A happy Buffalo nickel tale
gyocomgd
Posts: 2,582 ✭✭✭
Had an interesting experience today. A week ago I saw a 1913 Type 1 raw buffalo nickel on eBay that, going by the images, seemed ordinary in most ways. The luster looked awfully flat, and clearly there appeared to be a big splotch of PVC near the date. I asked the seller how nasty it looked to him, and he replied that the PVC was indeed there but that he wasn't qualified to say how much damage it had done. As the piece seemed to have an awesome strike, I put in the minimum bid of $23. It was the one and only bid.
Here are images from the auction:
The coin arrived today. I immediately put the coin in acetone, and within an hour the PVC began to dissolve. I probed at it lightly with a a Stim-U-Dent toothpick (won't scratch coin) and it all came off. This is rare from my experience; it usually takes longer soaking (sometimes days), and even then it doesn't come off. Frequently it has eaten away at the surface of the coin.
The piece immediately seemed to have even better detail than the auction photos indicated. However, it had a layer of lousy-looking haze. Not an original skin, but a muddled film that dimmed the luster. Though I am increasingly judicious about which raw pieces I dip, I felt this coin truly needed it. A very quick dip, and the piece was transformed. It looks great, and in my mind could go MS65:
I feel this coin surely had been treated at some point in its history (albeit lightly), as it did not have an original look to it when it came in the mail. There was no natural toning to it at all, just crappy haze. To be sure, this coin is no killer gem, as it remains unoriginal. If it WERE original, it probably would grade even higher--MS66. But the luster is still there, and perhaps this coin has a fresh start and a little more potential. Mostly I'm thrilled that the PVC came off, that the piece is amazingly well-struck and practically free of marks, and that there was much more luster lurking underneath than the auction photos indicated. It sure was worth $23, and I'm pretty happy--not all gambles pay off.
Here are images from the auction:
The coin arrived today. I immediately put the coin in acetone, and within an hour the PVC began to dissolve. I probed at it lightly with a a Stim-U-Dent toothpick (won't scratch coin) and it all came off. This is rare from my experience; it usually takes longer soaking (sometimes days), and even then it doesn't come off. Frequently it has eaten away at the surface of the coin.
The piece immediately seemed to have even better detail than the auction photos indicated. However, it had a layer of lousy-looking haze. Not an original skin, but a muddled film that dimmed the luster. Though I am increasingly judicious about which raw pieces I dip, I felt this coin truly needed it. A very quick dip, and the piece was transformed. It looks great, and in my mind could go MS65:
I feel this coin surely had been treated at some point in its history (albeit lightly), as it did not have an original look to it when it came in the mail. There was no natural toning to it at all, just crappy haze. To be sure, this coin is no killer gem, as it remains unoriginal. If it WERE original, it probably would grade even higher--MS66. But the luster is still there, and perhaps this coin has a fresh start and a little more potential. Mostly I'm thrilled that the PVC came off, that the piece is amazingly well-struck and practically free of marks, and that there was much more luster lurking underneath than the auction photos indicated. It sure was worth $23, and I'm pretty happy--not all gambles pay off.
0
Comments
-Paul
<< <i>Amazing transformation! Did it look better in hand than the seller's pics, - even before your restoration? >>
Oh yeah, much better. The detail in the Indian's hair knot surprised me the most. And I could see luster underneath, trying to get out.
The PVC was another matter. You never can tell how deep it is with the naked eye--at least I can't.
Great eye!
<< <i>ummmm.. what substance do you use to dip nickels? Didn't know such an animal existed. >>
Hot water and a teaspoon of sugar.
<< <i>amazing,will that recipe work on hazy unc. jeffs as well? >>
I was kidding, sorry to mislead.
In truth, it's EZ-est.
Visit my son's caringbridge page @ Runner's Caringbridge Page
"To Give Anything Less than Your Best, Is to Sacrifice the Gift" - Steve Prefontaine
Tiger trout, Deerfield River, c. 2001.
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
Steve
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
<< <i>I would have never guess that it's the same coin. >>
Exactly what I tought when I saw the comparison photos
<< <i>Lovely images. How high did you crank up the contrast on your photo editing software? >>
I don't have any editing software per se. My images open in the Windows Photo Gallery, and I use the cropping tool. That's it.
I do adjust my camera settings, though. I almost always shoot with the EV at 0, and let the camera know I'm shooting indoors. I use a single Reveal light bulb (hence shadows and poor showing of LIBERTY) and hold the coin atop my small black back in one hand, the camera in the other. I choose the images that have the best focus/sharpness; there are a lot of throwaways. It's a very crude setup. There are two basic settings that seem to work for coins: One is "flower," the other is "food," lol. My only real complaint is that the coins invariably come out with a brown quality that isn't actually there on the coin.
Here are two images with the EV cranked up from 0 to +3. Note, the coin is so bright that my camera freaks a bit, and automatically adjusts to eliminate what it perceives as glare.
I like the strike and the luster on that coin.
BST Transactions: DonnyJf, MrOrganic, Justanothercoinaddict, Fivecents, Slq, Jdimmick,
Robb, Tee135, Ibzman350, Mercfan, Outhaul, Erickso1, Cugamongacoins, Indiananationals, Wayne Herndon
Negative BST Transactions: