1805 quarter eagle

The surface of a coin under dirt/crud patinates (my that's a big word...couldn't find it in my dictionary) at a different rate than the exposed surfaces, if at all. Insider agrees. Gold as a noble metal is less susceptible to corrosion than others Insider agrees , seems you are a pretty good teacher after all., but the point stands that if you remove the dirt, the underlying surfaces will be of a different patination (? )than the rest and the coin will clearly look cleaned. I'll have to admit, this is also true You'll then have to also remove the patination (Ok, I get it "patina")to regularize the surfaces, leaving a circulated coin obviously too "clean" looking to be original.[/QUOTE] Unless, a person knows how to "SPOT CORRECT" "COIN DOCTOR" "RESTORE" "PROPERLY CONSERVE" whatever you wish to call it. Many do, some work at NCS - I Don't!


NCS advertises that "You have not seen their (conservation) work.
You or anyone else will not see mine EITHER

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I wonder if the owner of the Norweb 1893 S could give some incite on conservation.

 

What? I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

NCS removes problems from coins. Haze, environmental effects, stabilize corrosion, PVC, etc... Conservation's goal is to stabilize a coin, and do no harm. A little bit of dirt is not harm - and yes, knowledgeable collectors will pay far more for a "dirty" original coin than a "dipped" or "doctored" coin. A circulated coin is supposed to have this look, and if it doesn't, many people don't want it.

 

I wouldn't use the word "conservation" for what was done to that coin. That is straight up doctoring, by way of dip. For those who don't know what we are talking about, Greg Reynolds runs through the condition census of 93S Morgans here: http://www.coinweek.com/auctions-ne...organ-silver-dollar-646250-auction-las-vegas/

While he uses the word "conservation," it is clear that he strongly disapproves of what was done to it, and uses the word tongue-in-cheek.

It is also clear, from his market analysis, that the original patination was considered far more valuable. Dipping and removing the skin killed the value (and grade) of the coin.

 

And that my friends. Is EXACTLY how I like an early coin to look. Everyone here knows my love for surfaces and toning. I'm mostly a silver guy but still I hate dipped out white silver too

 

That one makes me want to cry. And puke

 

Jack Lee was a member of the Crescent City Coin Club of which I'm a member and he would always set up a table at our monthly show. I remember seeing that formerly 67 and would agree with the grade then. Today (though I've only seen the conserved coin through images) I see it as a 65. It just looks lifeless. No wonder it seems that NGC purchased the coin and downgraded it. Still a great coin, but it was once magnificent. I hope that time will heal that coin; it would be a pretty big loss to the collecting community if not.

 

NCS removes problems from coins. True, like DIRT which depending on its chemical composition can EVENTUALLY cause corrosion (not to gold), discoloring (including gold depending on time period and conditions)Haze, environmental effect

NOTE: I really hate to/need to include all the extra qualifiers when I write as I ASS-UME that most of you are informed/qualified to understand/read between the lines. , stabilize corrosion, PVC, etc... Conservation's goal is to stabilize a coin, and do no harm. as is the case with "expert, professional" dirt removal! A little bit of dirt is not harm Except to a coin's eye-appeal (value?). - and yes, knowledgeable collectors (perhaps, that's the key here - "collectors." IMO, the majority of knowledgeable dealers will send them out using the "Dirt Removal Only" Tier ** will pay far more for a "dirty" original coin than a "dipped" or "doctored" Most dealers/collectors couldn't spot a PROPERLY DIPPED or PROFESSIONALLY DOCTORED coin if it were done in front of their eyes! Want Proof...Read about all the stuff found in TPGS slabs before they learned how to detect alterations. A circulated coin ...maybe in grades LOWER than XF is supposed to have this look, and if it doesn't, many people don't want it. Good! More coins for those of us who appreciate attractive, professionally cleaned coins along with attractive original ones.[QUOTE]

I really wish you guys would give it up. It's a beautiful, sunny day here in FL and I am going to take my fancy sports car to a Polo Match here in town (he's lying right?). Let's agree that THERE ARE DEGREES in everything about numismatics. If you don't understand that, I'LL GIVE UP!

NOT!

 

Eh, continuing this argument is pointless. We have very different opinions.

Just don't ruin any coins, okay?

 

I agree that they do pretty good work and have sent them some coins that needed a bit of help, but there are some coins that should be left as they are. The issue is that many coins look unnatural after they are conserved compared to their unconserved counterparts. For those who like to complete collections, the coins always stand out like a sore thumb.

 

Sometimes they just blow-up no matter how much patience and experience you have.

 

I've seen the shrapnel.

 

I seriously doubt it. The actual coins were few and EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE - guaranteed to be far over our (yours & mine) pay grade.

 

That is a piece of fundamental wisdom which ought to be the first thing everyone learns about conservation. It really puts the decision process of whether to conserve or not in context. Yes, experts blow them up less regularly, but by definition if you're removing something obscuring the surface, you don't know what's underneath it....

This. For the Love of Longacre, this.

 

Interesting coin. Someone else asked but got no answer on this: are the diagonal marks on the portrait adjustment marks? I think so.

Besides that, the obverse has some weird, mushy denticles (one at 3:00 has turned into a spike!). Reverse denticles are not strong, either. IIRC both of these things would be somewhat typical for these coins because they are broadstruck. Also, the obverse appears to be a late die state due to the denticles and some stretched stars. Possible die crack through IBE in LIBERTY on the obverse.

I was thinking cleaned at first, but I've changed my mind.

Any comments on my observations?

 

Experts (by experience) can tell 99% of the time what the surface contamination is and what it will do to (depending on the metal) the underlying surface of a coin. I feel like I'm discussing a group taking Conservation 101 minus. Oops, play nice.

 

Actually it seems like you are trying to argue with those who know much better the points that you are trying to make.

 

Exactly Kirkuleez. Don't be too rough on the rookie conservator though, I'm sure he really means well. One thing that's lacking here... We've yet to see him offer one example of circulated gold, up to high AU grades that's been conserved/dipped, whatever he chooses to call it, to prove his point. Yet we've seen coins that stand on their own, without the "help" of artificial improvement. I stand behind my coins... All he has done is hide behind silly emoticons.

'dude

 

This. Starting a slow clap. Clap. Clap. Clap.

Sorry, insider. Sometimes, you make some good points. This thread has not been one of them.

 

The coin in the OP looks totally original and AU50 at least IMO; I agree with the majority here that conservation/dirt removal/whatever you call it would be a BIG mistake on this historic item.