Question on tarnish...

kurtdog · September 19, 2010 4:28AM

I was just wondering, if it's market acceptable to dip a coin to remove tarnish, why isn't it market acceptable to dip a coin to impart tarnish? If anything is “unoriginal,” one would think it’s the former, and not the latter, as coins naturally tarnish when they leave the Mint, they don’t naturally get “whiter.” Anybody have any thoughts on that? Thanks.

BAJJERFAN · September 19, 2010 6:29AM

Dipping when properly done RESTORES a coin to what it once was [or close to it], usually without a large change in value. ATing changes a coin into something that it never was and maybe never could be. ATing is an attempt to deceive either by hiding something or creating something that could be sold for a large premium [usually to the uninitiated].

Zoins · September 19, 2010 6:39AM

Dipping is often used to get grade bumps and increases in value. It often makes coins look newer, unlike they way they possibly should look given their age. However, it can also give the coins a washed out appearance, destroying lustre, which is a big issue with many coins. Like many things in numismatics, there is debate. There are both those that find dipping distasteful and others that swear by it. However, one thing dipping does not do is hide damage.

AT is used for two things: (a) to increase eye appeal and (b) to hide damage. These can also have a dramatic effect on price. Another problem with AT is that it is often unstable in that the tarnish can turn dark and unpleasant within a short time period while NT is more stable. Someone buying an AT coin that turns may not have much resources to recover their investment and because of this, it is considered deception.

As for the prices AT can achieve, here is one example. I believe this was taken off the market and the owner made whole by PCGS. Issues like this are a big problem for the hobby, TPGs, and collectors. You can learn more about AT, doctoring, and similar issues from posts here and Laura Sperber's Hot Topics blog. Her posts are usually posted here for discussion. It will also be interesting to see the results of the PCGS vs. doctors lawsuit.

ricko · September 19, 2010 7:45AM

Dipping is acceptable (by TPG rules), accelerated tarnish is not. That simple. Cheers, RickO

kurtdog · September 20, 2010 2:22AM

Thanks to all who replied. We got a whole three replies, here. Seriously, this is very easy, I just want your thoughts. Nobody is going to bite anybody's head off. Just go back to post #1 and try to answer the question posed. Tell us your opinions. It's impossible to be wrong.

Hell, what more do you want?

garrynot · September 20, 2010 2:59AM

I dont know, there is not much to add. Do you want someone to say AT is a good idea? In most cases AT looks like color was painted on the coin and subdues or removes luster where NT looks like the color is floating on the coin and enhances whatever luster is left.

kryptonitecomics · September 20, 2010 3:49AM

when I read tarnish instead of toning...I just pass through the thread without reading

Unknown · September 20, 2010 4:03AM

This content has been removed.

airplanenut · September 20, 2010 4:16AM

The only time I deem dipping okay is if it is used to actually conserve the coin (ie, remove PVC before it causes damage). When I took the ANA grading classes, my grades were most consistently wrong on dipped coins, because I always knocked the grades down. Neither AT or dipping is acceptable, though the terminology used in your question obviously biases it. From now on, I'll refer to what you collect as white crap.

kryptonitecomics · September 20, 2010 4:27AM

<< <i>The only time I deem dipping okay is if it is used to actually conserve the coin (ie, remove PVC before it causes damage). When I took the ANA grading classes, my grades were most consistently wrong on dipped coins, because I always knocked the grades down. Neither AT or dipping is acceptable, though the terminology used in your question obviously biases it. From now on, I'll refer to what you collect as white crap. >>

The point I was trying to make in a much much more subtle way...you go boy!!!!!

kurtdog · September 20, 2010 8:26AM

<< <i>Neither AT or dipping is acceptable, though the terminology used in your question obviously biases it. From now on, I'll refer to what you collect as white crap. >>

I beg your pardon but what exactly did I say in my question that made you so emotionally-unstable? I'm very curious.

Question on tarnish...

Comments

Leave a Comment