin pictured here is caca. It will never get a CAC sticker. If you buy It I will tell you it will be worth less in the future because these type of coin are manufactured and more will be made and graded.
Stewart
Rick is mostly correct. The blue can be induced and removed from copper very easily; however, it is a chemical reaction that takes certain conditions. I cannot speak about the envelope helping the reaction along. Some copper coins turn, others don't.
News Flash: Leaving out "moderns," it's a good bet that just about every coin that you think (in spite of your credentials, experience, knowledge, etc.) is truly original IS NOT. That's because most vintage coins - probably 98% - are not original - something has been done to them since they left the press. "Never" is a word you'll eventually have to eat. I've learned that lesson.
I do agree somewhat with this that you posted: "True original coins are scarce if not rare." However, in my experience, you have understated the facts. I'll say that true original "vintage" coins are EXTREMELY RARE and virtually non-existent in some series.
Actually, as a scientist I really hate it when someone (and I don't care who) asserts that a coin is without a doubt original in its original "skin". That last term "skin" really irks me as well, but I guess it is in somewhat common usage. How in the world is an individual so expert that their knowledge of a coin is not to be challenged? Have they shepherded the coin since its striking? Please!!!!
I can even accept the IMO or IMHO term, but other than that is shear arrogance.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
OINK:
_"Clearly Mr. Blay would like to establish himself as the market maker for high end copper coins? But the market will define the market. Not Mr. Blay. There are other dealers, such as Rick Snow that have proved to make market in these coins on a much more neutral basis. If you desire to be a dealer in TPG coins, you need to reserve your opinion on not only grade, but also as to AT/NT. Blay is clearly trying to embelish his inventory/collection to enhance it's value. I have no problem with that, but I think that I would rather buy from a dealer who is not also a collector."__
The only thing clear in this statement is that you have not seen Mr. Blay's "inventory/collection."
2.And after eliminating surface contamination on these coins with a mild dip in acetone, the underlying toning was resultant
I have not been able to obtain this result. I have left coins soak overnight in acetone(past the criteria of a "mild dip") with no apparent change except that the coins appear very dull and dry looking. when swabbed with MS70 the color comes forth.
I think people forget that many 19th century coin collectors kept their coins in coin cabinets and often times the colors found on these coins were caused by exposure to the various volatile wood compounds. I have a buddy that put coins in a freshly cut cedar box and in as little as a year the coins looked beautiful (And yes, some of the copper Lincolns were gaining a cool blue color but the silver coins were the real winners. I wish I still had the photo he sent me and I'd post it). That said, would a coin toned by placing it in a freshly cut wooden box be considered AT or NT?
@OldIndianNutKase said:
I also treated the same 1961 coins with MS70 and the MS70 did reduce the slight degree of toning from the coin. But I see no evidence of the coins becoming blue after the application of MS70.
Does everyone agree MS70 does not turn modern coins blue, for example 2017 copper bullion rounds? If so, it could be interesting data on whether MS70 turns coins blue or it exposes existing blue.
Never had a coin dated after 1960's turn blue; however, I can probably count on my fingers and toes the number of them I have conserved so on this, the door is open.
That blue is not natural, period. It is not being exposed by the solvent/oxidants but rather created by them. There may be other factors involved as I had brought up in other threads. I am amazed that this line of thought even continues at all and should not have been promoted in the first IMO.
There are definitely copper coins from before 1960 that have turned - I have seen Indians and of course British copper pre 1860 turned.
I kind of laugh at this whole "exposing" notion - a bit like spontaneous generation in the biological world before real biologists got hold of it.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@OldIndianNutKase said:
I also treated the same 1961 coins with MS70 and the MS70 did reduce the slight degree of toning from the coin. But I see no evidence of the coins becoming blue after the application of MS70.
Does everyone agree MS70 does not turn modern coins blue, for example 2017 copper bullion rounds? If so, it could be interesting data on whether MS70 turns coins blue or it exposes existing blue.
As I have previously posted pictures of copper reacted with NH3, and then dipped in acetone without any result, and then "rubbed" with MS70 on a Q-Tip, which will remove the corrosion imparted by the NH3. I have applied acetone and MS70 on raw copper and can see no blue toning as a result. In fact, no discoloration of the coin.
The many colors that copper may show are created by chemical reaction. But the colors are dependent on the thickness of the "oxidation" layer on the coin, much like as described by Sunnywood on Morgan dollars. Copper will react with many other substances, and the results will vary. I have purposefully reacted copper with many substances, including sea water, and have found that copper is a very reactive metal. Blue is the principal color of many copper compounds. I have tried to create the "blue" effect with acetone, MS70 and NH3, and have had no success in doing so.
Lot's of the Simpson collection of patterns that are currently being auctioned by Legend are blue-ish. Do you really think that they are blue because Simpson dipped them, Jaguar7????
Why do so many people question the validity of blue copper? Nobody questions the rainbow toning on fairly fresh silver eagles a few years back. They were slabbed as NT, and rightfully so, since dipping them in acetone allowed the rainbow colors to come through. Colors, which often seemed to mirror the colors found on some high priced Morgan Dollars (many of which appeared when the toning craze really took off). I think it's time to put it to a vote: Which of the following do you have complete faith in?
1) Blue Copper
2) Rainbow Toned Silver Eagles
3) Rainbow toned Morgan Dollars
4) Original "Copper Red" Large Cents
5) The Easter Bunny
Some of the above may exist, but certainly not the number that are out there. There is, after all, only one real Easter Bunny, but, if he were slabbable, there would be an Easter Bunny available for anyone with pockets deep enough...
That comment was posted "tongue in cheek". Just pointing out that popularity seems to cause a sudden increase in certain items. I don't really believe in the Easter Bunny either, but do believe that, were he slabbable, Easter Bunnys would be showing up in droves. I have been a collector for 40+ years, and have noticed a lot of changes in that time. Yes, I have become somewhat of a skeptic...
I reread this thread just now, as nothing of interest going on and it is a fascinating subject. It would be a real pleasure to get a group of yourselves including Bob Campbell, David Hall, JD, TPGS finalizers, myself, and some of the well-known "doctors." at a retreat in an exotic place - free food, drinks, etc. All sworn to secrecy, signed papers, and freedom from prosecution to decide once and for all (actually just for awhile until the next alteration is discovered - LOL) what is market acceptable for all the TPGS.
I am not a coin doctor. My only interest is to be able to detect altered coins when I see them. Here are some facts as I know them. I have not posted them in this thread or in the thread posted by Rick about "blue Indians." I don't care if you believe what I write or not:
In the 1970's, I have seen a mint state, red & brown Indian cent changed to original red that would pass me, any of you, and any present-day TPGS. And I'll wager I've seen the surfaces of more coins closer than anyone at that retreat I wish we could have. It took two tries. I told the dealer his first effort was close but no cigar. The second try was perfection! He used three electrolytic baths. I could tell one solution was copper sulfate.
The color of metals has been changed for centuries. There are books of formulas out there for those who wish to look. To get the best results, you better have a chemistry lab with a fume hood as many of these formulas can harm you.
Chemically altered coins are passed as original by every TPGS on a regular basis. Proof Indians are a good case in point. Although I don't collect them and don't alter them myself - I know.
When a coin is conserved, treated, cleaned, altered, etc. in any way, it is no longer in its natural state. As long as the appearance of the coin - its physical state - is improved, and a knowledgeable numismatist cannot find any trace of this UNNATURAL "action" I believe there is no harm done.
It all boils down to this: We are all learning new things. Our coins have been around a very long time and have passed thru many hands. They are stored in various ways and affected by their surroundings. I'll say that none of us can know for sure 100% of the time if the color of a coin has been "helped" to develop or happened naturally. When I look at a coin, I don't care, as long as it looks like a natural coin. When I first turned a Proof Indian cent "iridescent blue" while removing some haze with MS-70, I was horrified! That's when I learned that the blue color could be eliminated in seconds and the coin restored to brown. That was many years ago and iridescent blue Indians were not in favor and considered chemical alterations. Perhaps now the fellow can crack it from its holder (if it is in one now), turn it blue again and increase its value! Blue is the new $$$$$.
IMO, all we need to do for the industry is to set some standards (perhaps a class for professional graders at the retreat paid for by our host of course?) so that fewer natural coins are determined to be altered and fewer altered coins are determined to be OK.
@Treeman said:
That comment was posted "tongue in cheek". Just pointing out that popularity seems to cause a sudden increase in certain items. I don't really believe in the Easter Bunny either, but do believe that, were he slabbable, Easter Bunnys would be showing up in droves. I have been a collector for 40+ years, and have noticed a lot of changes in that time. Yes, I have become somewhat of a skeptic...
Yeah, too bad there are so many doctors and nothing that can stop them.
@Treeman said:
That comment was posted "tongue in cheek". Just pointing out that popularity seems to cause a sudden increase in certain items. I don't really believe in the Easter Bunny either, but do believe that, were he slabbable, Easter Bunnys would be showing up in droves. I have been a collector for 40+ years, and have noticed a lot of changes in that time. Yes, I have become somewhat of a skeptic...
Yeah, too bad there are so many doctors and nothing that can stop them.
See my post above. Do you consider the folks who put chemicals on coins at the TPGS's to be coin doctors? I do. It's just that they have a different motive. They have also saved a lot of coins for future collectors. There is a difference.
@Treeman said:
That comment was posted "tongue in cheek". Just pointing out that popularity seems to cause a sudden increase in certain items. I don't really believe in the Easter Bunny either, but do believe that, were he slabbable, Easter Bunnys would be showing up in droves. I have been a collector for 40+ years, and have noticed a lot of changes in that time. Yes, I have become somewhat of a skeptic...
Yeah, too bad there are so many doctors and nothing that can stop them.
See my post above. Do you consider the folks who put chemicals on coins at the TPGS's to be coin doctors? I do. It's just that they have a different motive. They have also saved a lot of coins for future collectors. There is a difference.
The PNG doctoring definition doesn't consider what the TPGs to do to be doctoring.
@Zoins said:
Lots of blue/purple Indians on the bay. The below search is for "pcgs rainbow -morgan -eagle indian head"
I'm not going to badger you for a straight answer to my simple question as I'm told that anyone can post an opinion yet no one is obligated to answer a question. Thanks for the pretty pictures. They say a thousand words; yet not what I asked of you.
@Zoins said:
Lots of blue/purple Indians on the bay. The below search is for "pcgs rainbow -morgan -eagle indian head"
I'm not going to badger you for a straight answer to my simple question as I'm told that anyone can post an opinion yet no one is obligated to answer a question. Thanks for the pretty pictures. They say a thousand words; yet not what I asked of you.
Best Regards and Happy collecting!
I didn't respond to your question on my opinion regarding TPG practices because I feel I already answered this in another thread and needed time to look up my prior answer. My response from the thread Coin doctoring is making a small come back is quoted below. In the thread below you can substitute "TPG conservation" for "dipping". In this case, I would say TPG practices aren't part of what I'm concerned about here unless you're saying TPGs are turning copper coins blue.
It's not that I believe or don't believe dipping is doctoring, it's that I don't think it's useful for this discussion because it distracts from very insidious doctoring like lasers, artificial heads, AT, etc. For example, I think outing doctors that do lasering may be beneficial to the hobby, but I don't think outing those that dip is useful given it's prevalence.
While there is a tendency to want to add dipping to almost every doctoring discussion, it is not what high end doctoring is about.
Man, what a great thread... I was not on the forums when this discussion hit, but it sure takes me back to 2007-2008 (?) when the "Blue Indian Proof" stuff was going on.
@EagleEye said:
I'll use the scientific method to prove my point. **Please try and make any old copper coin turn blue. I'll wait......sorry, I'll save you some time - you can't. ** It can't be done to a red coin. It can't be done to any old brown coin. If it can't be done to every copper coin, then the premise that it adds the color at all is wrong. It is only specific coins that will show the color. And the thing they all have in common is long-term storage in an envelope. I have tried to figure this out over many years and this is my conclusion. It is not an opinion, it is fact.
You keep saying this even when I demonstrated in your "rooster" thread that your claim in bold is FALSE. Acetone, a common coin solvent, can turn copper/bronze blue under the right reaction conditions, namely light and sufficient time. That is a FACT and has been shown in peer reviewed scientific literature. Specifically, a paper analyzing the effects of acetone as a cleaning agent for copper artifacts found that copper in the presence of water and light could catalyze side reactions that lead to the formation of blue crystal/oxidation. (A research abstract appears at the end of my post).
MS70 contains lye, a strong base that will dissociate in an aqueous environment to produce free hydroxide anions in solution. Copper hydroxides are blue, so it is plausible on its face that there could be a reaction under the right conditions. What those conditions might be - ask one of the resident chemistry PhDs. There are far too many variables to account for. It is also possible that it is a complex interaction with surface oils, the detergent, and the metal. It is unlikely that an experiment under uncontrolled conditions will prove anything other than the need for controlled experiments with metallurgical and other chemical analyses.
As for blue copper, I have seen bronze plaques naturally develop a blue patina. The paper discussed shows that blue copper can also be faked. It isn't an all or nothing issue. What ever your views on blue copper, the two cent piece in this thread looks funky for the reasons that @zcoins pointed out, but to each his own.
Photochemical Breakdown of Acetone on Copper
Sanjay V. Kagwade, Clive R. Clayton, Devicharan Chidambaram and
Gary P. Halada
Electrochemica Acta 46, 15 (2001) 2337-2342.
X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy studies have shown that acetone, when used as a cleaning agent for copper in the presence of ambient light and water vapor, slowly reacts to form acetic acid. This reaction does not occur in the absence of light. This suggests that copper acts as a photocatalyst for the reaction between acetone and water vapor. The use of acetone for degreasing copper and copper containing alloys as recommended by ASTM E1078-97 is questioned in this work.
Copper reacts photochemically with acetone and water vapor to form acetic acid. The acetic acid then reacts with copper to form copper acetate. Over a period of 18 hours the copper foil that was immersed in acetone and exposed to ambient light developed blue crystal deposits as shown in the optical photomicrograph in Fig. 1(left). The acetone in the beaker had evaporated leaving behind a strong odor of acetic acid. In contrast, there were no visible changes observed on the copper foil that was exposed to acetone in darkness as shown in Fig. 1(right). The acetone in the beaker in this case had evaporated, leaving behind no distinguishable odor of any byproduct. The decomposition of acetone appears to be completely inhibited in darkness. The following reaction sequence was proposed:
CH3COCH3 + H2O CH3COOH + CH4
2(CH3COOH) + Cu Cu(COOCH3)2 + H2
CH3COOH (aq.) + e- CH3COO- (aq.) + 1/2 H2
Cu(CH3COO)2 + Cu(0) 2 Cu(CH3COO)
Acetone should not be recommended for degreasing or cleaning of copper or copper bearing alloys containing discrete copper rich intermetallic particles. Though ASTM E1078-97 "Standard Guide for Specimen Preparation and Mounting in Surface Analysis" recommends that prior to surface analysis samples should be ultrasonically degreased in analytical grade acetone and isopropanol, based on this work acetone is not recommended to be used for degreasing copper or copper containing alloys. Also one of the other studies performed in this lab has shown that isopropanol has no such effects on copper, and hence we recommend the use of isopropanol alone for degreasing.
I have posted here very few times over the last few years, but I think that this one is really worthwhile. Copper coins with blue toning have taken a bad rap over the past several years, with many exclaiming that any copper coins with blue toning must be AT, while others dispute that assertion. Read through this old post if you have the time and absorb these various views.
I just returned from the Whitman Baltimore show and spent hours looking at the James Allaire Millholland Collection being auctioned by Stacks' Bowers. This collection is absolutely amazing. It has been stored in a wooden cabinet since 1911 and only recently came to light when family descendants brought it to Stacks'. Many copper coins are included in this collection. Take a look at few of the coins depicted here, and look up many more of the copper coins from this collection with similar toning. In fact , you might note a pattern of toning with these coins. Most have blue tones.
I hope that this collection puts a dent in the thoughts of those that believe that blue toning on copper coins cannot be natural.
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
I don't think the assertion of most members is that blue toned copper is all AT. I think the biggest take-away is that the preponderance of blue copper during the past 20 years coupled with the fact that there have been admitted perpetrators who were doctoring coins leads to a conclusion: it is reasonable to believe that many of the intensely blue toned coins weren't toned naturally.
I recall David Hall commenting to the effect that during the 1960's and 1970's there just weren't very many intensely toned Morgan Dollars seen at shows and auctions. That changed dramatically from the late 1990's to the present day. I would be eager to hear HRH's thoughts on the influx of blue copper because it seems like a similar phenomenon. I don't doubt coins like those pictured above from the James Allaire Millholland Collection and others exist, but we live in an age where deceit runs rampant and the number of blue coins is staggering.
@Maywood said:
I don't think the assertion of most members is that blue toned copper is all AT. I think the biggest take-away is that the preponderance of blue copper during the past 20 years coupled with the fact that there have been admitted perpetrators who were doctoring coins leads to a conclusion: it is reasonable to believe that many of the intensely blue toned coins weren't toned naturally.
I recall David Hall commenting to the effect that during the 1960's and 1970's there just weren't very many intensely toned Morgan Dollars seen at shows and auctions. That changed dramatically from the late 1990's to the present day. I would be eager to hear HRH's thoughts on the influx of blue copper because it seems like a similar phenomenon. I don't doubt coins like those pictured above from the James Allaire Millholland Collection and others exist, but we live in an age where deceit runs rampant and the number of blue coins is staggering.
Very well said. Tread blue toned copper coins carefully, as there has been a recent influx But the zealots that dismiss all blue toned coins must be debunked.
Adding fuel to the fire is that defining NT vs. AT with blue colors on copper can be very difficult, moreso than any other color.
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
Comments
100 An amazing post Keets........
There has been a lot of accusations that most IHC proofs that have blue toning are AT and should not be even graded. When I review the PCGS Registry for IHC PR Basic set, I observe the following..... the number one set, EDM, is RD and CAM. The next nine sets are predominately BR/RB sets that contain many or a majority of RB and BN coins.
What should this tell you???? Serious colectors have eschewed highly priced RD and CAM coins for BN and RB coins that have color and in many cases greater eye appeal than RD coins. The market is not idiots. The market questions the value of RD coins that have been enhanced over the years to "make" them RD whereas most BN and RB coins are much more original. There may be totally original IHC PR coins that are RD, the number that are original is significantly less than the POP report. And I would not be surprised if Stewart Blay owns ALL of the Original coins that are graded RD.
Clearly Mr. Blay would like to establish himself as the market maker for high end copper coins? But the market will define the market. Not Mr. Blay. There are other dealers, such as Rick Snow that have proved to make market in these coins on a much more neutral basis. If you desire to be a dealer in TPG coins, you need to reserve your opinion on not only grade, but also as to AT/NT. Blay is clearly trying to embelish his inventory/collection to enhance it's value. I have no problem with that, but I think that I would rather buy from a dealer who is not also a collector.
OINK
ADG, this is the best post of them all. I think you nailed it as succinctly as it can be told. I hope folks read this, and then read it again!
So, does it seems like:
Recent blue copper coins are created using MS70 which strips the coin and results in a blue color. The blue color can be either permanent or temporary (going away in a few years).
So is the result to be beware of blue copper unless you can trace it back a few decades, e.g. in an OGH?
If anyone wishes they can contact many
Mettalurgical analysis labs in the country to ascertain what is on their coinsPCGG uses a lab. I would wager Bookoo bucks
That the coin in the OP's image has chemical residue on it
Zoins, let me address your point:
Stewart Blay is totally correct when he assets that copper coins that are toned blue are chemically altered. Pure copper is NEVER Blue. Other elements combine with copper to create compounds that have many different colors, including, but not exclusively, blue. The QUESTION is: are these coins toned naturally or were they doctored for that bluish look?
Mr. Blays' concerns are valid. To date there has been no convincing evidence that the Proskey coins attained blue toning as a result of their storage medium. It could have been that Proskey used coin envelopes that contains sulfur or other elements that will chemically react with copper.
My experience with IHC PR coins is that I have submitted 10-12 RD coins and all have come back as code .91 Questionable
Color. I have submitted a similar number of BN/RB IHC PR coins and with only one exception they all graded from 63 to 66.
My conclusion is that enterprising coin doctors are turning IHC PR BN to RD, not to BL(blue).
OINK OINK OINK
OINK, I'll ask again...what dip or treatment is used to turn a BN cent RD...one that would fool professional graders? Not eZest. Not MS70, not acetone. Not bleach, not ammonia. Just what is this magic chemical you are sure has been used many, many thousands of times to trick graders, dealers and collectors?
Lance.
Lance, I know that you understand that a BN coin has color due to just the surface of the coin. If you take sandpaper to a BN coin you will find RD copper underneath. The coin will not ever be BN throughout. An old BN coin cannot be turned RD with acetone, MS70, NH3, and some others that I have never used. You can take if off with Brasso, but not sure that will pass muster at PCGS.
But you are missing my point. There are many apparently RD IHC PR coins that will grade Questionable Color. One can only think that the graders have determined that the color of the coins have been enhanced to make them look RD. These coins were probably RB in a prior life. But for a coin doctor there is a lot more money in making a RD coin than a blue coin.
IHC's toned blue have been well understood for many years and accepted by PCGS since about 1996 or the time of the Eliasberg sale which had a number of them. Perhaps this thread is just a smokescreen to divert attention from RD coins that have been "doctored". There seem to be a lot of true believers that think copper will be RD after 100 years without a lot of help. I had a copper flashing installed on the chimmeny of my house 3 years ago, and it is now totally brown. And as I previously posted, I have never been sucessful in grading a RAW RD IHC PR.
I will acquire some Brasso and post a pic of copper enhanced when I can acquire a new can. Cannot find the can I had in the Army about 45 years ago.
OINK
My question was about how to make a convincing RD cent from one with BN surfaces...such that it would fool experts. Brasso, lemon juice, erasers and sandpaper obviously don't cut it.
Many thousands of hundred year old RD cents are original, undoctored. As I said earlier I have 50, 60, and 70 year old cents I've owned most of my life, sitting in albums and they are still red.
So, with all due respect, I object to the notion that all old red cents have been messed with. It just isn't so.
Lance.
Lance, I do not mess with coins except to understand the difference between one that will grade and one that will not. Obviously, all of the RAW IHC PR coins that I purchased that looked RD were graded code .91 Questionable Color. The color on some was identical to RB coins and when submitted together, the coin in the holder came back 65RB and the RAW coin came back .91. Obviously, but not to me, this coin has been messed with to deserve the .91 (three times)?
I suspect that there are a lot more RD coins in slabs that are messed with than BN coins toned blue. The RD coins are worth much more so it only makes sense to make one red than to make one blue which is much more difficult to do. I am currently trying to turn a test strip of copper blue with ammonium hydroxide. The first run just turned it brown. But then I learned that you need to pretreat the copper with NaCl before the NH3. But that somewhat blows my theory, previously posted, that ammonium hydroxide, a predominate cleaning solution prior to about 1960 could cause the blue toning that was experienced with the Proskey hoard. The POP of the Proskey coins was estimated to be over 100 per each date. Might have been ammonium chloride in the building where Proskey stored the coins? But sulfur ini the paper in the envelopes sounds questionable as well to achieve the blue color.
When Rick Snow asserts that creating blue on IHC proofs is almost impossible........does not mean that God cannot do it with His assistant, Mother Nature.
Years ago coin doctors would use cyanide compounds. My understanding is that the coins initially have an unnatural pink color, but look much more natural with the passage of time. Don't try it at home. If you mix the wrong ingredients together, you will turn your home into a gas chamber.
Edited: I don't dispute your conclusion concerning the existence of original red copper. I'm only answering your question about turning a BN cent RD.
I doubt you will get any takers on that bet.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
Rick is mostly correct. The blue can be induced and removed from copper very easily; however, it is a chemical reaction that takes certain conditions. I cannot speak about the envelope helping the reaction along. Some copper coins turn, others don't.
News Flash: Leaving out "moderns," it's a good bet that just about every coin that you think (in spite of your credentials, experience, knowledge, etc.) is truly original IS NOT. That's because most vintage coins - probably 98% - are not original - something has been done to them since they left the press. "Never" is a word you'll eventually have to eat. I've learned that lesson.
I do agree somewhat with this that you posted: "True original coins are scarce if not rare." However, in my experience, you have understated the facts. I'll say that true original "vintage" coins are EXTREMELY RARE and virtually non-existent in some series.
+1
Actually, as a scientist I really hate it when someone (and I don't care who) asserts that a coin is without a doubt original in its original "skin". That last term "skin" really irks me as well, but I guess it is in somewhat common usage. How in the world is an individual so expert that their knowledge of a coin is not to be challenged? Have they shepherded the coin since its striking? Please!!!!
I can even accept the IMO or IMHO term, but other than that is shear arrogance.
Well, just Love coins, period.
OINK:
_"Clearly Mr. Blay would like to establish himself as the market maker for high end copper coins? But the market will define the market. Not Mr. Blay. There are other dealers, such as Rick Snow that have proved to make market in these coins on a much more neutral basis. If you desire to be a dealer in TPG coins, you need to reserve your opinion on not only grade, but also as to AT/NT. Blay is clearly trying to embelish his inventory/collection to enhance it's value. I have no problem with that, but I think that I would rather buy from a dealer who is not also a collector."__
The only thing clear in this statement is that you have not seen Mr. Blay's "inventory/collection."
2.And after eliminating surface contamination on these coins with a mild dip in acetone, the underlying toning was resultant
I have not been able to obtain this result. I have left coins soak overnight in acetone(past the criteria of a "mild dip") with no apparent change except that the coins appear very dull and dry looking. when swabbed with MS70 the color comes forth.
I think people forget that many 19th century coin collectors kept their coins in coin cabinets and often times the colors found on these coins were caused by exposure to the various volatile wood compounds. I have a buddy that put coins in a freshly cut cedar box and in as little as a year the coins looked beautiful (And yes, some of the copper Lincolns were gaining a cool blue color but the silver coins were the real winners. I wish I still had the photo he sent me and I'd post it). That said, would a coin toned by placing it in a freshly cut wooden box be considered AT or NT?
NT.. no intent to deceive. JMO.
Does everyone agree MS70 does not turn modern coins blue, for example 2017 copper bullion rounds? If so, it could be interesting data on whether MS70 turns coins blue or it exposes existing blue.
Never had a coin dated after 1960's turn blue; however, I can probably count on my fingers and toes the number of them I have conserved so on this, the door is open.
That blue is not natural, period. It is not being exposed by the solvent/oxidants but rather created by them. There may be other factors involved as I had brought up in other threads. I am amazed that this line of thought even continues at all and should not have been promoted in the first IMO.
There are definitely copper coins from before 1960 that have turned - I have seen Indians and of course British copper pre 1860 turned.
I kind of laugh at this whole "exposing" notion - a bit like spontaneous generation in the biological world before real biologists got hold of it.
Well, just Love coins, period.
As I have previously posted pictures of copper reacted with NH3, and then dipped in acetone without any result, and then "rubbed" with MS70 on a Q-Tip, which will remove the corrosion imparted by the NH3. I have applied acetone and MS70 on raw copper and can see no blue toning as a result. In fact, no discoloration of the coin.
The many colors that copper may show are created by chemical reaction. But the colors are dependent on the thickness of the "oxidation" layer on the coin, much like as described by Sunnywood on Morgan dollars. Copper will react with many other substances, and the results will vary. I have purposefully reacted copper with many substances, including sea water, and have found that copper is a very reactive metal. Blue is the principal color of many copper compounds. I have tried to create the "blue" effect with acetone, MS70 and NH3, and have had no success in doing so.
Lot's of the Simpson collection of patterns that are currently being auctioned by Legend are blue-ish. Do you really think that they are blue because Simpson dipped them, Jaguar7????
OINK
Why do so many people question the validity of blue copper? Nobody questions the rainbow toning on fairly fresh silver eagles a few years back. They were slabbed as NT, and rightfully so, since dipping them in acetone allowed the rainbow colors to come through. Colors, which often seemed to mirror the colors found on some high priced Morgan Dollars (many of which appeared when the toning craze really took off). I think it's time to put it to a vote: Which of the following do you have complete faith in?
1) Blue Copper
2) Rainbow Toned Silver Eagles
3) Rainbow toned Morgan Dollars
4) Original "Copper Red" Large Cents
5) The Easter Bunny
Some of the above may exist, but certainly not the number that are out there. There is, after all, only one real Easter Bunny, but, if he were slabbable, there would be an Easter Bunny available for anyone with pockets deep enough...
Actually, a lot of people on these forums have been questioning these, as does ATS.
That comment was posted "tongue in cheek". Just pointing out that popularity seems to cause a sudden increase in certain items. I don't really believe in the Easter Bunny either, but do believe that, were he slabbable, Easter Bunnys would be showing up in droves. I have been a collector for 40+ years, and have noticed a lot of changes in that time. Yes, I have become somewhat of a skeptic...
I reread this thread just now, as nothing of interest going on and it is a fascinating subject. It would be a real pleasure to get a group of yourselves including Bob Campbell, David Hall, JD, TPGS finalizers, myself, and some of the well-known "doctors." at a retreat in an exotic place - free food, drinks, etc. All sworn to secrecy, signed papers, and freedom from prosecution to decide once and for all (actually just for awhile until the next alteration is discovered - LOL) what is market acceptable for all the TPGS.
I am not a coin doctor. My only interest is to be able to detect altered coins when I see them. Here are some facts as I know them. I have not posted them in this thread or in the thread posted by Rick about "blue Indians." I don't care if you believe what I write or not:
In the 1970's, I have seen a mint state, red & brown Indian cent changed to original red that would pass me, any of you, and any present-day TPGS. And I'll wager I've seen the surfaces of more coins closer than anyone at that retreat I wish we could have. It took two tries. I told the dealer his first effort was close but no cigar. The second try was perfection! He used three electrolytic baths. I could tell one solution was copper sulfate.
The color of metals has been changed for centuries. There are books of formulas out there for those who wish to look. To get the best results, you better have a chemistry lab with a fume hood as many of these formulas can harm you.
Chemically altered coins are passed as original by every TPGS on a regular basis. Proof Indians are a good case in point. Although I don't collect them and don't alter them myself - I know.
When a coin is conserved, treated, cleaned, altered, etc. in any way, it is no longer in its natural state. As long as the appearance of the coin - its physical state - is improved, and a knowledgeable numismatist cannot find any trace of this UNNATURAL "action" I believe there is no harm done.
It all boils down to this: We are all learning new things. Our coins have been around a very long time and have passed thru many hands. They are stored in various ways and affected by their surroundings. I'll say that none of us can know for sure 100% of the time if the color of a coin has been "helped" to develop or happened naturally. When I look at a coin, I don't care, as long as it looks like a natural coin. When I first turned a Proof Indian cent "iridescent blue" while removing some haze with MS-70, I was horrified! That's when I learned that the blue color could be eliminated in seconds and the coin restored to brown. That was many years ago and iridescent blue Indians were not in favor and considered chemical alterations. Perhaps now the fellow can crack it from its holder (if it is in one now), turn it blue again and increase its value! Blue is the new $$$$$.
IMO, all we need to do for the industry is to set some standards (perhaps a class for professional graders at the retreat paid for by our host of course?) so that fewer natural coins are determined to be altered and fewer altered coins are determined to be OK.
Yeah, too bad there are so many doctors and nothing that can stop them.
See my post above. Do you consider the folks who put chemicals on coins at the TPGS's to be coin doctors? I do. It's just that they have a different motive.
They have also saved a lot of coins for future collectors. There is a difference.
The PNG doctoring definition doesn't consider what the TPGs to do to be doctoring.
I'm not interested in the PNG opinion. I asked my question of you NOT the PNG
Lots of blue/purple Indians on the bay. The below search is for "pcgs rainbow -morgan -eagle Indian head"
It could be the True View images, but most of those do not look original to me.
I'm not going to badger you for a straight answer to my simple question as I'm told that anyone can post an opinion yet no one is obligated to answer a question. Thanks for the pretty pictures. They say a thousand words; yet not what I asked of you.
Best Regards and Happy collecting!
I didn't respond to your question on my opinion regarding TPG practices because I feel I already answered this in another thread and needed time to look up my prior answer. My response from the thread Coin doctoring is making a small come back is quoted below. In the thread below you can substitute "TPG conservation" for "dipping". In this case, I would say TPG practices aren't part of what I'm concerned about here unless you're saying TPGs are turning copper coins blue.
Any one interested in "blue" coins should check out this new thread posted on 4/20/17 by Zippcity:
"CHANGE FIND."
"Got this in change last week, not too bad of shape for a 62 year old coin. Let it soak a few days to remove some of the green gunk."
Quote · Disagree Agree Like LOL
It's all about eye appeal, you either like it or you don't, that's the the bottom line.
Man, what a great thread... I was not on the forums when this discussion hit, but it sure takes me back to 2007-2008 (?) when the "Blue Indian Proof" stuff was going on.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
You keep saying this even when I demonstrated in your "rooster" thread that your claim in bold is FALSE. Acetone, a common coin solvent, can turn copper/bronze blue under the right reaction conditions, namely light and sufficient time. That is a FACT and has been shown in peer reviewed scientific literature. Specifically, a paper analyzing the effects of acetone as a cleaning agent for copper artifacts found that copper in the presence of water and light could catalyze side reactions that lead to the formation of blue crystal/oxidation. (A research abstract appears at the end of my post).
MS70 contains lye, a strong base that will dissociate in an aqueous environment to produce free hydroxide anions in solution. Copper hydroxides are blue, so it is plausible on its face that there could be a reaction under the right conditions. What those conditions might be - ask one of the resident chemistry PhDs. There are far too many variables to account for. It is also possible that it is a complex interaction with surface oils, the detergent, and the metal. It is unlikely that an experiment under uncontrolled conditions will prove anything other than the need for controlled experiments with metallurgical and other chemical analyses.
As for blue copper, I have seen bronze plaques naturally develop a blue patina. The paper discussed shows that blue copper can also be faked. It isn't an all or nothing issue. What ever your views on blue copper, the two cent piece in this thread looks funky for the reasons that @zcoins pointed out, but to each his own.
I have posted here very few times over the last few years, but I think that this one is really worthwhile. Copper coins with blue toning have taken a bad rap over the past several years, with many exclaiming that any copper coins with blue toning must be AT, while others dispute that assertion. Read through this old post if you have the time and absorb these various views.
I just returned from the Whitman Baltimore show and spent hours looking at the James Allaire Millholland Collection being auctioned by Stacks' Bowers. This collection is absolutely amazing. It has been stored in a wooden cabinet since 1911 and only recently came to light when family descendants brought it to Stacks'. Many copper coins are included in this collection. Take a look at few of the coins depicted here, and look up many more of the copper coins from this collection with similar toning. In fact , you might note a pattern of toning with these coins. Most have blue tones.
I hope that this collection puts a dent in the thoughts of those that believe that blue toning on copper coins cannot be natural.
I don't think the assertion of most members is that blue toned copper is all AT. I think the biggest take-away is that the preponderance of blue copper during the past 20 years coupled with the fact that there have been admitted perpetrators who were doctoring coins leads to a conclusion: it is reasonable to believe that many of the intensely blue toned coins weren't toned naturally.
I recall David Hall commenting to the effect that during the 1960's and 1970's there just weren't very many intensely toned Morgan Dollars seen at shows and auctions. That changed dramatically from the late 1990's to the present day. I would be eager to hear HRH's thoughts on the influx of blue copper because it seems like a similar phenomenon. I don't doubt coins like those pictured above from the James Allaire Millholland Collection and others exist, but we live in an age where deceit runs rampant and the number of blue coins is staggering.
Very well said. Tread blue toned copper coins carefully, as there has been a recent influx But the zealots that dismiss all blue toned coins must be debunked.
Adding fuel to the fire is that defining NT vs. AT with blue colors on copper can be very difficult, moreso than any other color.