1913-D Barber Half Dollar

I don't see hairlines, so I'd say it should grade.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Pretty coin but looks cleaned to me. I would have to pass on it.

 

I don't think it has been harshly cleaned, it just looks cleaned to me. I don't mind coins that have been cleaned as long as they don't looked cleaned to me, if that makes any sense. And I don't mind if lots of people disagree with me. I just call them like I see them.

 

GDJMSP, posted: "...Now of you think the coin has been harshly or improperly cleaned Mike, you are of course welcome to your opinion. But if you do, please keep in mind that just about everyone who knows coins is going to disagree with you, even the genuine experts."

The "problem" with opinions is that everyone has one - including the "genuine experts." For example, I've discovered that most members of chat forums have the opinion that every coin with continuous hairlines is "harshly cleaned."

NOT TRUE! There is a VERY BIG gap between a coin that has been improperly cleaned;**and one that is harshly cleaned.

** Evidence of cleaning determined by a "genuine expert" or knowledgeable numismatist THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE "market acceptable" what the...!

 

Doug,

This is not something that floats my boat. Any type of chemical or mechanical treatment to a surface is visible in DEGREES based on the degree of change to that surface. The TPGS's USUALY tend to call any degree of mechanical or chemical alteration to a surface simply CLEANED. IMHO, while that keeps everyone happy, this is a disservice to anyone trying to get educated. That is why many coins with end-stage black corroded surfaces are considered to be darkly toned and harshly buffed coins are considered to be only improperly cleaned! My boat SANK YEARS AGO when this nonsense was adopted.

Let's keep collectors dumb and happy . As for me. I know the difference.

 

I guess not cleaned.

 

You members are to picky. I get it. But it’s nice looking

 

Thanks for not being an expert. I know Zip about dipping. But I’ve been dipping my own way with Buffalo no date nickels and vinaigrette

 

Yikes

 

Probably gently dipped at some point in its life, but luster still looks strong. I'd be surprised if it didn't straight grade.

 

I have observed the same. At least, sometimes I lean to "cleaned", but it seems the graders were kind and gave out a 58 or a 55.

 

I disagree - totally.

Long ago someone who shall remain unknown was teaching that there was NOTHING WRONG with cleaning a coin. In fact, it often preserved them for future collectors. At the least, it often raised their eye appeal which was not even considered as a component of grading at the time!

At the first authentication service, an option to clean a submitters coin if needed to authenticate it was even added to the submission form.

It was very obvious that if I cleaned a coin and no one could tell (except possibly the owner who might like his coin better) IT WAS NOT CLEANED. It was conserved, another term that no one used or considered at the time. Another very obvious conclusion was that if any evidence of "conservation" could be detected on a coin, it was IMPROPERLY CLEANED! Unfortunately, a majority of old vintage coins have been improperly cleaned. So..."market acceptable" evolved to dumb down collectors and allow TPGS to please more people. Even the ANA published (reading between the hairlines ) that improperly cleaned coins can be graded as high as MS-61!

Therefore, if an improperly cleaned Mint State coin can be straight graded or considered "market acceptable" by the folks who run the commercial coin market, I should think that indicates the coin is much different from one that is "detailed" due to harsh cleaning. Collectors better learn the difference or they can ignore it!

 

Looks like it , doesn't