Is there a new definition for original skin?

BG · February 10, 2019 10:19PM

I did a search on this topic and there are threads going back to 2002 about original skin.

What is the consensus now on that definition?

Are original Mint Sets "Original Skin"? Coins may have been switched out.

For me it's not that difficult a definition. A coin that has "Never Been Messed With."

But, do we truly know a coin has never been "Messed With"?

I'll post an image of a coin I think is original in this thread in the very near future.

If you have an "original skin" coin, please show us.

TommyType · February 10, 2019 10:27PM

There are those here who swear they can identify an original skin coin. But I have a feeling, as you suggest, that it may be a matter of degree. A quick, diluted dip would be harder to see than a coin getting a longer, or multiple, dips.

keets · February 11, 2019 3:39AM

MFeld · February 11, 2019 4:30AM

We can guess whether a coin’s surfaces (and/or in the case of a toned one, wether its patina) is “original”. However, unless we’ve had it since the time it was produced, we can’t really know.

Regarding a definition of “original” - I like “unmessed with”.

Zoins · February 11, 2019 4:31AM

@MFeld said:
We can guess whether a coin’s surfaces (and/or in the case of a toned one, wether its patina) is “original”. However, unless we’ve had it since the time it was produced, we can’t really know.

It seems original skin can be a benefit of the PCGS First Strike holders as the coins age in them, aside from gassing that is.

keets · February 11, 2019 4:46AM

the term "original" is always one I have disliked for most of the reasons stated by Feld. there have been numerous threads about it over the years and dealers/collectors alike talk about it from both sides of their mouths, whichever side suits them at the moment. in the end, we each have to use what our experience has taught us and what we are actively learning.

PerryHall · February 11, 2019 4:55AM

@MFeld said:
We can guess whether a coin’s surfaces (and/or in the case of a toned one, wether its patina) is “original”. However, unless we’ve had it since the time it was produced, we can’t really know.

When you see a silver coin from the early 1800's that is untoned, you can be pretty certain that it's lost its original skin.

keets · February 11, 2019 5:00AM

When you see a silver coin from the early 1800's that is untoned, you can be pretty certain that it's lost its original skin unless you're the dealer or auction house selling it. then you come up with a spurious line of reasoning as to how it got to the present looking how it does.

just think of all the Red Large Cents from the 1850's and smile at the use of "original" in the descriptions.

CommemDude · February 11, 2019 5:11AM

Here's a fairly modern coin with original skin; it appears to me to be very lightly toned ("frosty") fields which have not been disturbed.
When it comes to older early type, it gets very difficult to tell which coins have been dipped, lightened, etc over the years although I believe that most have.

Evan Gale once sold me a truly untouched 1807 AU58 draped bust half: it had a dark honey brown color which most collectors would not find appealing but it also had underlying intact cartwheel luster.

Broadstruck · February 11, 2019 6:05AM

Tab Toned Early Commemorative coins with white centers are the truest way to gauge original skin.

The as struck mint luster can still run the gamut from virginal cartwheel to subdued.

MFeld · February 11, 2019 6:13AM

@Broadstruck said:
Tab Toned Early Commemorative coins with white centers are the truest way to gauge original skin.

The as struck mint luster can still run the gamut from virginal cartwheel to subdued.

I thought about those and I suppose part of the same applies to original proof sets, still in the original cellophane.

logger7 · February 11, 2019 6:19AM

A couple examples:

Here is a bust coin with original skin, bought from the late "elusive spondulix", "Tommy":

It conserved quite well at NGC and ended up in an XF45 holder.

One concern of toning I am seeing with second tier coins is how it is used or can be introduced to try to obtain a higher grade. So I would rely on industry experts like Mark Feld to ascertain the difference between real skin, real toning and questionable types.

MFeld · February 11, 2019 6:23AM

I don't know that an "environmentally damaged" coin, like the 1818 half above, could accurately be said to have "original skin". After all, that skin has been compromised.

Broadstruck · February 11, 2019 6:25AM

@MFeld said:

@Broadstruck said:
Tab Toned Early Commemorative coins with white centers are the truest way to gauge original skin.

The as struck mint luster can still run the gamut from virginal cartwheel to subdued.

I thought about those and I suppose part of the same applies to original proof sets, still in the original cellophane.

Or naturally bag toned Morgan's.

MFeld · February 11, 2019 6:34AM

@Broadstruck said:

@MFeld said:

@Broadstruck said:
Tab Toned Early Commemorative coins with white centers are the truest way to gauge original skin.

The as struck mint luster can still run the gamut from virginal cartwheel to subdued.

I thought about those and I suppose part of the same applies to original proof sets, still in the original cellophane.

Or naturally bag toned Morgan's.

True. But even in the case of the commemoratives, the Proof sets and the dollars, once removed from the holders, they are subject to manipulation. And unless you're present at that time and take possession right then and there, you cant know that they haven't subsequently been messed with.

TwoSides2aCoin · February 11, 2019 7:03AM

Original skin is easier to see than to define. Look in unopened Uncirculated mint sets.

amwldcoin · February 11, 2019 7:21AM

I like it more as an adjective to describe the look of a coin. IE nice richly toned coin. I am also a firm believer(other than Morgan Dollars) that more than 90% of untoned silver coins over say 75 years old have been dipped.

ricko · February 11, 2019 7:30AM

I agree with @MFeld....unless you possess the coin at origin, you can only guess at originality. Of course, truly sealed sets (no tampering - which can also be questioned) add to the perception of originality. There are highly skilled individuals (known by the derogatory term 'coin doctors') that produce results that will deceive anyone. Sure, there are also less skilled perpetrators that allow many of us to call AT or Dipped and be correct. There are many such coins. However, the proliferation of this low level manipulation should not lull people into such confidence that they can identify all cases of artificial surface treatment. Simply said... learn as much as you can and do your best. Cheers, RickO

logger7 · February 11, 2019 8:18AM

A dealer I know was at a NY show who offered me an Unc. 1928 Peace dollar with colorful toning unique for those. I may be a natural born sucker and gullible, but I wasn't born yesterday. I asked him if I could get opinions by sharp dealers. Assessment: the obverse and reverse did not match. No sale.

Skin on gold is unique with all those that have been dipped out for more luster and higher grades. With silver how are you going to have really natural original toning and eye appeal unless it has been kept in a climate controlled environment through the decades? Otherwise it just tones out if exposed to the elements.

MFeld · February 11, 2019 8:34AM

@logger7 said:
A dealer I know was at a NY show who offered me an Unc. 1928 Peace dollar with colorful toning unique for those. I may be a natural born sucker and gullible, but I wasn't born yesterday. I asked him if I could get opinions by sharp dealers. Assessment: the obverse and reverse did not match. No sale.

Skin on gold is unique with all those that have been dipped out for more luster and higher grades. With silver how are you going to have really natural original toning and eye appeal unless it has been kept in a climate controlled environment through the decades? Otherwise it just tones out if exposed to the elements.

The lack of matching toning on the obverse and reverse of a coin doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether it's original. While the 1928 dollar might have been artificially toned, it should be the nature/pattern/colors that indicated such, not that the reverse didn't match. Take coins stored in/on velvet trays inside coin cabinets, as one example.

Regarding a "climate controlled environment" and "natural original toning and eye appeal" - I once saw some beautifully toned, natural looking Buffalo Nickels that were supposedly in albums found in the crawl space underneath a house. I have no reason to doubt what I was told. And I'm sure that others could point to different examples of attractive, naturally toned (or if you prefer. market acceptable) coins that did not reside in climate controlled environments.

lusterlover · February 11, 2019 9:14AM

I'm a huge fan of original skin. This is my only contribution. It was purchased in an auction where the coin was in it's original mint packaging. It was graded by NGC then immediately crossed in holder to PCGS. This is the only coin I own where I can say with 100% certainty that it is original - I am the second owner.

coinbuf · February 11, 2019 9:24AM

To answer your question no there is not a new definition, however the ability to truly identify with 100% certainty is as difficult as ever.

jabba · February 11, 2019 9:45AM

Something that hasn’t been dipped

PerryHall · February 11, 2019 9:58AM

@jabba said:
Something that hasn’t been dipped

Coins can be messed with in more ways than just dipping them.

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 10:19AM

My 2c...

@keets said:

Toning is oxidation that changes (damages it the closer it gets to "end Stage.") the item's surface. IT IS NOT SKIN!" While very desirable (I don't consider attractive toning to be damage) in some cases we try to devide into AT and NT.

@ricko said: "I agree with @MFeld....unless you possess the coin at origin, you can only guess at originality. Of course, truly sealed sets (no tampering - which can also be questioned) add to the perception of originality. There are highly skilled individuals (known by the derogatory term 'coin doctors') that produce results that will deceive anyone. Sure, there are also less skilled perpetrators that allow many of us to call AT or Dipped and be correct. There are many such coins. However, the proliferation of this low level manipulation should not lull people into such confidence that they can identify all cases of artificial surface treatment. Simply said... learn as much as you can and do your best. Cheers, RickO

This is true, however, I learned that "skin" is a film-like substance that develops on the surface of a metal that is in its original condition due to a reaction with the environment. it can also be artificial (unauthentic.). Technically, PVC haze is "skin." Coins do not have any skin when they are made. Very often a coin's eye appeal is increased when it has "skin." Most chemicals we use will remove "skin."

Is conserving a coin and then adding skin such a horrible crime (those nasty coin doctors) if the coin looks 100% original to everyone? I'm unaware of any TPGS Conservation Division doing this but it is something you need to decide for yourself. After all, the widespread practice of "thumbing" is adding "skin" to the coin.

PS I'm sure the chemists will chime in to say that oxidation is "skin."

TommyType · February 11, 2019 10:39AM

Point of order: Can a well circulated coin, (say, VF), still be said to have an "original skin"?

I've always mentally applied the term to MS, or high grade AU coins only. After you wear off the luster, there ain't anything "original" about it any longer! It might be "unmessed" with, but I have a hard time calling it "original".

Wahoo554 · February 11, 2019 10:43AM

I think it’s fair to describe this one as having nice original skin:

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 10:46AM

@TommyType said:

Point of order: Can a well circulated coin, (say, VF), still be said to have an "original skin"?

I've always mentally applied the term to MS, or high grade AU coins only. After you wear off the luster, there ain't anything "original" about it any longer! It might be "unmessed" with, but I have a hard time calling it "original".

IMO, No. The coin can have a 100% original circulated surface but I don't call it "skin."

I first heard the word "skin" applied to a coin ($20 Saint) while working at the ATS. If I remember, the word was only used for MS coins. Once, I got chewed out at a conservation service for removing the skin on a coin that we had to "eat."

georgiacop50 · February 11, 2019 10:50AM

Any coin that has circulated beyond AU58 can not have original skin in my mind

BlindedByEgo · February 11, 2019 10:52AM

Kind of like the Supremes on obscenity - I can't define it, but know it when I see it

asheland · February 11, 2019 10:55AM

Totally my Two Peso:

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 11:02AM

@lusterlover said:
I'm a huge fan of original skin. This is my only contribution. It was purchased in an auction where the coin was in it's original mint packaging. It was graded by NGC then immediately crossed in holder to PCGS. This is the only coin I own where I can say with 100% certainty that it is original - I am the second owner.

Please describe the "original Mint package." What did it look like? Thanks!

Broadstruck · February 11, 2019 11:12AM

This medal shows a lot of original skin...

1869 Independent Order of Odd Fellows - Philadelphia Fiftieth Anniversary Grand National Celebration, 51mm Diameter, Silvered White Metal

I first saw an example of this medal about a decade ago and really liked the nouveau obverse design however it was holed for suspension which turned me off. Over the years I’ve seen a half a dozen others which all had either environmental damage or abused in some fashion. None have compared to the quality of this specimen which looked wonderfully preserved based on the seller mediocre images. Well I had a major eyegasm once it arrived and I had it in hand being fully proof-like with wonderful pull-away patina.

Enjoy!

lusterlover · February 11, 2019 12:02PM

@Insider2 said:

Please describe the "original Mint package." What did it look like? Thanks!

I will PM you a photo.

Higashiyama · February 11, 2019 12:19PM

Broadstruck: that is truly amazing!

On a more mundane note, if one wanted to 'document' original, untoned silver skin from coins minted from the mid-1930s through 1964, it would not be hard to do. There is somewhat of a myth that unless environmental conditions are exceptional, silver will tone (perhaps fairly quickly) to some often ugly end state. This empirically not true. I have a few 'BU' 1963 and 1964 dimes and quarters that I personally pulled from circulation circa 1965 -- they have been stacked up ever since and remain untoned. I have earlier dates that were taken from rolls and remain untoned (where I can with almost certainty attest to the fact that they are not messed with). I also have BU Morgan dollars from my grandfather that have been stored for 60 + years in almost laughable conditions and are only lightly toned.

In any case, I suspect that there is still a lot of common date unmessed with stuff from the twentieth century that could serve as a guide to collectors wanting to gain intuition into originality.

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 12:23PM

@lusterlover said:

@Insider2 said:

Please describe the "original Mint package." What did it look like? Thanks!

I will PM you a photo.

I think everyone would like to see it. It is part of U.S. Mint history!

BG · February 11, 2019 1:06PM

Thanks all for the comments.

Any Numismatist who has been around a while knows what I mean when I state the term "skin" on a coin.

CommemDude has some early commemoratives that truly are original. I've seen images of some of his collection and I'm jealous.

How about this for "original skin:"

photo f9c347a8-c686-4184-819a-7bd9e25822a2.png

Kindly fugly coins but I feel original none the less.

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 1:12PM

We > @BG said:

Thanks all for the comments.

Any Numismatist who has been around a while knows what I mean when I state the term "skin" on a coin.

CommemDude has some early commemoratives that truly are original. I've seen images of some of his collection and I'm jealous.

How about this for "original skin:"

Kindly fugly coins but I feel original none the less.

I have been asked to find out what one of these original Stack's Sets w/the paper insert is worth. I told the collector not to have the coins slabbed and keep them in the case. Any auction records?

OnlyGoldIsMoney · February 11, 2019 1:13PM

My idea of an mint state coin with original skin in my series.

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 1:25PM

OK, looks like most folks consider the word "SKIN" to be a coin's surface IN ANY CONDITION considered not messed with. IMO, that's too bad.

https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/5e/id3ndvjmek9h.jpg

Here is a damaged coin that has "SKIN" that I found in another discussion.

keets · February 11, 2019 3:11PM

Toning is oxidation that changes (damages it the closer it gets to "end Stage.") the item's surface. IT IS NOT SKIN

so we have the above from a member and we have the following from the PCGS Glossary: toning ---The term for the color seen on many coins. There are infinite shades, hues, and pattern variations seen, the result of how, where, and how long a coin is stored. Every coin begins to tone as it leaves the die, as all United States coins contain reactive metals in varying degrees.

this forces us to make a choice, do we ascribe to what our esteemed member believes or do we choose what the penultimate grading service board of experts chooses to say?? I am left to believe what I have always believed, that the tone which forms on every coin as the result of oxidation in some form is the "skin" of that coin. sometimes we refer to a coin having a thick skin or thick toning, other times it is barely perceptible and what an old friend used to call "lingerie" tone.

Broadstruck · February 11, 2019 4:00PM

A coin that has original skin hasn't been molested by anyone in the hobby or outside.

Some of the lower grade coins posted with a now wholesome look, might have been boinked and reskinned by further circulation.

Having the box of issue for any coins no more guarantees they haven't been messed with like still owning the box your virginity came in.

Walkerfan · February 11, 2019 4:03PM

My definition: whether white or toned, it is a coin that has never been cleaned or dipped.

I am confident that these two have never been fooled with:

The 18s was likely stored in a Whitman folder while the 16s was likely stored in a Kraft envelope.

Musky1011 · February 11, 2019 4:05PM

BG · February 11, 2019 4:07PM

@Insider2 said:
We > @BG said:

Thanks all for the comments.

Any Numismatist who has been around a while knows what I mean when I state the term "skin" on a coin.

CommemDude has some early commemoratives that truly are original. I've seen images of some of his collection and I'm jealous.

How about this for "original skin:"

Kindly fugly coins but I feel original none the less.

I have been asked to find out what one of these original Stack's Sets w/the paper insert is worth. I told the collector not to have the coins slabbed and keep them in the case. Any auction records?

This particular set sold for $1,320.

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 4:08PM

Insider2 posted: "Toning is oxidation that changes (damages it the closer it gets to "end Stage.") the item's surface. IT IS NOT SKIN"

@keets replied: "so we have the above from a member and we have the following from the PCGS Glossary: toning ---The term for the color seen on many coins. There are infinite shades, hues, and pattern variations seen, the result of how, where, and how long a coin is stored. Every coin begins to tone as it leaves the die, as all United States coins contain reactive metals in varying degrees".

@keets continued: "this forces us to make a choice, do we ascribe to what our esteemed member believes or do we choose what the penultimate grading service board of experts chooses to say?? I am left to believe what I have always believed, that the tone which forms on every coin as the result of oxidation in some form is the "skin" of that coin. sometimes we refer to a coin having a thick skin or thick toning, other times it is barely perceptible and what an old friend used to call "lingerie" tone."

Actually, I think any knowledgeable numismatist will see that the folks who wrote that statement on TONING (note I did not see any mention of "SKIN" in the PCGS part you quoted) and any of my comments about toning are not in disagreement at all in any way. I consider the PCGS statement to be excellent and unimprovable. So thankfully, none of us needs to make a choice.

Nevertheless, as I posted above, it looks like some folks wish to consider ANY TYPE OF SERFACE on a coin to be "skin." While I personally do not agree with that, it seems that over time, the words used in the past to describe characteristics seen on coins have become changed by some folks to suit the times. I consider this to be a result of the failure of our national organization to educate us better.
As I posted above, someone is going to call an oxidized surface that cannot be restored to its original state "skin." Therefore, I cannot argue that they are 100% correct in their own mind. Perhaps, our host can add "skin" to their glossary of terms and solidify its new (?) meaning.

PS I got a chuckle out of the PM you sent me. Be very careful as I have posted certain PM's I've received in the past for discussion on the public forums. Best Regards my friend,

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 4:10PM

@BG said: "This particular set sold for $1,320."

THANK YOU so much! I'll pass this on to our customer.

keets · February 11, 2019 4:14PM

post it if you want but it is in bad taste to post PM's, a point almost universally agreed upon.

to the thread, skin is the surface so now you may continue to argue with yourself.

TommyType · February 11, 2019 4:21PM

I'm so used to butting heads with @Insider2, I'm not sure what to do when I agree with him....

BG · February 11, 2019 4:24PM

I've seen many a 1957 Mint Set and bought several.

When the coins arrived I could tell that some had been swapped out. I could also tell when they haven't.

This Franklin Half looks original to me:

photo GC Obv 665472-1 A 2.png

Insider2 · February 11, 2019 4:40PM

@lusterlover said: "I'm a huge fan of original skin. This is my only contribution. It was purchased in an auction where the coin was in it's original mint packaging. It was graded by NGC then immediately crossed in holder to PCGS. This is the only coin I own where I can say with 100% certainty that it is original - I am the second owner."

I asked him to post an image of the package as I've never seen one this early.

He sent this and the thread shows an even earlier example of Mint packaging:

.https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/892800/getting-close-to-examples-of-original-matte-proof-lincoln-packaging#latest

Is there a new definition for original skin?

Comments

Leave a Comment