1907 Barber Quarter for Grading

Most people use "harshly cleaned" when the cleaning has been destructive to the coin and renders it ungradeable.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That is the first time I have heard that. I thought the over-arching term was "Imporperly Cleaned."

 

The problem with the new lighting is that it may only illuminate hairlines from circulation wear in a particular direction and make it look like cleaning. Based on the new photos I'm going to say AU58.

 

Both work fine and are common. My point is, I believe this coin has been damaged by being cleaned and won't grade. I think it is evident in both sets of photos. However, coins are very hard to grade in photos...in hand it might look very different. I would be hesitant to spend money on getting this coin graded because I think it has problems.

 

AU details--cleaned. scratched.

 

We agree on this point. It looks nice in my album. Plus slabbing is stupid.

 

"Harshly Cleaned" is NOT commonly used to describe all levels of an abrasive cleaning. Your definition means that a coin that had a Q-Tip lightly wipe the fields is "harshly cleaned," as well as a coin in which someone scrubbed the coin with a wire brush or Brillo pad.

It makes no sense to me, and your statement that most people use this terminology is completely false.

And "DIPPING" is not the same as "CLEANING."

 

You can believe whatever you want, I'm not trying to argue with you. Dipping is a form of cleaning...that's a fact.

A harshly cleaned coin is what you have. Someone took something and rubbed the coin hard enough to damage the surface and leave hairlines. That is not lightly cleaning it...that is "harshly" or "improperly" cleaning the coin. Sorry...but that's the way it is.

 

Then I guess we agree to disagree. I know many respected collectors (Bill Fivaz, Bill Jones, Bob Campbell, etc) that use the same terminology that I do.

Also, if you noticed, you were the only one in this thread that said "harsly cleaned."

 

My initial reaction to your OP was "those pictures are too dark to tell anything"

In your second, more well lit pictures, there are some hairlines. I don't think these are from cleaning, as the fields appear original-ish. I think this is probably a circulated coin that's had a rough encounter or two, but is within "market acceptable" range.