If you don't want to buy blast white coins then don't buy them. And if you don't want to buy original but ugly coins don't buy those either. It is as simple as that. If others feel differently, what business is it of your? Financial of course. One would not want a dipped coin to be considered to be the equal of your "original" (as far as you can tell) coin would one. If the coins that are left after the dipped and ugly coins are eliminated are too expensive for you to buy, then what? Then the hobby is left to those who can afford to own the top tier original and attractive coins. That's one way to keep the riff raff out of the club I suppose. If that is your aim.
In that regard, it is not sufficient to have different color holder labels for dipped and original coins. If you did that, the original coin holders would soon be filled with those ugly coins, which would stigmatize and devalue all coins in "original" holders, including yours. No, that won't do at all. We need to have at least three different labels. White for dipped. Rose colored for original and pretty. And maybe black with a cross bones and skull and the word UGLY in full caps for the ugly coins.
If we know that coins are continuously being dipped in order to achieve the higher grades (and) the tpg's are rewarding them, should we allow that to continue and is it good for our coins and the hobby.
For what it's worth, the TPGs are grading market-acceptable coins for the folks who submitted them. To suggest they reward dipping is a bit tortured. I think a fair argument could be made that buyers tastes motivate dipping, contesting the view that original coins are more universally more desirable regardless of their appearance. Whether "we" should allow that to continue, and whether it is good for the coins/hobby, assumes we have agency to change this dynamic.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>Now tell me are you educating the collectors that dark is better than light, don't think so. >>
What you are really saying is "Teach everyone that what 'I' like is the best way.' This is not true.... it is what YOU like, not what all collectors like or want. I suggest everyone collect what they like and leave other collectors to their choices. It really is NONE of anyone else's concern what others prefer and collect.
<< <i>Now tell me are you educating the collectors that dark is better than light, don't think so. >>
What you are really saying is "Teach everyone that what 'I' like is the best way.' This is not true.... it is what YOU like, not what all collectors like or want. I suggest everyone collect what they like and leave other collectors to their choices. It really is NONE of anyone else's concern what others prefer and collect.
Cheers, RickO >>
Ricko has hit it on the head perfectly. Here is an example. I have a customer who collects classic commems and want them to have booming luster and be blast white. This is what he likes, this is what he wants. I have repeatedly offered him nice, original and attractive pieces with booming luster and he wants nothing of it. I can't teach him to like something he doesn't like nor would I want to. Truth be told I teach my customers to collect what they like. If they ask which is better toned or white I give them both arguments. I do tell people that 100+ year old coins are not naturally white and for the most part people don't care. I would guess people who want completely original or nothing is the very very small minority.
In reference to the discussion about TPGs labeling coins on originality. That argument has so many practical and philosophical errors that it's not even worth considering. All this hot air spent discussing something that will ultimately never actualize...and the world goes round. If you're going to spend time on nu mismatic discussion at all, at least spend it wisely.
<< <i>All this hot air spent discussing something that will ultimately never actualize...and the world goes round. If you're going to spend time on numismatic discussion at all, at least spend it wisely. >>
What should we discuss then? Modern mint products? The latest eBay gripe? The latest eBay anything? The latest million dollar coin that most of us can't afford to even dream about? The latest variety that requires an electron microscope to see?
What issue that's important to all of us would you like to discuss?
<< <i>All this hot air spent discussing something that will ultimately never actualize...and the world goes round. If you're going to spend time on numismatic discussion at all, at least spend it wisely. >>
What should we discuss then? Modern mint products? The latest eBay gripe? The latest eBay anything? The latest million dollar coin that most of us can't afford to even dream about? The latest variety that requires an electron microscope to see?
What issue that's important to all of us would you like to discuss? >>
Sorry my original post was incomplete. Please see the edited one. Posting on a phone + slow connection sucks.
Some people like bright white coins and others like crusty toned coins. The marketplace places a value on each and apparently they value the bright white coins more. You like the "original" or beautifully toned coins and that is great for you. It seems that because the majority do not agree with you you want the holder to somehow make the coins you have better. Kinda like market manipulation.
A bird sitting on a tree is never afraid of the branch breaking because it's trust is not in the branch but it's own wings.
Freakin crazy thread. Im in the crack and place in envelope for many moons camp, but monitor it and make sure the coin doesn't get too ridiculously toned. And keep in mind PCGS may grade the coin lower with heavy toning....
I would prefer this O-120 that I just picked up (same D/M as original post)
For those who are interested in more about this D/M or want to see bigger pics:
<< <i>Maibock, I would argue that coin is nice but needs an acetone bath to remove the organic contaminants from the surface. >>
The spotting shows up in the photos due to light, but is hardly noticeable in hand at many lighting angles. I would say that the coin may have had a bit of contamination in the past and it was likely already removed, as there is not much of anything left on the coin itself.
Q1: Suppose you came to own a nearly full black silver coin. And suppose you could reasonably determine it was approaching that fatal point where the toning is about to etch into the surface. Would you dip it or let it go? (This is a hypothetical. Assume no damage has yet occurred but will if untreated.)
Q2: Is it correct that everyone firmly opposed to dipping at all costs would never use PCGS's conservation service, where you have no control over how the coin is conserved? Lance.
<< <i>Q1: Suppose you came to own a nearly full black silver coin. And suppose you could reasonably determine it was approaching that fatal point where the toning is about to etch into the surface. Would you dip it or let it go? (This is a hypothetical. Assume no damage has yet occurred but will if untreated.)
Q2: Is it correct that everyone firmly opposed to dipping at all costs would never use PCGS's conservation service, where you have no control over how the coin is conserved? Lance. >>
Re Q2, I don't have to be seriously opposed to dipping to not like the idea - I do not get to know what was done and what was used or any stability guarantee, so I'd pass. But, those circumstances are true of practically every coin. "Nothing is clean. It's a dirty world Baby, we do the best we can." - Ava to Howard from The Aviator
Excessive toning is considered damaging to the coins surfaces, should we not take action to try and conserve coins like these? I see no reason not to in this case be it for resale or just for sake of conserving for the future of the coins health. I would buy blast white or nice toned coins, if they meet my collecting needs.
<< <i>Excessive toning is considered damaging to the coins surfaces, should we not take action to try and conserve coins like these? I see no reason not to in this case be it for resale or just for sake of conserving for the future of the coins health. I would buy blast white or nice toned coins, if they meet my collecting needs. >>
Once the damage is done, you cannot un-do it. If the coin really was ugly, and dipping makes it more acceptable in the marketplace, then it may be better to dip it. But it should not be holdered as a problem-free coin! Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right?
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
Thats why knowing which coins to dip is important. Black toning doesn't mean the surfaces are always damaged but they will be eventually. Removing the tarnish as ricko called it is good in these cases. Which can make a problem coin, problem free as PCGS will not grade a coin that thats to dark to tell if it has surface issues.
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
Thats why knowing which coins to dip is important. Black toning doesn't mean the surfaces are always damaged but they will be eventually. Removing the tarnish as ricko called it is good in these cases. Which can make a problem coin, problem free as PCGS will not grade a coin that thats to dark to tell if it has surface issues. >>
So by this discussion, dipping can make a problem coin into a problem-free coin. That sounds like the definition of doctoring to me. Of course a doctored coin is still a problem coin once the method of doctoring is discovered.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
Thats why knowing which coins to dip is important. Black toning doesn't mean the surfaces are always damaged but they will be eventually. Removing the tarnish as ricko called it is good in these cases. Which can make a problem coin, problem free as PCGS will not grade a coin that thats to dark to tell if it has surface issues. >>
So by this discussion, dipping can make a problem coin into a problem-free coin. That sounds like the definition of doctoring to me. Of course a doctored coin is still a problem coin once the method of doctoring is discovered. >>
A coin that has actually sat undisturbed for 200 years will likely have dark heavy toning. There is no way around it, unless the coin sat in a metal box someplace. Black toning means the surfaces technically have been damaged, but if there is nothing on the surfaces, then it will not continue. The black toning can simply be a product of where the coin was stored.
<< <i>I don't care how bad it may have looked before it was ruined. It had to be better than that! >>
Black would have been beautiful! >>
I would not go far. I avoid black toned silver as much as I avoid poorly dipped pieces. And a piece of black silver would not dip like this. It would "big time" ugly.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<< <i>Now tell me are you educating the collectors that dark is better than light, don't think so. >>
What you are really saying is "Teach everyone that what 'I' like is the best way.' This is not true.... it is what YOU like, not what all collectors like or want. I suggest everyone collect what they like and leave other collectors to their choices. It really is NONE of anyone else's concern what others prefer and collect.
Cheers, RickO >>
Ricko has hit it on the head perfectly. Here is an example. I have a customer who collects classic commems and want them to have booming luster and be blast white. This is what he likes, this is what he wants. I have repeatedly offered him nice, original and attractive pieces with booming luster and he wants nothing of it. I can't teach him to like something he doesn't like nor would I want to. Truth be told I teach my customers to collect what they like. If they ask which is better toned or white I give them both arguments. I do tell people that 100+ year old coins are not naturally white and for the most part people don't care. I would guess people who want completely original or nothing is the very very small minority. >>
While I completely appreciate and respect this opinion and mindset, isn't there a way to get a picky collector his BRIGHT WHITE coin without having to "dip" the originality off of another one ? Or have all the commemoratives already been dipped once ?
As a discussion is concerned, I've had a few old timers ask for bright white Peace Dollars. Dipping isn't really an option. Dippers should network with non dippers so we can help each other out and keep a few of the originals around. If, in fact, there are original coins (undipped) out there, still. It doesn't make sense, if those originals will bring a premium when in the proper place. Instead of bringing 70-90% of price guide money without the real eye appeal, an original specimen with eye appeal might bring far more than a price guide tells us.
With respect,
And it's rhetorical. No need to address my point. Maybe just ponder it.
Keets: <<.. strangely, everyone is repulsed by this coin yet they are enamored by similar coins with a nice "original skin" and sometimes attractively colored tone>>
This is not true. RealOne consistently favors coins that have never been cleaned or dipped. I agree and RealOne would probably acknolwedge, though, that a very large precentage of uncirculated, classic U.S. coins have been dipped in the past.
I said, well above, in my first post to this thread: On many occasions, however, coins naturally retone after having been dipped. I discuss natural retoning and provide examples in my articles. As Keets suggests, we need to deal with the reality that so many coins have been dipped in the past. It does not make sense to refer to all such coins as having been ruined.
MidLifeCrisis: When I express concern for "the hobby", what I really mean is "the hobby". ... I'd like a hobby in which dipping (and) doctoring (were not) so prevalent...and so universally accepted. ... There are other things about the hobby that I'd like to change...and they have nothing at all to do with the coins that I collect.
For the most part, I agree with MidLifeCrisis and I am offended by Baley's remarks. Most of interest do not have a financial interest in discouraging dipping or doctoring. It is unfortunate, though, that MidLifeCrisis is bundling dipping and doctoring together. They are two entirely different activities. Dipping is acceptable to the PCGS, the NGC and the CAC. Doctoring is not acceptable. Doctored coins sometimes slip by because graders are deceived, not because they are accepting. Doctoring involves deception. While dipping is harmful, it does not involve deception.
<< <i>While dipping is harmful, it does not involve deception >>
This is simply not true! The only way it does not involve deception is if everyone knows explicitly that a coin has been dipped, and the only way it could be known by everyone is if it is marked on the holder as having been dipped, or if every seller of a dipped coin (raw or slabbed but not stated as having been dipped on the slab) that the coin has been dipped. Otherwise, there is always an element of deception and this varies anywhere from a simple "wink and a nod" to outright fraud. Many unsophisticated buyers (investors, beginning collectors, folks with low IQ, etc) look at a bright, untoned coin such as this one and think they are looking at a perfectly-preserved, original coin that is worth a premium, yet nothing could be farther from the truth!
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
Proper dipping doesn't matter - what you see is what you get. Evaluate the surfaces and luster and store it like the numismatists of yore until you can retire off of it.
Analyst (me above): <<While dipping is harmful, it does not involve deception >>
rmpsrpms: << This is simply not true! The only way it does not involve deception is if everyone knows explicitly that a coin has been dipped, ...
My remark is being taken out of context. Moreover, I have pointed out many times that dipped Morgan Dollars and Walkers are often marketed to the general public and others who do not understand the concept of dipping. In terms of the participants of this forum, dipping does not inolve deception and doctoring does! Certainly, PCGS graders are deceived when they fail to detect doctored coins. PCGS graders know that bright white 18th century or 19th century silver coins are very likely to have been dipped. Almost all collectors know as well.
rmpsrpms: << there is always an element of deception and this varies anywhere from a simple "wink and a nod" to outright fraud.
This statement is not true. There is not "always an element of deception"! As I just said, almost all collectors, certainly more than 95%, know that bright white 18th century and 19th century have been dipped and/or have been modified in some other way.
Many unsophisticated buyers (investors, beginning collectors, folks with low IQ, etc) look at a bright, untoned coin such as this one and think they are looking at a perfectly-preserved, original coin that is worth a premium, yet nothing could be farther from the truth! >>
RMP is correct that some people who do not know anything about rare coins are occasionally fooled by dipped coins, but how many? The vast majority of these people are aware that silver utensils and silver plates tone. It is hard to believe that many of them would think that a bright white piece of silver from the 19th century has never been modified.
<< <i>rmpsrpms: << there is always an element of deception and this varies anywhere from a simple "wink and a nod" to outright fraud.
This statement is not true. There is not "always an element of deception"! As I just said, almost all collectors, certainly more than 95%, know that bright white 18th century and 19th century have been dipped and/or have been modified in some other way. >>
Talk about taking out of context! You removed the key word "Otherwise" from that sentence. Unless it is stated in the transaction or in some documentation, there is always deception, by definition. Deception: to mislead by a false appearance or statement. How can that be any clearer?
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
While I don't care for the coin as-is, it is entirely possible that it was so ugly before that the dip was an improvement. >>
>>
I agree as well! But that is missing the point. This coin "totally scared the bejesus" out of the OP, and it does the same for me. Why is it in a problem-free holder? If it was so ugly before that it needed dipping, it was a PROBLEM COIN. Dipping it does not make it problem-free.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
Sorry ebaybuyer..... it is evident that on this forum we cannot agree to disagree.. certain elements insist on being right - their way or the highway.... fortunately, the hobby will continue to endure and their opinions will continue to be the cross they must bear..... so sad. Cheers, RickO
<< <i>Proper dipping doesn't matter - what you see is what you get. Evaluate the surfaces and luster and store it like the numismatists of yore until you can retire off of it.
RMPsrpms: << <<Unless it is stated in the transaction or in some documentation, there is always deception, by definition. Deception: to mislead by a false appearance or statement. How can that be any clearer?>>
Dipping is not limited to coins. Medals, ornamental spoons and even rare forks are often dipped as well. As I said, dipping is harmful. It does not follow, however, that many people are deceived. Almost all people know that bright white silver items from the 19th century or earlier have been artificially brightened.
Usually, when a dipped coin is sold, there is no false statement. As RMP himself said above, the buyer may think that a dipped item has never been dipped, as a buyer of a used car may think that it has never been driven or the buyer of a comic book may assume that no one ever read any part of it. There is no way to control all the assumptions, however unwarranted, that people make in their own minds. Because some people make false, ridiculous or unrealistic assumptions, it does not follow that they have been deceived in instances when such assumptions are wrong.
In the field of rare coins, knowledgeable buyers know that a MS-62 grade coin, in accordance with widely accepted standards, may have many substantial hairlines from a past cleaning and may have substantial friction on the highpoints. It does not follow, however, that someone who does know what a "MS-62" grade means is being deceived. Such a person should ask experts and do some reading. A buyer who does not know that most bright white 19th century silver coins have been dipped is not being deceived; he just has no idea what he is buying. As more than 95% of buyers of bright white pre-1900 silver coins know that these coins have been dipped, they are not being deceived. The "appearance" of such a coin is not "false" in the sense a successful forgery is false or a coin that has been deceptively repaired is false. Almost all buyers are aware of the 'truth' regarding the appearances of obviously dipped coins.
EbayBuyer: <<.. can't we just agree to disagree ? buy what you like and enjoy the hobby. there is no right or wrong way to collect coins. >>
I would have to side with RMP in his response to this statement. When a coin that was formerly in the Garrett, Eliasberg, or Norweb Family collections is dipped; the hobby as a whole is being harmed, not just the coin that is dipped. Much of the history and the character of the respective coin is destroyed. Further, the legacy of an epic collection is harmed. The traditions and history of coin collecting are impaired. too. I list other reasons in my articles. EbayBuyer, please read. I really believe that one person dips a rare coin, it is not just the coin that is being harmed; other collecters are harmed, too.
<< <i> I would have to side with RMP in his response to this statement. When a coin that was formerly in the Garrett, Eliasberg, or Norweb Family collections is dipped; the hobby as a whole is being harmed, not just the coin that is dipped. Much of the history and the character of the respective coin is destroyed. Further, the legacy of an epic collection is harmed. The traditions and history of coin collecting are impaired. too. I list other reasons in my articles. EbayBuyer, please read. I really believe that one person dips a rare coin, it is not just the coin that is being harmed; other collecters are harmed, too. >>
Although we don't agree on the inherent deception of dipping, we do at least agree that dipping is harmful to both indivdual coins and our hobby in general. I would extend your argument to not just famous coins, but any original coin whose history and character is destroyed by a new owner in order to make a fast buck.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
Comments
In that regard, it is not sufficient to have different color holder labels for dipped and original coins. If you did that, the original coin holders would soon be filled with those ugly coins, which would stigmatize and devalue all coins in "original" holders, including yours. No, that won't do at all. We need to have at least three different labels. White for dipped. Rose colored for original and pretty. And maybe black with a cross bones and skull and the word UGLY in full caps for the ugly coins.
CG
For what it's worth, the TPGs are grading market-acceptable coins for the folks who submitted them. To suggest they reward dipping is a bit tortured. I think a fair argument could be made that buyers tastes motivate dipping, contesting the view that original coins are more universally more desirable regardless of their appearance. Whether "we" should allow that to continue, and whether it is good for the coins/hobby, assumes we have agency to change this dynamic.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>Now tell me are you educating the collectors that dark is better than light, don't think so. >>
What you are really saying is "Teach everyone that what 'I' like is the best way.' This is not true.... it is what YOU like, not what all collectors like or want. I suggest everyone collect what they like and leave other collectors to their choices. It really is NONE of anyone else's concern what others prefer and collect.
Cheers, RickO
<< <i>Realone, by this statement...
<< <i>Now tell me are you educating the collectors that dark is better than light, don't think so. >>
What you are really saying is "Teach everyone that what 'I' like is the best way.' This is not true.... it is what YOU like, not what all collectors like or want. I suggest everyone collect what they like and leave other collectors to their choices. It really is NONE of anyone else's concern what others prefer and collect.
Cheers, RickO >>
Ricko has hit it on the head perfectly. Here is an example. I have a customer who collects classic commems and want them to have booming luster and be blast white. This is what he likes, this is what he wants. I have repeatedly offered him nice, original and attractive pieces with booming luster and he wants nothing of it. I can't teach him to like something he doesn't like nor would I want to. Truth be told I teach my customers to collect what they like. If they ask which is better toned or white I give them both arguments. I do tell people that 100+ year old coins are not naturally white and for the most part people don't care. I would guess people who want completely original or nothing is the very very small minority.
In reference to the discussion about TPGs labeling coins on originality. That argument has so many practical and philosophical errors that it's not even worth considering. All this hot air spent discussing something that will ultimately never actualize...and the world goes round. If you're going to spend time on nu mismatic discussion at all, at least spend it wisely.
<< <i>All this hot air spent discussing something that will ultimately never actualize...and the world goes round. If you're going to spend time on numismatic discussion at all, at least spend it wisely. >>
What should we discuss then? Modern mint products? The latest eBay gripe? The latest eBay anything? The latest million dollar coin that most of us can't afford to even dream about? The latest variety that requires an electron microscope to see?
What issue that's important to all of us would you like to discuss?
<< <i>
<< <i>All this hot air spent discussing something that will ultimately never actualize...and the world goes round. If you're going to spend time on numismatic discussion at all, at least spend it wisely. >>
What should we discuss then? Modern mint products? The latest eBay gripe? The latest eBay anything? The latest million dollar coin that most of us can't afford to even dream about? The latest variety that requires an electron microscope to see?
What issue that's important to all of us would you like to discuss? >>
Sorry my original post was incomplete. Please see the edited one. Posting on a phone + slow connection sucks.
Brilliance again. Yes, semantics. Let's name it immersion and take a breather.
Semantics seem to change everything sometimes.
Is it electrolytic, or very acidic?
Sonically or manually?
Ohhhh - "You say immersion, he says conversion.
I say "it's gored", she says "restored!"
Conversion, immersion,
reduction, destruction
Lets wipe the whole thing off."
Eric
places a value on each and apparently they value the bright white coins more. You
like the "original" or beautifully toned coins and that is great for you. It seems that
because the majority do not agree with you you want the holder to somehow make
the coins you have better. Kinda like market manipulation.
I would prefer this O-120 that I just picked up (same D/M as original post)
For those who are interested in more about this D/M or want to see bigger pics:
1806 O-120
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
<< <i>Maibock, I would argue that coin is nice but needs an acetone bath to remove the organic contaminants from the surface. >>
The spotting shows up in the photos due to light, but is hardly noticeable in hand at many lighting angles. I would say that the coin may have had a bit of contamination in the past and it was likely already removed, as there is not much of anything left on the coin itself.
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
<< <i>That hurts my eyes. >>
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
<< <i>
<< <i>Where's Ricko?? >>
scrambling to find the owner so he can acquire this coin?
. >>
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
Q2: Is it correct that everyone firmly opposed to dipping at all costs would never use PCGS's conservation service, where you have no control over how the coin is conserved?
Lance.
<< <i>Q1: Suppose you came to own a nearly full black silver coin. And suppose you could reasonably determine it was approaching that fatal point where the toning is about to etch into the surface. Would you dip it or let it go? (This is a hypothetical. Assume no damage has yet occurred but will if untreated.)
Q2: Is it correct that everyone firmly opposed to dipping at all costs would never use PCGS's conservation service, where you have no control over how the coin is conserved?
Lance. >>
Re Q2, I don't have to be seriously opposed to dipping to not like the idea - I do not get to know what was done and what was used or any stability guarantee, so I'd pass. But, those circumstances are true of practically every coin. "Nothing is clean. It's a dirty world Baby, we do the best we can." - Ava to Howard from The Aviator
Eric
<< <i>"Nothing is clean. It's a dirty world Baby, we do the best we can." - Ava to Howard from The Aviator
Eric >>
or as the Boss might say..
"No one gets
out of this world, Buddy,
without their feet a little dirty
and their hands a little bloody"
type2,CCHunter.
<< <i>Excessive toning is considered damaging to the coins surfaces, should we not take action to try and conserve coins like these? I see no reason not to in this case be it for resale or just for sake of conserving for the future of the coins health. I would buy blast white or nice toned coins, if they meet my collecting needs. >>
Once the damage is done, you cannot un-do it. If the coin really was ugly, and dipping makes it more acceptable in the marketplace, then it may be better to dip it. But it should not be holdered as a problem-free coin! Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right?
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
As long as you focus on the coin
Eric
<< <i>
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
As long as you focus on the coin
Eric >>
Actually, the question was rhetorical...
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
Thats why knowing which coins to dip is important. Black toning doesn't mean the surfaces are always damaged but they will be eventually. Removing the tarnish as ricko called it is good in these cases. Which can make a problem coin, problem free as PCGS will not grade a coin that thats to dark to tell if it has surface issues.
type2,CCHunter.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
Thats why knowing which coins to dip is important. Black toning doesn't mean the surfaces are always damaged but they will be eventually. Removing the tarnish as ricko called it is good in these cases. Which can make a problem coin, problem free as PCGS will not grade a coin that thats to dark to tell if it has surface issues. >>
So by this discussion, dipping can make a problem coin into a problem-free coin. That sounds like the definition of doctoring to me. Of course a doctored coin is still a problem coin once the method of doctoring is discovered.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dipping a problem coin doesn't make it problem-free, right? >>
Thats why knowing which coins to dip is important. Black toning doesn't mean the surfaces are always damaged but they will be eventually. Removing the tarnish as ricko called it is good in these cases. Which can make a problem coin, problem free as PCGS will not grade a coin that thats to dark to tell if it has surface issues. >>
So by this discussion, dipping can make a problem coin into a problem-free coin. That sounds like the definition of doctoring to me. Of course a doctored coin is still a problem coin once the method of doctoring is discovered. >>
A coin that has actually sat undisturbed for 200 years will likely have dark heavy toning. There is no way around it, unless the coin sat in a metal box someplace. Black toning means the surfaces technically have been damaged, but if there is nothing on the surfaces, then it will not continue. The black toning can simply be a product of where the coin was stored.
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
When do you expect the Ghost of Miss Liberty Present to visit?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't care how bad it may have looked before it was ruined. It had to be better than that! >>
Black would have been beautiful! >>
I would not go far. I avoid black toned silver as much as I avoid poorly dipped pieces. And a piece of black silver would not dip like this. It would "big time" ugly.
Lance.
<< <i>
<< <i>Realone, by this statement...
<< <i>Now tell me are you educating the collectors that dark is better than light, don't think so. >>
What you are really saying is "Teach everyone that what 'I' like is the best way.' This is not true.... it is what YOU like, not what all collectors like or want. I suggest everyone collect what they like and leave other collectors to their choices. It really is NONE of anyone else's concern what others prefer and collect.
Cheers, RickO >>
Ricko has hit it on the head perfectly. Here is an example. I have a customer who collects classic commems and want them to have booming luster and be blast white. This is what he likes, this is what he wants. I have repeatedly offered him nice, original and attractive pieces with booming luster and he wants nothing of it. I can't teach him to like something he doesn't like nor would I want to. Truth be told I teach my customers to collect what they like. If they ask which is better toned or white I give them both arguments. I do tell people that 100+ year old coins are not naturally white and for the most part people don't care. I would guess people who want completely original or nothing is the very very small minority. >>
While I completely appreciate and respect this opinion and mindset, isn't there a way to get a picky collector his BRIGHT WHITE coin without having to "dip" the originality off of another one ? Or have all the commemoratives already been dipped once ?
As a discussion is concerned, I've had a few old timers ask for bright white Peace Dollars. Dipping isn't really an option. Dippers should network with non dippers so we can help each other out and keep a few of the originals around. If, in fact, there are original coins (undipped) out there, still. It doesn't make sense, if those originals will bring a premium when in the proper place. Instead of bringing 70-90% of price guide money without the real eye appeal, an original specimen with eye appeal might bring far more than a price guide tells us.
With respect,
And it's rhetorical. No need to address my point. Maybe just ponder it.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Keets: <<.. strangely, everyone is repulsed by this coin yet they are enamored by similar coins with a nice "original skin" and sometimes attractively colored tone>>
This is not true. RealOne consistently favors coins that have never been cleaned or dipped. I agree and RealOne would probably acknolwedge, though, that a very large precentage of uncirculated, classic U.S. coins have been dipped in the past.
I said, well above, in my first post to this thread: On many occasions, however, coins naturally retone after having been dipped. I discuss natural retoning and provide examples in my articles. As Keets suggests, we need to deal with the reality that so many coins have been dipped in the past. It does not make sense to refer to all such coins as having been ruined.
Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 1
The Fabulous Eric Newman Collection, part 6: Auction Results for silver U.S. Coins
The Fabulous Eric Newman Coin Collection, part 3: Draped Bust Quarters
MidLifeCrisis: When I express concern for "the hobby", what I really mean is "the hobby". ... I'd like a hobby in which dipping (and) doctoring (were not) so prevalent...and so universally accepted. ... There are other things about the hobby that I'd like to change...and they have nothing at all to do with the coins that I collect.
For the most part, I agree with MidLifeCrisis and I am offended by Baley's remarks. Most of interest do not have a financial interest in discouraging dipping or doctoring. It is unfortunate, though, that MidLifeCrisis is bundling dipping and doctoring together. They are two entirely different activities. Dipping is acceptable to the PCGS, the NGC and the CAC. Doctoring is not acceptable. Doctored coins sometimes slip by because graders are deceived, not because they are accepting. Doctoring involves deception. While dipping is harmful, it does not involve deception.
Defining Coin Doctoring and Dipping- 09/08/10
[L=The PCGS SecurePlus Program, Part 1: An Explanation]http://www.coinlink.com/News/commentary-and-opinion/coin-rarities-related-topics-the-pcgs-secureplus-program-part-1-an-explanation/[/L
[L=The PCGS SecurePlus Program, Part 1: An Explanation]http://www.coinlink.com/News/commentary-and-opinion/coin-rarities-related-topics-the-pcgs-secureplus-program-part-1-an-explanation/[/L
<< <i>While dipping is harmful, it does not involve deception >>
This is simply not true! The only way it does not involve deception is if everyone knows explicitly that a coin has been dipped, and the only way it could be known by everyone is if it is marked on the holder as having been dipped, or if every seller of a dipped coin (raw or slabbed but not stated as having been dipped on the slab) that the coin has been dipped. Otherwise, there is always an element of deception and this varies anywhere from a simple "wink and a nod" to outright fraud. Many unsophisticated buyers (investors, beginning collectors, folks with low IQ, etc) look at a bright, untoned coin such as this one and think they are looking at a perfectly-preserved, original coin that is worth a premium, yet nothing could be farther from the truth!
http://macrocoins.com
Improper or overdipping on the other hand....
Analyst (me above): <<While dipping is harmful, it does not involve deception >>
rmpsrpms: << This is simply not true! The only way it does not involve deception is if everyone knows explicitly that a coin has been dipped, ...
My remark is being taken out of context. Moreover, I have pointed out many times that dipped Morgan Dollars and Walkers are often marketed to the general public and others who do not understand the concept of dipping. In terms of the participants of this forum, dipping does not inolve deception and doctoring does! Certainly, PCGS graders are deceived when they fail to detect doctored coins. PCGS graders know that bright white 18th century or 19th century silver coins are very likely to have been dipped. Almost all collectors know as well.
rmpsrpms: << there is always an element of deception and this varies anywhere from a simple "wink and a nod" to outright fraud.
This statement is not true. There is not "always an element of deception"! As I just said, almost all collectors, certainly more than 95%, know that bright white 18th century and 19th century have been dipped and/or have been modified in some other way.
Many unsophisticated buyers (investors, beginning collectors, folks with low IQ, etc) look at a bright, untoned coin such as this one and think they are looking at a perfectly-preserved, original coin that is worth a premium, yet nothing could be farther from the truth! >>
RMP is correct that some people who do not know anything about rare coins are occasionally fooled by dipped coins, but how many? The vast majority of these people are aware that silver utensils and silver plates tone. It is hard to believe that many of them would think that a bright white piece of silver from the 19th century has never been modified.
Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 1
Understanding Classic U.S. Coins and Building Excellent Coin Collections, Part 2: Dipped Coins
Defining Coin Doctoring and Dipping- 09/08/10
Coin doctoring, not dipping, is the most important problem facing the coin collecting community. It is a much more serious issue than dipping.
<< <i>rmpsrpms: << there is always an element of deception and this varies anywhere from a simple "wink and a nod" to outright fraud.
This statement is not true. There is not "always an element of deception"! As I just said, almost all collectors, certainly more than 95%, know that bright white 18th century and 19th century have been dipped and/or have been modified in some other way. >>
Talk about taking out of context! You removed the key word "Otherwise" from that sentence. Unless it is stated in the transaction or in some documentation, there is always deception, by definition. Deception: to mislead by a false appearance or statement. How can that be any clearer?
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>What we can't see is the "before" images.
While I don't care for the coin as-is, it is entirely possible that it was so ugly before that the dip was an improvement. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>What we can't see is the "before" images.
While I don't care for the coin as-is, it is entirely possible that it was so ugly before that the dip was an improvement. >>
I agree as well! But that is missing the point. This coin "totally scared the bejesus" out of the OP, and it does the same for me. Why is it in a problem-free holder? If it was so ugly before that it needed dipping, it was a PROBLEM COIN. Dipping it does not make it problem-free.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>cant we just agree to disagree ? buy what you like and enjoy the hobby. there is no right or wrong way to collect coins. >>
No.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>cant we just agree to disagree ? >>
Sorry ebaybuyer..... it is evident that on this forum we cannot agree to disagree.. certain elements insist on being right - their way or the highway.... fortunately, the hobby will continue to endure and their opinions will continue to be the cross they must bear..... so sad. Cheers, RickO
<< <i>Proper dipping doesn't matter - what you see is what you get. Evaluate the surfaces and luster and store it like the numismatists of yore until you can retire off of it.
Improper or overdipping on the other hand.... >>
A rational, reasonable point of view.
RMPsrpms: << <<Unless it is stated in the transaction or in some documentation, there is always deception, by definition. Deception: to mislead by a false appearance or statement. How can that be any clearer?>>
Dipping is not limited to coins. Medals, ornamental spoons and even rare forks are often dipped as well. As I said, dipping is harmful. It does not follow, however, that many people are deceived. Almost all people know that bright white silver items from the 19th century or earlier have been artificially brightened.
Usually, when a dipped coin is sold, there is no false statement. As RMP himself said above, the buyer may think that a dipped item has never been dipped, as a buyer of a used car may think that it has never been driven or the buyer of a comic book may assume that no one ever read any part of it. There is no way to control all the assumptions, however unwarranted, that people make in their own minds. Because some people make false, ridiculous or unrealistic assumptions, it does not follow that they have been deceived in instances when such assumptions are wrong.
In the field of rare coins, knowledgeable buyers know that a MS-62 grade coin, in accordance with widely accepted standards, may have many substantial hairlines from a past cleaning and may have substantial friction on the highpoints. It does not follow, however, that someone who does know what a "MS-62" grade means is being deceived. Such a person should ask experts and do some reading. A buyer who does not know that most bright white 19th century silver coins have been dipped is not being deceived; he just has no idea what he is buying. As more than 95% of buyers of bright white pre-1900 silver coins know that these coins have been dipped, they are not being deceived. The "appearance" of such a coin is not "false" in the sense a successful forgery is false or a coin that has been deceptively repaired is false. Almost all buyers are aware of the 'truth' regarding the appearances of obviously dipped coins.
EbayBuyer: <<.. can't we just agree to disagree ? buy what you like and enjoy the hobby. there is no right or wrong way to collect coins. >>
I would have to side with RMP in his response to this statement. When a coin that was formerly in the Garrett, Eliasberg, or Norweb Family collections is dipped; the hobby as a whole is being harmed, not just the coin that is dipped. Much of the history and the character of the respective coin is destroyed. Further, the legacy of an epic collection is harmed. The traditions and history of coin collecting are impaired. too. I list other reasons in my articles. EbayBuyer, please read. I really believe that one person dips a rare coin, it is not just the coin that is being harmed; other collecters are harmed, too.
Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 1
Understanding Classic U.S. Coins and Building Excellent Coin Collections, Part 2: Dipped Coins
The Dazzling Collecting Journey of Dr. Steven Duckor
Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 3
<< <i>
I would have to side with RMP in his response to this statement. When a coin that was formerly in the Garrett, Eliasberg, or Norweb Family collections is dipped; the hobby as a whole is being harmed, not just the coin that is dipped. Much of the history and the character of the respective coin is destroyed. Further, the legacy of an epic collection is harmed. The traditions and history of coin collecting are impaired. too. I list other reasons in my articles. EbayBuyer, please read. I really believe that one person dips a rare coin, it is not just the coin that is being harmed; other collecters are harmed, too. >>
Although we don't agree on the inherent deception of dipping, we do at least agree that dipping is harmful to both indivdual coins and our hobby in general. I would extend your argument to not just famous coins, but any original coin whose history and character is destroyed by a new owner in order to make a fast buck.
http://macrocoins.com