Main impediment is money. Second is finding sandblast proofs that have not been dipped or otherwise altered. A pristine sandblast proof will have "sparkle."
Incredibly easier, though you'd have to settle for a PR66+ 1909. Multiples of every other date in 67.
Basal state for $2 1/2 Indian proofs is PR63. Finding a "mere" 64 isn't that easy. LOL, many have been processed or recolored upwards.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@RogerB and @ColonelJessup This thread started discussing why so few MS 67 Indian QE in the entire series and also touched on the dearth of CAC examples in 65 and 66 (and none in 67). Why do the Proof QE seem to have a higher rate of approval by JA and CAC? 27 stickered in PF65 in the series, 55 in PF 66 and 24 in PF 67.
They were made to be and were, in fact, very deliberately handled and safely preserved.
As opposed to being put in a bag shaken around.
Coin doctors and NCS have surely ruined more than half of all the 08-15 gold proofs made.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@Gazes said:
since the thread seems to have a lot of interest---curious what others think of the challenge of building a gem proof Indian QE set?
It sounds like an enjoyable set with an obvious net factor, and it seems affordable (as far as proof gold anyway). I predict you will wait many years if your are holding out for the very best coins. Of course you're already accustomed to that as a proof gold collector. At least there are "only" 8 coins to the set.
I would work with Doug Winter. This may be a time when you can't hold out for a PCGS/CAC example and may need to cross or downgrade. As the others have stated, there are a lot of problem coins to watch for.
@ColonelJessup said:
They were made to be and were, in fact, very deliberately handled and safely preserved.
As opposed to being put in a bag shaken around.
Coin doctors and NCS have surely ruined more than half of all the 08-15 gold proofs made.
I understand the coin doctor part, but can you clarify the NCS part? Other than dipping, what has NCS done?
Example - In the David Lawrence Richmond auction(s), a complete run of 1908-1915 proof Gold, $2 1/2's thru $20's, was offered. Each and every coin had been chemically processed by NCS. Each and every coin of every date 08,11-15 was stripped of all original color and was a very similar shade of mustard-wheat-gold. Additionally, the chemical process had eaten away a micro-layer of sandblasted surface and re-pickled all the sparkle and most hairlines, resulting in less reflectivity and higher grades.
The 09 and 10 satins were also processed, but had a similar pickled look, which, when you think about it, is even more off-key,
This was essentially (or exactly) the same process that stripped the Norweb 1893-S $1 MS67 (lock CAC) of every micron of its entire natural surface.
So it's not doctoring because it's officially sanctioned by PNG as done by professionals, but no one wanted one after a while. They have now likely all been re-toned and I see many that "work" at the services, though not at CAC.
I am by no means unique in my ability to be able to tell you the date of any 08-15 proof gold coin by looking at the reverse (that's all based on color), but veterans with that recall are going blind or dropping dead becoming more sparse.
Unspoiled surfaces? It's all about the sparkle. It can be taught pretty easily if in-hand, but straight-on (un-rotating) images can't convey the "blinking" of the sparkle very well.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
I am surprised that NCS would work on original coins. I thought it (and PCGS's conservation wing) only made manipulations to conserve a coin to prevent damage and not solely for the purpose of obscuring hairlines and improving grade. This has been a very interesting thread and one of the most educational ones in recent memory.
Methods and materials for sandblasting differed a century ago from what has been in use since about 1950. The most important change was the replacement of natural quartz sand - SiO2 - with manufactured uniform beads of glass or quartz. Sand grains are very hard and have sharp edges that chip away metal from a coin's surface. (Crushed quartz sand is harsher than most natural sand.) The resulting coin has millions of tiny cut facets that give the coin an unusual sparkle.
Natural chemical reactions and surface contamination easily degrade this surface, and cleaning was been a common way to "restore" the sparkle. However, cleaning is done with liquid acids which dissolve a tiny part of the cut facet surface --- gradually converting it from smooth and sharp to textured and rounded. Once damaged, the original appearance can never be restored - well, short of sandblasting it again with original abrasive.
The above is what occurs - and has been done - to a lot of the sandblast US gold. It is unfair to single out any one company or individual, however - all are culpable.
Here is the salient point the Colonel made that many on this thread may have missed:
People Coin doctors and NCS have surely ruined more than half of all the 08-15 gold proofs made.
I had a nice collection of GEM Proof Gold, all Liberty plus $1s & $3s. My trusted dealer and I were never able to locate a "post 1907" piece that met his unmolested standards. I knew the number of molested 20th century matte/satin/roman pieces was high, but this is a sad testament.
@RogerB said:
Methods and materials for sandblasting differed a century ago from what has been in use since about 1950. The most important change was the replacement of natural quartz sand - SiO2 - with manufactured uniform beads of glass or quartz. Sand grains are very hard and have sharp edges that chip away metal from a coin's surface. (Crushed quartz sand is harsher than most natural sand.) The resulting coin has millions of tiny cut facets that give the coin an unusual sparkle.
Natural chemical reactions and surface contamination easily degrade this surface, and cleaning was been a common way to "restore" the sparkle. However, cleaning is done with liquid acids which dissolve a tiny part of the cut facet surface --- gradually converting it from smooth and sharp to textured and rounded. Once damaged, the original appearance can never be restored - well, short of sandblasting it again with original abrasive.
The above is what occurs - and has been done - to a lot of the sandblast US gold. It is unfair to single out any one company or individual, however - all are culpable.
Excellent technical discussion.
However,
1) all are NOT culpable
2) and some are a great deal more culpable than others.
3) "how do you live with yourself?"
Do not be naïve.
Facts are not unfair. Reality does bite, and if you're ignorant, it bites hard!
You have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about. Did you look at the Richmond coins? Good grief! Why ignore prima facie evidence placed directly under your nose? Anyone watching this series over the last 40 years knows what's happened to these coins, a lot of how it's done, when it was rewarded and when various TPGs wised up to what.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
RogerB---Thanks for the in depth analysis. Is anyone aware of a coin doctor taking a well struck mark-free business strike gold coin from that era and then sand-blasting it to create a matte surface so they can pass the coin off as a proof?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@ColonelJessup said:
Example - In the David Lawrence Richmond auction(s), a complete run of 1908-1915 proof Gold, $2 1/2's thru $20's, was offered. Each and every coin had been chemically processed by NCS. Each and every coin of every date 08,11-15 was stripped of all original color and was a very similar shade of mustard-wheat-gold. Additionally, the chemical process had eaten away a micro-layer of sandblasted surface and re-pickled all the sparkle and most hairlines, resulting in less reflectivity and higher grades.
The 09 and 10 satins were also processed, but had a similar pickled look, which, when you think about it, is even more off-key,
This was essentially (or exactly) the same process that stripped the Norweb 1893-S $1 MS67 (lock CAC) of every micron of its entire natural surface.
So it's not doctoring because it's officially sanctioned by PNG as done by professionals, but no one wanted one after a while. They have now likely all been re-toned and I see many that "work" at the services, though not at CAC.
I am by no means unique in my ability to be able to tell you the date of any 08-15 proof gold coin by looking at the reverse (that's all based on color), but veterans with that recall are going blind or dropping dead becoming more sparse.
Unspoiled surfaces? It's all about the sparkle. It can be taught pretty easily if in-hand, but straight-on (un-rotating) images can't convey the "blinking" of the sparkle very well.
Based upon your comments @ColonelJessup ---would you make it a requirement for a collector that any quarter eagle indian proof they purchase be CAC stickered?
@PerryHall said:
RogerB---Thanks for the in depth analysis. Is anyone aware of a coin doctor taking a well struck mark-free business strike gold coin from that era and then sand-blasting it to create a matte surface so they can pass the coin off as a proof?
Yes. AFAIK, that's the only way to make a deceptive fake. However, this is easy to detect and I have not seen one of these alterations in over ten years. Possibly because I no longer work at a TPGS considered in the first tier where most of these are sent.
As to ruining Proof Indians...
There are only three basic ways to clean "conserve" these coins. Chemical or abrasive methods are two of them and I hope the folks who know any others will keep it to themselves!
Dipping one of these coins is the usual method. As for dulling their micro-surface roughness, except for the color change this will not occur to the degree that anyone can tell for many, many dips! Abrasive cleaning such as with baking soda is something that would be frowned upon and hopefully would not occur at a conservation service.
I don't claim to be an expert on the color found on each date when they were minted. I have seen dark olive shades of gold all the way back to dull gold shades. Microscopic examination can detect improper conservation.
I suspect that few of these Proofs exist that have been untouched by someone trying to improve them.
@PerryHall said:
RogerB---Thanks for the in depth analysis. Is anyone aware of a coin doctor taking a well struck mark-free business strike gold coin from that era and then sand-blasting it to create a matte surface so they can pass the coin off as a proof?
This kind of thing was fairly common for 1921 Peace dollars in the early 1960s, and likely tried for some gold. It would be easy to detect from the inadequate detail, plus the wrong type of surface treatment.
As for color - all coins should, if possible, be examined under 5500k light. Only then can someone claim the coin has a specific color cast. Many have written about sandblast proofs looking "greenish," but I've never seen one when viewed under correct lighting.
Comments
A proof Indian QE set?
Main impediment is money. Second is finding sandblast proofs that have not been dipped or otherwise altered. A pristine sandblast proof will have "sparkle."
Incredibly easier, though you'd have to settle for a PR66+ 1909. Multiples of every other date in 67.
Basal state for $2 1/2 Indian proofs is PR63. Finding a "mere" 64 isn't that easy. LOL, many have been processed or recolored upwards.
@RogerB and @ColonelJessup This thread started discussing why so few MS 67 Indian QE in the entire series and also touched on the dearth of CAC examples in 65 and 66 (and none in 67). Why do the Proof QE seem to have a higher rate of approval by JA and CAC? 27 stickered in PF65 in the series, 55 in PF 66 and 24 in PF 67.
They were made to be and were, in fact, very deliberately handled and safely preserved.
As opposed to being put in a bag shaken around.
Coin doctors and NCS have surely ruined more than half of all the 08-15 gold proofs made.
RE: "Why do the Proof QE seem to have a higher rate of approval by JA and CAC? 27 stickered in PF65 in the series, 55 in PF 66 and 24 in PF 67."
You'll have to ask them. CAC is marking coins of potential purchasing interest.
It sounds like an enjoyable set with an obvious net factor, and it seems affordable (as far as proof gold anyway). I predict you will wait many years if your are holding out for the very best coins. Of course you're already accustomed to that as a proof gold collector. At least there are "only" 8 coins to the set.
I would work with Doug Winter. This may be a time when you can't hold out for a PCGS/CAC example and may need to cross or downgrade. As the others have stated, there are a lot of problem coins to watch for.
I understand the coin doctor part, but can you clarify the NCS part? Other than dipping, what has NCS done?
Ditto
@cameonut2011 said: "I understand the coin doctor part, but can you clarify the NCS part?"
Example - In the David Lawrence Richmond auction(s), a complete run of 1908-1915 proof Gold, $2 1/2's thru $20's, was offered. Each and every coin had been chemically processed by NCS. Each and every coin of every date 08,11-15 was stripped of all original color and was a very similar shade of mustard-wheat-gold. Additionally, the chemical process had eaten away a micro-layer of sandblasted surface and re-pickled all the sparkle and most hairlines, resulting in less reflectivity and higher grades.
The 09 and 10 satins were also processed, but had a similar pickled look, which, when you think about it, is even more off-key,
This was essentially (or exactly) the same process that stripped the Norweb 1893-S $1 MS67 (lock CAC) of every micron of its entire natural surface.
So it's not doctoring because it's officially sanctioned by PNG as done by professionals, but no one wanted one after a while. They have now likely all been re-toned and I see many that "work" at the services, though not at CAC.
I am by no means unique in my ability to be able to tell you the date of any 08-15 proof gold coin by looking at the reverse (that's all based on color), but veterans with that recall are going blind or dropping dead becoming more sparse.
Unspoiled surfaces? It's all about the sparkle. It can be taught pretty easily if in-hand, but straight-on (un-rotating) images can't convey the "blinking" of the sparkle very well.
@ColonelJessup
Thank you!
I am surprised that NCS would work on original coins. I thought it (and PCGS's conservation wing) only made manipulations to conserve a coin to prevent damage and not solely for the purpose of obscuring hairlines and improving grade. This has been a very interesting thread and one of the most educational ones in recent memory.
I can't litigate intentions, only results
Mark Salzberg still thinks the Norweb 93-S $1 was nice work
The Colonel knows his stuff!
Interesting thread! I'd love to own a proof Indian, but it's price prohibitive for me. 
My YouTube Channel
Methods and materials for sandblasting differed a century ago from what has been in use since about 1950. The most important change was the replacement of natural quartz sand - SiO2 - with manufactured uniform beads of glass or quartz. Sand grains are very hard and have sharp edges that chip away metal from a coin's surface. (Crushed quartz sand is harsher than most natural sand.) The resulting coin has millions of tiny cut facets that give the coin an unusual sparkle.
Natural chemical reactions and surface contamination easily degrade this surface, and cleaning was been a common way to "restore" the sparkle. However, cleaning is done with liquid acids which dissolve a tiny part of the cut facet surface --- gradually converting it from smooth and sharp to textured and rounded. Once damaged, the original appearance can never be restored - well, short of sandblasting it again with original abrasive.
The above is what occurs - and has been done - to a lot of the sandblast US gold. It is unfair to single out any one company or individual, however - all are culpable.
Here is the salient point the Colonel made that many on this thread may have missed:
People Coin doctors and NCS have surely ruined more than half of all the 08-15 gold proofs made.
I had a nice collection of GEM Proof Gold, all Liberty plus $1s & $3s. My trusted dealer and I were never able to locate a "post 1907" piece that met his unmolested standards. I knew the number of molested 20th century matte/satin/roman pieces was high, but this is a sad testament.
Excellent technical discussion.
However,
1) all are NOT culpable
2) and some are a great deal more culpable than others.
3) "how do you live with yourself?"
Do not be naïve.
Facts are not unfair. Reality does bite, and if you're ignorant, it bites hard!
You have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about. Did you look at the Richmond coins? Good grief! Why ignore prima facie evidence placed directly under your nose? Anyone watching this series over the last 40 years knows what's happened to these coins, a lot of how it's done, when it was rewarded and when various TPGs wised up to what.
RogerB---Thanks for the in depth analysis. Is anyone aware of a coin doctor taking a well struck mark-free business strike gold coin from that era and then sand-blasting it to create a matte surface so they can pass the coin off as a proof?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Based upon your comments @ColonelJessup ---would you make it a requirement for a collector that any quarter eagle indian proof they purchase be CAC stickered?
Yes. AFAIK, that's the only way to make a deceptive fake. However, this is easy to detect and I have not seen one of these alterations in over ten years. Possibly because I no longer work at a TPGS considered in the first tier where most of these are sent.
As to ruining Proof Indians...
There are only three basic ways to clean "conserve" these coins. Chemical or abrasive methods are two of them and I hope the folks who know any others will keep it to themselves!
Dipping one of these coins is the usual method. As for dulling their micro-surface roughness, except for the color change this will not occur to the degree that anyone can tell for many, many dips! Abrasive cleaning such as with baking soda is something that would be frowned upon and hopefully would not occur at a conservation service.
I don't claim to be an expert on the color found on each date when they were minted. I have seen dark olive shades of gold all the way back to dull gold shades. Microscopic examination can detect improper conservation.
I suspect that few of these Proofs exist that have been untouched by someone trying to improve them.
I'd fire me if I didn't.
This kind of thing was fairly common for 1921 Peace dollars in the early 1960s, and likely tried for some gold. It would be easy to detect from the inadequate detail, plus the wrong type of surface treatment.
As for color - all coins should, if possible, be examined under 5500k light. Only then can someone claim the coin has a specific color cast. Many have written about sandblast proofs looking "greenish," but I've never seen one when viewed under correct lighting.