Can you tell if a coin is not "original" from a short distance?
Insider2
Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
I'm just looking down at a stack of coins in plastic flips getting ready to pick up the first one - a Silver Vancouver 50c. I can tell from (just measured) about 15 - 17 inches away that the coin has just about all of its design details (makes it at least an AU-55) but it is not original. This is a fairly large coin. Is this something (detect originality from a distance) you can do on a regular basis?
NOTE: It depends on the coin, the lighting, my mood, location, etc is not included as an answer to keep the poll simple. So please keep it simple. Thanks.
Can you tell if a coin is not "original" from a short distance?
This is a private poll: no-one will see what you voted for.
0
Comments
If, by 'original,' you are referring to surface quality and old dipping, then yes. This does not always extend to artificial toning, however. Fake red color on coppers, unless it is starting to turn, frequently fools me (I have been burned several times when buying RD coppers).
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
And then there's 'not original, but market acceptable'....but I let the TPG's determine that!
There was no "I can spot them from a mile away" option, so I chose the next best thing...
I've gotten better at spotting ones that are not "original" US mint products
...
Much more important!
sometimes.
If I know the series, and have been looking at a lot of them recently.
Often, sometimes...no
Honestly it is easier to tell if it is than if it isn’t.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
I'm backing away from the "Usually" answer, and agreeing with the "Sometimes" or "Often" answers above me.
Also agree it depends on the issue. To me, the Vermont commemorative "often" looks messed with....except that they all look like that. (Brilliant, but subdued luster). If I see a Walker like that, I'm "usually" right that it has been over dipped....The Vermont is "usually" natural like that.
So, those issues I'm not all that familiar with? I need to look, think, and do some comparing....
Are there degrees of originality? Is it possible to have two coins that are original but one coin is a little more original than the other?
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
Right now I let the TPG's decide. I am getting closer to where I will be able to tell for myself more consistently.
Is someone who's had plastic surgery 'original'? If collectors only got to see 'original' coins, would they tend to like what they see? My guess is no.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Yes over time I did.
On coins that would interest me anyway.
Usually I can tell. Usually.
I’d also add that it concerns me how many semi-key/key date problem coins I see in straight plastic. But that’s a topic for another day.
Stay safe -
Dave
Sometimes I can see it in the customers hand when he comes thru the front door!
Yes, every show with at least 50% of the people who visit my table. I still try and examine the coin closely before telling them it's been cleaned, etc. I try and explain why I believe the coin isn't original, because the majority of the people bringing the coins by are new to collecting, aren't collectors, or just can't tell the difference. Simply pronouncing the coin as non-original as soon as they lay it in the tray might give the impression that I'm making them feel dumb for not knowing. This was advice that John Roberts, our variety attributor and grader gave me the first time he and I worked a show together, and it has proven to be great.
I can usually tell.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Short answer" NO. When a coin comes off the press it is "original." It's surface is original. Its strike is original even if completely FLAT with few details. Even a "Set UP Strike" has an original surface. So, as far as Mint State coins go, no problem. We can even bagmark the coin down to a scruffy MS-60, virtual cull and the coin is STILL ORIGINAL to the eye. Bagmarks and strike do not affect originality. Remember, this is not about value. Therefore, no degrees allowed. Dull or subdued original luster is still original.
Circ's are a little harder to tell. I didn't think about that when I did the poll. For now let's try to leave them out until another time.
You brought back a bad memory from a smarty-pants young authenticator who "knew everything" at the time. I was teaching authentication at either the '73 or '74 Summer Seminar. We were at lunch and I was sitting with some teachers when a student came up with a crude fake Continental dollar (I believe). I told him it was a junky fake or some such quick answer and he walked away very disappointed.
Ken Bressett was sitting next to me and boy did he make me feel three feet shorter and dumb as a rock when the student left. You'll never guess from my posts here but I am truly much kinder for that experience.
I'm getting much better.
Yes in 3.1 seconds!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Wooooha! Did someone just say it's officially "TACO™" Tuesday????
The degree of ease at which I can spot them depends on how badly boinked they are. Sometimes a coin will look original, then you set it aside or turn your head and something catches the corner of your eye and you spot the problem.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Probably about 75-80% of the time....Cheers, RickO
I can about 85-90% of the time. Cheers, PerryO
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
Sometimes, people (myself included) “can tell” that a coin is “original”/hasn’t been messed with, but are mistaken.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Usually with experience it gets easier.
My YouTube Channel
I imagine that once you actually get it close enough to examine it nothing gets by. For example, I just looked at my scope lighted by florescent light. I was surprised to find the zoom was set at 12X. That's much more magnification than I regularly use so I may have taken a micrograph of something earlier.
Anyway, a coin's originality is easily confirmed 100% of the time at the lowest setting (7X) as long as you pay attention.
I’m going to be a smart ass, I’ll let CAC decide.
Not to derail the thread, but CAC stickers plenty of non-original coins. Dipped Morgans are but one prominent example.
Actually, that is an important point because now you have introduced the "Market Acceptability Factor" of the TPGS first and the Sticker service next. On some occasions they may disagree.
I was going to say that I can....from a short distance up to about 6 feet. Lol
When a coin is chemically treated, without some tell-tale evidence remaining, it is mostly guess work. The statement we all hear that "no one hundred year old coin could remain in original brilliant white condition" may be true but in most cases, you cannot prove it! Many coins are conserved properly on a daily basis and graded as if they are original because they STILL ARE when viewed under a high power microscope.
I'll guarantee I can take a dozen BU coins and dip one of them and you or any professional numismatist couldn't tell which one it was even by smelling it! Then do another so two are dipped and the result would be the same! Then add another. Eventually you'll get lucky an pick one of the dipped coins, LOL.
I've dipped a Morgan many times in class without any ill effects. I joke with students that some time between the first dip and the one thousandth, when the coin and my fingers have dissolved, the surface of the coin will be changed enough to notice.
Fair enough. I will hypothesize that any 100+ year-old silver coin that is completely untoned is far more likely to have been chemically treated than not. Since you state that there's no way to prove it one way or another, you really can't argue with me...
@CoinJunkie said: "Fair enough. I will hypothesize that any 100+ year-old silver coin that is completely untoned is far more likely to have been chemically treated than not. Since you state that there's no way to prove it one way or another, you really can't argue with me..."
I agree 100% and raise you.
I think a large number of "White" silver coins have been cleaned! I've probably done over 5K since 1976 myself and I'm just one person.
Can you tell if a coin is not "original" from a short distance?
no, and neither can you despite what you think.
I know very little about CAC but I didn't know they "decide" anything about a certified coin in regards to "originality" or authenticity. I have become pretty good at telling if an early copper coin is "original" in several aspects but not at a distance and not in 3.1 seconds!
Yes, in some instances CAC will decline to sticker a coin, particularly gold, due to a lack of originality. My point was that in other cases they won't (decline to), so a sticker is not a guarantee of originality.
For me the question is how the coin was kept for 100 plus years usually. There is "original" but gross, and "original" and highly collectible. Morgan dollars with full luster and that white stuff in the devices and undipped coins have. Bust coins are usually heavily toned if fully original. It depends on the series of coins. Gold coins with the "Euro" look, toned.
I can, and I will. Although by short distance , I'm talking ten feet or more during social distancing hours. Toss it over, let me have a look.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Understood, thanks CoinJunkie; I really didn't think CAC actually guaranteed anything. I know of one instance they stickered a counterfeit in a genuine holder and added a note later on their look-up page that the TPG cert was no longer active and not included in the current CAC Pop report.
Once upon a time I was able to accurately grade a coin from across the room by using the light of a lightening bolt from a summer thunderstorm.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
We have been throwing the term "original" around without first agreeing what it means. This is my fault because a coin grading Poor-1 or any other grade can be totally "original" - just honestly circulated.
Near the top of this discussion I limited my question to MS coins. This discussion has nothing to do with the grading or sticker services BECAUSE as all of you should know, coins that are considered to be MS and coins that are NOT totally "original" are found/bought/sold/traded as 100% original MS items.
In spite of what some uninformed "rookies" may claim, it should seem very obvious to any reader that many of our members here have developed the ability to see a majority of unoriginal MS coins from a small distance away. With enough coins and some practice it is not as hard as you might think. Correct opinions are seen all the time here with only an image available. Even a "rookie" collector with a good eye for detail and not color blind can be trained to spot most cleaned coins in a very short including examination of a sharp image.
BTW, there are also some folks working at the TPGS who can OFTEN tell a coin is counterfeit while it is still in a flip about a foot away w/o even picking it up.
I think what CAC does is agree that the coin's grade falls into the top 2/3'rds of the grade on the label (green) or that it is undergraded (gold). Additionally, when they sticker a coin. they agree that the coin is market acceptable whether it is 100% original or not.
How the coin was kept, who owns it, what it sells for, its rarity, what is on a slab label, etc, etc. have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH determining if a coin is "original." I can pull out two gold coins graded MS-62. One is 100% original and the other has a little rub and is lightly cleaned. BOTH are graded correctly! I can also pull out another MS-62 coin that is 100% original with a slight bit of friction on the high points. It just has some honest rub. Crack it out and put it in your pocket ant it will stay "original" as it becomes an XF. Once we take that MS (w/rub) 62 coin and alter its surface with a chemical it is NO LONGER original.
Nothing I've written in this thread so far would be invalidated by limiting the discussion to MS coins.
My working definition of an original coin is one that hasn't had its surface altered by (applied) chemical or mechanical means at any point in time since its minting. There are edge cases, to be sure, but let's not rehash the great NT/AT debate here.
I can agree with your final paragraph with the caveat that no one knows exactly the minimum percentile of its grade a coin must reside to get a sticker. 34th percentile (as you suggest) seems too low. The concept of a (meaningfully) quantifiable percentile is suspect to me, in any case. I tend to imagine that when one has seen as many coins as JA has, he simply knows what a solid coin for a given grade looks like. As do I in my areas of focus.
Lastly, your final sentence does not contradict my position.
I believe in WWII they used extremely color-blind people to spot camouflage on recon photos. I'll bet one of those guys could spot a puttied coin from 10 feet.
@CoinJunkie,
We are in virtual agreement. Thank you for feeling you should express my thoughts in another way. Our only disagreement may be how you HAD previously expressed the way CAC works. You say it better here: "I tend to imagine that when one has seen as many coins as JA has, he simply knows what a solid coin for a given grade looks like." However, from reading CAC threads on CU, I didn't think a solid for the grade MS-64, 64.1, 64.2, 64.3, etc would get a bean.
This is also a very good way to describe an original coin: "An original coin is one that hasn't had its surface altered by (applied) chemical or mechanical means at any point in time since its minting." Have you been in one of my classes?
Since the ones I've worked with couldn't see "rub" on a coin, I don't think so. .
Other than reading the forum every day, no.
"Solid for the grade" may in fact be CAC's own phrase. But semantics aside, I think we all understand that CAC is trying to identify the "nicer" coins at a given assigned grade, however that may be defined by them.
Not enough poll options, for many collectors it may depend on how many series they may have collected or studied over time. I am somewhat confident that I could spot original surfaces on my core series, although perhaps not from a distance or even from a photo in all cases. But outside my core area my ability to do so is much lower because I just haven't likely seen enough examples. One that comes to mind is commemoratives, I don't collect those at all and other than some photos I've seen on sites like this I have only had perhaps a dozen or so in hand. I would not consider myself confident in the least to be able to distinguish an original surface on a Grant just as an example.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Lots of varying opinions. It might be helpful to solicit opinions concerning a coin that is ca. 200 years old. Here is the reverse (I won't show the obverse) at two magnifications:
This coin was given a 63 grade by a major TPG.
P.S. This coin is not mine.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]