@coinbuf said:
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.
Well said. However, anyone can introduce conditions that invalidate a simple Yes I can/No I cannot poll. You CAN SPOT originality on objects that you are familiar with. No need to ask you about paper money or ancients. It takes a very special and experienced numismatic generalist who can cover all the bases. I can name several who would not even think to narrow down my poll.
@Sonorandesertrat said:
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.
The photos appear low resolution and somewhat grainy. My initial impression would be "not original" but it's pretty much impossible to say from (those) photos.
Now this is going to be fun. It's too bad you gave us the grade. I magnified the image and I have formed a list of things I see on the coin Based only on the image. So right or wrong, this coin is a great lesson on grading IF OTHERS START FIRST and describe what they see,
@CoinJunkie said: "The photos appear low resolution and somewhat grainy. My initial impression would be "not original" but it's pretty much impossible to say from (those) photos."
Just being a "prick." This post started off great UNTIL: "...My initial impression would be "not original"..."
@Insider2 said: @CoinJunkie said: "The photos appear low resolution and somewhat grainy. My initial impression would be "not original" but it's pretty much impossible to say from (those) photos."
Just being a "prick." This post started off great UNTIL: "...My initial impression would be "not original"..."
WHY?
Well, since I all I had to go on was a small, out-of-focus image of one side of the coin, and given the vast majority of 200-year-old coins are not original, I started from the premise that the coin was "guilty until proven innocent". The coloration patterns simply don't look normal to my eye as if the coin has been lightened at some point. Since I am far from an expert on old copper, I look forward to reading the more informed opinions of others.
What can you say to describe this coin?
1. Round.
2. Large cent (Matron Head, actually).
3. Not glossy.
4. No important marks.
5. Decent strike.
6. Some faded red [collector bait].
7. Mottled brown.
7. An unidentified TPG called it MS63 [my head hurts].
Anything else? Look again.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
Can a coin that's not original become original again? If a coin that was dipped thirty years ago and then put back into circulation, can it be considered original if there is no visible evidence of it ever having been cleaned?
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
@PerryHall said:
Can a coin that's not original become original again? If a coin that was dipped thirty years ago and then put back into circulation, can it be considered original if there is no visible evidence of it ever having been cleaned?
I will comment on the coin later today. Going out...
For now, the answer to your question is yes. As long as the coin looks original - most will think it is so it might as well be. For example, a large cent can be stripped down to PINK COPPER and restored to "original" brown color. The length of time to do this depends on the method used.
The coin is MS (Unc-enough). There is no obvious change of color on the high points of the leaves or bow. The coin appears to have muted luster and very few defects. I am trouble by the color of the pinkish surface at 1-2 but it is also showing slightly in the 7-8 position which is how a cartwheel appears.
If the reddish color is not normal then my GUESS is the coin was re-colored at some time in the past.
What bothered me about this image (I have not seen the coin in hand) is darker spots in/near the O and E in ONE and the C in CENT. The larger image also suggests surface disturbance in these areas. I suspected that the color was applied after verdigris (or spalled metal salts more generally) was carefully picked off. The obverse is a scarce overdate, so I tracked this coin from catalog to catalog (at least 5 auctions). This coin was worked on at least twice, based on the color images I saw in various auction catalogs. This coin went from raw (reverse was spotted with verdigris in multiple places) to MS63 (after bouncing between major TPG slabs) during this time. I wonder if this would be market acceptable if it were a common coin.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
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
Speaking as a collector and a chemist by training, I would say no. Products like Blue RIbbon and Care are intended to be used to form a coating on the surface. If enough is used, the coin will look wet (glossy)---this has no real effect on the grade, and plenty of glossy coins are in slabs with straight grades. I don't particularly care for glossy coins, but that never stopped me from buying them if I liked other attributes, since a little acetone will remove the coat. The bigger problem with monkeying with copper coins is the potential for leaving faint hairlines, especially if Q-tips are used.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
@burfle23 said:
The 1806 C-1 half cent I posted is an "original" recent struck counterfeit in a top TPG holder; "coin" looks pretty good in hand.
What gives it away as being a counterfeit?
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
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
Purists will tell you though that under a good glass or microscope they show hairlines as a result.
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
Purists will tell you though that under a good glass or microscope they show hairlines as a result.
I suspect most of the hairlines are in the film and not the metal. I brush coins and don't notice any hairlines under the scope.
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
The fact that it’s done a lot isn’t the same thing as the coins still beIng “original”. Many coins are dipped, too.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
The fact that it’s done a lot isn’t the same thing as the coins still beIng “original”. Many coins are dipped, too.
If only our coins could talk - especially the Old Coppers.
As long as a coin LOOKS 100% original no matter what I or anyone else has done to it it is original for all intents and purposes. Is a modern coin taken directly from a proof set "original?" Yes, original enough for most. What if we dip it properly 5 times and nobody can tell? Is it original? Heck no but who cares. It looks original.
PS Some guys should have their camel hair brush taken from them!
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
The fact that it’s done a lot isn’t the same thing as the coins still beIng “original”. Many coins are dipped, too.
If only our coins could talk - especially the Old Coppers.
As long as a coin LOOKS 100% original no matter what I or anyone else has done to it it is original for all intents and purposes. Is a modern coin taken directly from a proof set "original?" Yes, original enough for most. What if we dip it properly 5 times and nobody can tell? Is it original? Heck no but who cares. It looks original.
Awesome discussion! Of course I take that next leap and say if 7 struck counterfeits LOOK original (read authentic) with 4 in Top TPG holders are they a genuine "variety" as well ?
@burfle23 said: "Awesome discussion! Of course I take that next leap and say if 7 struck counterfeits LOOK original (read authentic) with 4 in Top TPG holders are they a genuine "variety" as well ?
YES!
In the old days (1970's) when a counterfeit was detected and published that was the end of it. After I joined the ANA's Certification Service in DC and was trained by Hoskins, I detected a "new" fake $3. Company records showed a few of these were previously certified as genuine. The owners were contacted and the certs were recalled. Counterfeits had no value except bullion or to advanced collectors who liked contemporary C/F's,Historic copies, or the output of famous forgers.
Today, MFLF (more folks like fakes). ICG even slabs them and counterfeits in the Morgan dollar series are often worth more than the genuine item.
IMO, your coins will definitely become collectable in the future - just as the 1795 Jefferson Head Cent - a very crude 100K abomination!
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
The fact that it’s done a lot isn’t the same thing as the coins still beIng “original”. Many coins are dipped, too.
If only our coins could talk - especially the Old Coppers.
As long as a coin LOOKS 100% original no matter what I or anyone else has done to it it is original for all intents and purposes. Is a modern coin taken directly from a proof set "original?" Yes, original enough for most. What if we dip it properly 5 times and nobody can tell? Is it original? Heck no but who cares. It looks original.
PS Some guys should have their camel hair brush taken from them!
I’ve seen a lot of brushed coins that don’t look original. They look too shiny to be so.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
In my area of Early Gold, it is fairly easy to tell on 90% of coins. With the advent of orange/copper artificial toning and actually adding "dirt" to coins....this becomes much more challenging.
Collector of Original Early Gold with beginnings in Proof Morgan collecting.
@PerryHall said:
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
The fact that it’s done a lot isn’t the same thing as the coins still beIng “original”. Many coins are dipped, too.
If only our coins could talk - especially the Old Coppers.
As long as a coin LOOKS 100% original no matter what I or anyone else has done to it it is original for all intents and purposes. Is a modern coin taken directly from a proof set "original?" Yes, original enough for most. What if we dip it properly 5 times and nobody can tell? Is it original? Heck no but who cares. It looks original.
PS Some guys should have their camel hair brush taken from them!
I’ve seen a lot of brushed coins that don’t look original. They look too shiny to be so.
I've seen a lot of brushed coins that do look original until you tip them just so.
Not with 100% certainty, and I don't believe anyone else can either. Whether a coin was brushed, wiped, or carried in a pocket with abrasive fabric in circulation, no person can determine.
I have Mercury dimes that I pulled from circulation, put them in an album where they have been sitting for 55 years, and they have not toned much if at all, still silver-gray. A lot of people would say they have been cleaned because of hairlines, but they are circulation hairlines.
Bust half dollars have been intentionally toned for years in envelopes and albums, this can be attractive and market acceptable, but looks unnatural to me. I prefer grey dirt.
Robert Scot: Engraving Liberty - biography of US Mint's first chief engraver
@Nysoto said:
Not with 100% certainty, and I don't believe anyone else can either. Whether a coin was brushed, wiped, or carried in a pocket with abrasive fabric in circulation, no person can determine.
I have Mercury dimes that I pulled from circulation, put them in an album where they have been sitting for 55 years, and they have not toned much if at all, still silver-gray. A lot of people would say they have been cleaned because of hairlines, but they are circulation hairlines.
Bust half dollars have been intentionally toned for years in envelopes and albums, this can be attractive and market acceptable, but looks unnatural to me. I prefer grey dirt.
I disagree with much of this statement: "Not with 100% certainty, and I don't believe anyone else can either. Whether a coin was brushed, wiped, or carried in a pocket with abrasive fabric in circulation, no person can determine. That's because each characteristic looks differently on a coin's surface. While nothing is 100%, I'll bet someone who has looked at a lot of coins can get to at least 99%. I'll use JA for example. The trick comes from deciding what is market acceptable UNORIGINALITY on a surface that has been ALTERED UNNATURALLY.
BTW: it took me years to realize what you have stated: "A lot of people would say they have been cleaned because of hairlines, but they are circulation hairlines."
Comments
Well said. However, anyone can introduce conditions that invalidate a simple Yes I can/No I cannot poll. You CAN SPOT originality on objects that you are familiar with. No need to ask you about paper money or ancients. It takes a very special and experienced numismatic generalist who can cover all the bases. I can name several who would not even think to narrow down my poll.
The photos appear low resolution and somewhat grainy. My initial impression would be "not original" but it's pretty much impossible to say from (those) photos.
They are typical of what one might see in some older auction catalogs. Larger:
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Now this is going to be fun. It's too bad you gave us the grade. I magnified the image and I have formed a list of things I see on the coin Based only on the image. So right or wrong, this coin is a great lesson on grading IF OTHERS START FIRST and describe what they see,
I think I can get that in focus if I squint and cross my eyes a bit.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
@CoinJunkie said: "The photos appear low resolution and somewhat grainy. My initial impression would be "not original" but it's pretty much impossible to say from (those) photos."
Just being a "prick."
This post started off great UNTIL: "...My initial impression would be "not original"..."
WHY?
There is enough on my terrible image to talk about, Your image is much sharper.
I'm going home. Be back later to read the comments.
What can you say to describe this coin?
Well, since I all I had to go on was a small, out-of-focus image of one side of the coin, and given the vast majority of 200-year-old coins are not original, I started from the premise that the coin was "guilty until proven innocent". The coloration patterns simply don't look normal to my eye as if the coin has been lightened at some point. Since I am far from an expert on old copper, I look forward to reading the more informed opinions of others.
...handle the edges of a coin inside of a glass bowl of distilled water if you want to see it’s true skin
What can you say to describe this coin?
1. Round.
2. Large cent (Matron Head, actually).
3. Not glossy.
4. No important marks.
5. Decent strike.
6. Some faded red [collector bait].
7. Mottled brown.
7. An unidentified TPG called it MS63 [my head hurts].
Anything else? Look again.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Can a coin that's not original become original again? If a coin that was dipped thirty years ago and then put back into circulation, can it be considered original if there is no visible evidence of it ever having been cleaned?
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
Look at the surface where there is no trace of faded red, especially near the wreath and some letters.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
@3keepSECRETif2rDEAD
I guess at least two of you are still alive.
I will comment on the coin later today. Going out...
For now, the answer to your question is yes. As long as the coin looks original - most will think it is so it might as well be. For example, a large cent can be stripped down to PINK COPPER and restored to "original" brown color. The length of time to do this depends on the method used.
Thanks to @Sonorandesertrat we have a sharper image:
The coin is MS (Unc-enough). There is no obvious change of color on the high points of the leaves or bow. The coin appears to have muted luster and very few defects. I am trouble by the color of the pinkish surface at 1-2 but it is also showing slightly in the 7-8 position which is how a cartwheel appears.
If the reddish color is not normal then my GUESS is the coin was re-colored at some time in the past.
What bothered me about this image (I have not seen the coin in hand) is darker spots in/near the O and E in ONE and the C in CENT. The larger image also suggests surface disturbance in these areas. I suspected that the color was applied after verdigris (or spalled metal salts more generally) was carefully picked off. The obverse is a scarce overdate, so I tracked this coin from catalog to catalog (at least 5 auctions). This coin was worked on at least twice, based on the color images I saw in various auction catalogs. This coin went from raw (reverse was spotted with verdigris in multiple places) to MS63 (after bouncing between major TPG slabs) during this time. I wonder if this would be market acceptable if it were a common coin.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Any thoughts on if this one looks "original"?
Based on that set of images, my gut says no. There are some spots that look smoothed (need to see it in hand).
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Looks original to me but I'm not a copper specialist.
Question for the copper experts---Can a copper coin be brushed with a soft camel hair brush and Blue Ribbon or Coin Care and still be original?
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
Speaking as a collector and a chemist by training, I would say no. Products like Blue RIbbon and Care are intended to be used to form a coating on the surface. If enough is used, the coin will look wet (glossy)---this has no real effect on the grade, and plenty of glossy coins are in slabs with straight grades. I don't particularly care for glossy coins, but that never stopped me from buying them if I liked other attributes, since a little acetone will remove the coat. The bigger problem with monkeying with copper coins is the potential for leaving faint hairlines, especially if Q-tips are used.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
The 1806 C-1 half cent I posted is an "original" recent struck counterfeit in a top TPG holder; "coin" looks pretty good in hand.
What gives it away as being a counterfeit?
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
The matching marks for one, especially the "cut" at the "A" at Half Cent. The actual source coin was sold in a 2008 Heritage auction.
Yes. Copper coins of all grades are brushed constantly. When I joined EAC they were selling the brushes to members.
Purists will tell you though that under a good glass or microscope they show hairlines as a result.
I suspect most of the hairlines are in the film and not the metal. I brush coins and don't notice any hairlines under the scope.
The fact that it’s done a lot isn’t the same thing as the coins still beIng “original”. Many coins are dipped, too.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
If only our coins could talk - especially the Old Coppers.
As long as a coin LOOKS 100% original no matter what I or anyone else has done to it it is original for all intents and purposes. Is a modern coin taken directly from a proof set "original?" Yes, original enough for most. What if we dip it properly 5 times and nobody can tell? Is it original? Heck no but who cares. It looks original.
PS Some guys should have their camel hair brush taken from them!
Awesome discussion! Of course I take that next leap and say if 7 struck counterfeits LOOK original (read authentic) with 4 in Top TPG holders are they a genuine "variety" as well
?
3 of mine:
@burfle23 said: "Awesome discussion! Of course I take that next leap and say if 7 struck counterfeits LOOK original (read authentic) with 4 in Top TPG holders are they a genuine "variety" as well
?
YES!
In the old days (1970's) when a counterfeit was detected and published that was the end of it. After I joined the ANA's Certification Service in DC and was trained by Hoskins, I detected a "new" fake $3. Company records showed a few of these were previously certified as genuine. The owners were contacted and the certs were recalled. Counterfeits had no value except bullion or to advanced collectors who liked contemporary C/F's,Historic copies, or the output of famous forgers.
Today, MFLF (more folks like fakes). ICG even slabs them and counterfeits in the Morgan dollar series are often worth more than the genuine item.
IMO, your coins will definitely become collectable in the future - just as the 1795 Jefferson Head Cent - a very crude 100K abomination!
I’ve seen a lot of brushed coins that don’t look original. They look too shiny to be so.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
In my area of Early Gold, it is fairly easy to tell on 90% of coins. With the advent of orange/copper artificial toning and actually adding "dirt" to coins....this becomes much more challenging.
I've seen a lot of brushed coins that do look original until you tip them just so.
Not with 100% certainty, and I don't believe anyone else can either. Whether a coin was brushed, wiped, or carried in a pocket with abrasive fabric in circulation, no person can determine.
I have Mercury dimes that I pulled from circulation, put them in an album where they have been sitting for 55 years, and they have not toned much if at all, still silver-gray. A lot of people would say they have been cleaned because of hairlines, but they are circulation hairlines.
Bust half dollars have been intentionally toned for years in envelopes and albums, this can be attractive and market acceptable, but looks unnatural to me. I prefer grey dirt.
I disagree with much of this statement: "Not with 100% certainty, and I don't believe anyone else can either. Whether a coin was brushed, wiped, or carried in a pocket with abrasive fabric in circulation, no person can determine. That's because each characteristic looks differently on a coin's surface. While nothing is 100%, I'll bet someone who has looked at a lot of coins can get to at least 99%. I'll use JA for example. The trick comes from deciding what is market acceptable UNORIGINALITY on a surface that has been ALTERED UNNATURALLY.
BTW: it took me years to realize what you have stated: "A lot of people would say they have been cleaned because of hairlines, but they are circulation hairlines."
To anyone who answered yes, here are a few I could use help with.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1036306/need-help-with-peru-1-2-dineros#latest
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/mysetregistry/showcase/6602