Options
Do you think dipping a coin is "doctoring"?
seateddime
Posts: 6,180 ✭✭✭
Opinions?
I seldom check PM's but do check emails often jason@seated.org
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
0
Comments
Hoard the keys.
Hoard the keys.
http://macrocoins.com
Dipping is harmful, but it is not coin doctoring. On rare occasions, the benefits of dipping will outweigh the harm done. Coin doctoring is often much more serious and involves attempts to deceive experts.
I implore the readers of this thread to read my latest column pertaining to coin doctoring and the PCGS lawsuit, in which I devote a section to dipping. Here is an excerpt:
“If a valuable silver coin is dipped and then submitted to the PCGS, the graders will, in most cases, immediately realize that it had been dipped. More than two thirds of all uncirculated 19th century silver coins have been dipped at one time or another. Obviously, all such coins are not regarded as having been doctored.”
Additions to the PCGS Lawsuit with further discussions of the overall coin doctoring problem and of DIPPING
Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors
No ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
The name is LEE!
aka doctoring that is acceptable to most
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 700
<< <i>First, let us define dipping in a manner that is consistent with how the term has been employed by collectors and dealers for more than a half century. Immersing a coin in soapy water, acetone, or lacquer is not dipping. Immersing a coin in an ACIDIC solution for the purpose of tearing a layer off the coin to brighten, remove toning and/or remove other matter (that has formed on the coin) is DIPPING.
Dipping is harmful, but it is not coin doctoring. On rare occasions, the benefits of dipping will outweigh the harm done. Coin doctoring is often much more serious and involves attempts to deceive experts.
I implore the readers of this thread to read my latest column pertaining to coin doctoring and the PCGS lawsuit, in which I devote a section to dipping. Here is an excerpt:
“If a valuable silver coin is dipped and then submitted to the PCGS, the graders will, in most cases, immediately realize that it had been dipped. More than two thirds of all uncirculated 19th century silver coins have been dipped at one time or another. Obviously, all such coins are not regarded as having been doctored.”
Additions to the PCGS Lawsuit with further discussions of the overall coin doctoring problem and of DIPPING
Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors >>
I agree! If done properly there are coins that can benefit from a dip.
Franklin-Lover's Forum
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
<< <i>Not really doctoring---more like nursing. >>
That's funny! Wrong...but funny!
<< <i>First, let us define dipping in a manner that is consistent with how the term has been employed by collectors and dealers for more than a half century. Immersing a coin in soapy water, acetone, or lacquer is not dipping. Immersing a coin in an ACIDIC solution for the purpose of tearing a layer off the coin to brighten, remove toning and/or remove other matter (that has formed on the coin) is DIPPING.
Dipping is harmful, but it is not coin doctoring. On rare occasions, the benefits of dipping will outweigh the harm done. Coin doctoring is often much more serious and involves attempts to deceive experts.
I implore the readers of this thread to read my latest column pertaining to coin doctoring and the PCGS lawsuit, in which I devote a section to dipping. Here is an excerpt:
“If a valuable silver coin is dipped and then submitted to the PCGS, the graders will, in most cases, immediately realize that it had been dipped. More than two thirds of all uncirculated 19th century silver coins have been dipped at one time or another. Obviously, all such coins are not regarded as having been doctored.”
Additions to the PCGS Lawsuit with further discussions of the overall coin doctoring problem and of DIPPING
Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors >>
Dipping might not involve an attempt to deceive, but I still believe it is a (widely accepted) form of doctoring - altering the appearance of a coin in order to make it more desirable/valuable.
Personally, I hope that dipping is not lumped together with other, much worse and/or stealthy types of doctoring. But I don't think it deserves a free-ride or should be encouraged, either.
<< <i>Sure, it's "market acceptable" doctoring. >>
The "market" is schizophrenic.
<< <i>
“If a valuable silver coin is dipped and then submitted to the PCGS, the graders will, in most cases, immediately realize that it had been dipped. More than two thirds of all uncirculated 19th century silver coins have been dipped at one time or another. Obviously, all such coins are not regarded as having been doctored.”
Additions to the PCGS Lawsuit with further discussions of the overall coin doctoring problem and of DIPPING
Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors >>
I believe that HRH has stated here that when properly done, a dip job is not readily detectable [which is likely why it is an acceptable practice] so I don't know how you can make such a statement. When a 150 year old coin shows up looking like the day it was minted, I expect the graders might strongly suspect that it was indeed dipped.
A better question would be "would you buy a coin that you know has been dipped or would you prefer to pass on the ugly POS"?
However, the TPG's approve and even reward dipping, so understanding this, I vote NO, dipping is not doctoring.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>First, let us define dipping in a manner that is consistent with how the term has been employed by collectors and dealers for more than a half century. Immersing a coin in soapy water, acetone, or lacquer is not dipping. Immersing a coin in an ACIDIC solution for the purpose of tearing a layer off the coin to brighten, remove toning and/or remove other matter (that has formed on the coin) is DIPPING.
Dipping is harmful, but it is not coin doctoring. On rare occasions, the benefits of dipping will outweigh the harm done. Coin doctoring is often much more serious and involves attempts to deceive experts.
I implore the readers of this thread to read my latest column pertaining to coin doctoring and the PCGS lawsuit, in which I devote a section to dipping. Here is an excerpt:
“If a valuable silver coin is dipped and then submitted to the PCGS, the graders will, in most cases, immediately realize that it had been dipped. More than two thirds of all uncirculated 19th century silver coins have been dipped at one time or another. Obviously, all such coins are not regarded as having been doctored.”
Additions to the PCGS Lawsuit with further discussions of the overall coin doctoring problem and of DIPPING
Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors >>
IMHO this rationale is so detached from reality it's embarrassing. Coins don't naturally whiten after they leave the Mint, if they do anything, they naturally tarnish. An acid dip destroys the original surface or "skin" on a coin. In that respect an acid dip to achieve unnatural white is even more detrimental than a sulfur dip to accelerate natural tarnish. The market accepts acid dipped coins, today, by default. It has to, as a compromise, as so many of our coins have been so dipped. That happened primarily in the day of simple condition (technical) grading, when there was money for the dealers in removing tarnish. Today, with market grading and "eye appeal" on par with those condition (technical) criteria, it's just the opposite, the money is in imparting tarnish. That's what's happening. The pendulum swung. If either of these activities is "doctoring," the other one surely is.
<< <i>Aren't coins inside original bank/mint rolls white? I keep hearing that all older coins HAVE to be toned... is that a true statement? There can be old white coins that haven't been dipped... correct? >>
Absolutely!
Absolutely, and many GSA coins are good examples. Not all (by any means) old silver coins have been dipped. Cheers, RickO
<< <i> Doctoring a coin does not automatically = bad. >>
I disagree.
I think in today's marketplace, the term 'doctoring' does imply an unethical and 'bad' practise towards coins.
For that reason and the reason I stated above, I voted 'NO' to dipping being considered as doctoring.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>
<< <i> Doctoring a coin does not automatically = bad. >>
I disagree.
I think in today's marketplace, the term 'doctoring' does imply an unethical and 'bad' practise towards coins.
For that reason and the reason I stated above, I voted 'NO' to dipping being considered as doctoring. >>
Doesn't NCS (NGC) and PCGS doctor coins in the form of preservation? They may be preserving a coin, but it's still doctoring. You have to doctor a coin to remove verdigris... you have to doctor a coin to remove milk spots... you have to doctor a coin to remove haze. So in that regard: Doctoring a coin does not automatically = bad.
Light surface corrosion, or toning as it’s described in the numismatic community, can be very desirable. Collectors often prize it as one indicator of a coin’s originality, or closeness to its original state. Toning causes copper coins to turn brown, and silver and nickel coins to develop hues of blue, red, green, purple, and other colors. Often, these coins need little or no conservation; however, advanced stages of corrosion can damage a coin’s surfaces. If the toning process goes too far, the coins turn black and the actual surface of the coin may be ruined forever.
Traditionally, collectors have been told to never have their coins cleaned; yet this policy stands in stark contrast to many other fields of collectibles. For example, the restoration and conservation of art works is performed routinely. Paintings are not mounted for display with their original beauty hidden beneath layers of dirt and aged varnish. Rather, such debris is painstakingly removed by persons highly skilled in this restoration work. Gems, silver, and other antiques are cleaned and maintained in good order. To do otherwise would be negligent. What should matter is how and why objects are cleaned. Professional coin conservators are no less skilled and responsible than conservators in other fields, so it is time to re-evaluate the cleaning and conservation of coins in this new light. Cleaning removes dirt and agents that hide or might be harmful to an object’s natural and original state. Proper cleaning takes into account original materials and finishes. It studiously avoids damaging original materials and finishes. The overall appearance is enhanced and the coin is more likely to last.
Sometimes confusion arises about the term "conservation." Numismatic conservation involves examination, scientific analysis, and a reliance upon an extensive base of numismatic knowledge to determine the nature of a coin’s state of preservation and the extent of any damage. Conservation also encompasses appropriate procedures to protect the coin’s original appearance and to guard against future deterioration to whatever extent possible.
Professional conservation should not be confused with "Coin Doctoring", in which an attempt is made to improve the appearance and grade of a coin through deceptive means such as artificial toning and where unaccepted or unorthodox methods are employed. Also not qualifying as conservation is restoration where mechanical repairs are made such as filling holes, smoothing out scratches, and re-engraving of detail.
Can be a bit different....
Maybe.
bob
to me, it's "doctored" if my expert eye can find it upon examination of a raw coin... this includes dipping if "I'm sure it's been dipped"
Now, the DEGREE to which this "Doctoring" bothers me about a coin,
always, without fail and with no exceptions, strictly, and with no room for debate,
....
...depends on the specific circumstances
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
If it's dirty and you want to clean it, go ahead. It's yours. If it's collectible , leave it alone.... that's how it got that way. Most collectibles that end up the "other' way (dipped or cleaned), got that way with the help of
Hint: see my first post
It begins with "C" (see) and ends with "Y" (why)
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Ron
If dipping is deliberately done to make money, it is doctoring.
If dipping is done in order to clean up some ugly toning it may be OK. However, the older the coin, the less chance that such dipping is acceptable.
Personally, I have only dipped modern proofs for my own collection.
<< <i>Opinions? >>
If it is done to remove an awesome rainbow toning then NO, it is NOT doctoring. Rather it is a crime against coins and ALL MANKIND AS WE KNOW IT.
My thoughts are DEATH PENALTY, but I'm strangly being told that I might be extreme here. Life imprisonment is also not favored by these light weights.
Okay, how about we just chop off a arm or leg and if that's too harsh, at least a finger or two.
Look! This was NOT my idea, even though it might work.
<< <i>It's not doctoring at all. It's cleaning. And that's the rest of the story of how I view a coin.
If it's dirty and you want to clean it, go ahead. It's yours. If it's collectible , leave it alone.... that's how it got that way. Most collectibles that end up the "other' way (dipped or cleaned), got that way with the help of
Hint: see my first post
It begins with "C" (see) and ends with "Y" (why) >>
Why do you ignore "the third side"? And don't give that BS line you always tell the Press. Give it to us straight and clean. If not clean then okay, dirty.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>Sometimes confusion arises about the term "conservation." Numismatic conservation involves examination, scientific analysis, and a reliance upon an extensive base of numismatic knowledge to determine the nature of a coin’s state of preservation and the extent of any damage. Conservation also encompasses appropriate procedures to protect the coin’s original appearance and to guard against future deterioration to whatever extent possible.
Professional conservation should not be confused with "Coin Doctoring", in which an attempt is made to improve the appearance and grade of a coin through deceptive means such as artificial toning and where unaccepted or unorthodox methods are employed. Also not qualifying as conservation is restoration where mechanical repairs are made such as filling holes, smoothing out scratches, and re-engraving of detail. >>
"What's this, propaganda?"
- Mae West, My Little Chickadee (1940)
<< <i>No matter how you spin it, one can't help but think that a dipped coin is a little bit tainted. >>
I had to laugh... tainted means to tarnish... so there's no way a dipped coin could be tainted!
Will’sProoflikes
Dipping is not doctoring, it is cleaning. If dipping the coin strips the coin of it's originality, it's been cleaned. (called it toyed with, doctored, messed with, or screwed up. Call it improved, conserved, helped or lustrous... I don't care one way or another) My definition doesn't matter , except maybe to you.
As to a third side, the BS and the Press, I'm thinking you're just a bit confused.
Chemistry is sold to people in the form of E-ZEST, ACETONE, Virgin Olive Oil, etc., in the marketplace. These are "solutions" and apparently they're working out problems with some people's coins. They're not my problem, although I can usually identify these coins when I see them and discount them heavily (buying or selling), due to it (cleaning).
Would ya like it if I said dipping is doctoring ? I cannot say it is doctoring, no matter how much I don't like it, even as it does strip away originality, in my opinion.
PM me for my phone number and I will explain it via phone if this post goes over your head.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5