Is it hypocritical of a TPG to bag a coin for "artificial color," but
RKKay
Posts: 3,017 ✭✭✭
knowingly slab other coins they know have been artificially colored, because they are "market acceptable?"
0
Comments
Specializing in 1854 and 1855 large FE patterns
<
At the ebnd of the day, its a judgement call as to what looks OK and what doesn't, and that judement may change over time. Or with the weather. Or depending on the graders' breakfast that day.
they've been "CURATED".
<< <i>Yes, but you must admit that there is a gray area between blatantly AT'd and just-about-virginal.
At the ebnd of the day, its a judgement call as to what looks OK and what doesn't, and that judement may change over time. Or with the weather. Or depending on the graders' breakfast that day. >>
beautifully said... Eloquent and precise and it pretty much sums up the WHOLE thing. Not just PCGS, NGC or any of the grading companies, in particular..but the market that exists outside of the scientific side of coins.
I'll use this post as my catalyst for reiterating the fact that GRADING ought not be subjective in nature, but scientific. So the one thing that is sort of wrong with the SCIENCE of Grading is this element that we call "EYE APPEAL".
it's still a pity that we cannot be more scientific and less opinionated when it comes to coins. In truth, even VAMS are coins with all sorts of flaws. These are cracked dies, overstrikes, doubles, ... it's terrible.
I like coins, but when I think of MS70 and the grading scale , then see what is in slabs even graded MS with the adverse effects of chemicals on coins then it makes me think PCGS and NGC ought to start considering grading FLOOD damaged coins as well. Let's have pity on the poor coins. They look beautiful to someone , and we can charge them money for putting them in plastic
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
are OK.
-Amanda
I'm a YN working on a type set!
My Buffalo Nickel Website Home of the Quirky Buffaloes Collection!
Proud member of the CUFYNA
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
THE BOYZ FROM BRASIL *DO IT ALL OF THE TIME* ACROSS THE STREET
and keep on doing it
just ask dr. greg.............................................
just look at all the middle date and later date large cents in ms bn rb sometimes red with the blue on them
or all those little indians in proof
and some other copper which will remain nameless here
<< <i>Rick, why not be far more specific? I KNOW there is much more to your post.
Okay. A while back, I submitted a PCGS proof 2c piece to "another TPG for SEM-EDX (Metallic composition) testing and cross. They cracked it out, never tested it and bagged it for "artificial color." Recently, I sent them 5 toned PF IHCs, and someone else sent them "before" pix. Evidence that these were the same coins, before (with no color) and after (with color) was undeniable, and the colors and look were all the same. I was told they wouldn't buy them back, as they were "market acceptable." They admitted the coins were the same, but with more color, but said they looked okay.
So, is the test whether they "look okay?" Is it that they know there are so many out there, they have to make a business decision.
Specializing in 1854 and 1855 large FE patterns
<
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>Do the TPGs have a definition of artificial? >>
Good question. Probably "not market acceptable."
Specializing in 1854 and 1855 large FE patterns
<
So whatcha gonna do about it?
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
Most likely scenario, and a real shame. I would hate to think what it would cost them to buy back all the 'questionable' copper floating out there, but there is no excuse to continue slabbing them. Give it a few years, and lets see what some of them look like.
I am stunned by the fact that a doc is bragging about his exploits on their own boards, and he seems to have the support of the community. Am I missing something here?
<< <i>Do the TPGs have a definition of artificial? >>
Excerpt from the NGC Booklet "Understanding 'No Grade' Coins":
"The term ARTIFICIAL TONING refers to the process
whereby patina is imparted to a coin in an accelerated
reaction process using chemicals and/or heat. In many
cases the purpose is to hide a defect that would otherwise
be detected.
"ARTIFICIAL COLOR refers to bronze, copper nickel
and copper coins that have been chemically dipped or
cleaned. Under natural conditions, most copper coins will
darken over time, but examples that retain their original
“red” color are highly valued. That’s why “Red Brown” (RB)
or “Brown” (BN) copper coins are sometimes treated to
remove this toning. The resulting color usually has an
unnatural and artificial look."
I couldn't find the PCGS no-grade definition of artificial toning or color, but assume that it is the same as appears on its "Lingo" page:
"ARTIFICIAL COLOR -- Coloring added to the surface of a coin by chemicals and/or heat. Many different methods have been employed over the years."
Edited to add PCGS definition.
<< <i>In the past, I've had a coin bagged at a TPG (not PCGS) for artificial color (interestingly, it came out of a PCGS PR65RB slab); yet, recently, faced with clear evidence of added color, the same TPG told me the coins in question were "market acceptable."
Which Market ?
Most likely scenario, and a real shame. I would hate to think what it would cost them to buy back all the 'questionable' copper floating out there, but there is no excuse to continue slabbing them. Give it a few years, and lets see what some of them look like.
I am stunned by the fact that a doc is bragging about his exploits on their own boards, and he seems to have the support of the community.
<< <i>A while back, I submitted a PCGS proof 2c piece to "another TPG for SEM-EDX (Metallic composition) testing and cross. They cracked it out, never tested it and bagged it for "artificial color." >>
It seems to me that there must be some liability in that scenario.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>knowingly slab other coins they know have been artificially colored, because they are "market acceptable?" >>
We had some coins that NGC would not slab, even though they admitted the toning was natural
(Morgans stored in 2x2 paper envelopes in the home of a cigar smoker for 40 years) because they did
not consider it market acceptable.
Yes! And I'm still stumped about this one coming back "artificial color." It was previously in a PCGS holder, and is certainly prettier than those purple IHC proofs! Maybe one of you with experience with "artificial color" can tell me how someone added the color.
<< <i>Rick, I don't want to hijack this thread (probably unlikely anyway), but I'm curious why you wanted your proof 2¢ analyzed chemically. Did you suspect it was struck from a different planchet? >>
It was for a 2c specialist who is into varieties, metallic as well as die. Since that time, I have begun to test large FE patterns for myself and will report the findings in a few years, when I've tested 150 or more. I've done 25 so far.
Specializing in 1854 and 1855 large FE patterns
<
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.