"Dipping, not cleaning"

toned please.
Those SLQ? i would take that toned coin any day of the week!
I said it before, and I will say it again; dipping is damage. I don't care what is currently "market acceptable".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Jim ... electrolysis, by definition, is the use of electricity to split compounds into atoms, or smaller compounds. So unless we are misusing the term, they're has to be electricity added to the process for it to work. As for Acetone, I don't know, you can be right but a casual search on cointalk will find extensive discussions of pure glacial acetone being used for dipping.

Ruben

 

Ok, thanks for the advice. I'll leave the seated liberty half the way it is.

 

wha???

Really?!? Are you serious here? I have to ask: why is "old genuine album toning" a "desired effect"? Wouldn't a silver coin that is the color of silver be more desirable?

Please: can you or someone else explain this one to me?

(My background: I collected as a kid in the late 60's and early 70's, stopped for 35 years, and now I'm back . . . this "toning" thing is something that I don't think people talked about 35 years ago . . . fwiw, that's why I call myself a semi-newbie)

So, nu?, why in the world is this "toning" (which looks more like creeping crud to me) desirable?

Thanks!

 

Well, it is creeping <crud>. It will keep creeping and will turn pitch black eventually. The trick is when to stop it by protecting from further exposure to the environment such as in an air-tite, etc.

Not all people go for that toning though. Many still like blast white. But AJ's point is well taken in that there are people who actually find that <crud> desirable.

 

imo I think it's a matter of what you like. For me, there are a few that are ugle crud, and perhaps a very light cleaning could help if one knows what he is doing.

For the majority of the toned ones it is just the character of the coin. I don't really care for the ones that are obvioulsy fake toned, but that is just me.

I have salt and pepper hair, but I wouldn't dare color my hair back to original because I think it would look fake.

Now if a coin is truly AU/BU and has original luster, then there is nothing better imo, but unless you are a very experienced chemist, you can never get it back once it's gone.

If we were all alike, this would be a boring world.

 

I'm not even getting to the second point here (about cleaning) . . . I'm just trying to see why those dimes (did you see them?) would be desirable. Sure, I've seen some nice toning . . . but that's not what I see on those dimes.

 

They say beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

Leave them as they are. If you dont like them, sell them and replace them. Don't try and become a coin doctor and start your new collecting life with a bad reputation.

 

I hear what you're saying, as well as the commentor above who said life would be boring if we were all alike. But for me, this doesn't seem like chocolate and vanilla ice cream -- it seems more like chocolate ice cream versus chop-liver-flavored ice cream. Or, a clean house versus a dusty one.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not trying to argue, just trying to understand. It truly blows me away that anyone would want those coins. Again, I can understand nice toning (nice colors, or rainbow -- and, yes, I know "nice" is in the eye of the beholder) . . . but I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea that anyone would find desirable "creeping crud"-type toning.

This truly is a dizzyingly mind-boggling eye-opener to me. A paradigm shifter. I had no idea . . .

 

Keep in mind two things: First Beauty isn't the same as all primary colors and bright lights. Secondly, more coins are destroyed by people trying to dip them than you can shake a stick at.

Ruben

 

I would have to say that I like the toned look way better that the bright white. Plus I would have to agree with whoever said that cleaning actually brings out it imperfections.

Plus keeping it in its original state, just makes since. Its like taking an old 57 Chevy that barely runs, the seats are torn, and the paint is pealing, and throwing some 20 inch crome rims on it, or a bangin loud stereo in it. Now the car is worth less, because its not original.

Man and what beautiful cars those are.

 

OTOH, though, would you find giving it a new paint job repugnant?

 

Yes, yes, I know that. (And everyone here's been saying). I understand the theory.

I'm just amazed that the coins that *I* posted are desirable.

 

Oh yet. That Whitman toning is of great sentimental value.

Ruben

 

I agree... removing some of coins metal is damage, be it with acid or a Brillo pad. Call it cleaning, dipping, whatever, it's all symantics... the end result is the same.

 

nice one

 

Toning is corrosion...which is damage...you can go in circles all day..its stupidity...

Those coins have some horrible toning...I would cut that toning and NOT sell them. Why sell them just to buy two of the same coins? Who cares if other people want nasty tone (some toning is just terrible and lets face it, all toning is corrosion that should NOT be allowed to go too far). Now if someone will buy the nasty toned coins at a price that you cannot refuse...sell it to the sucker

Let me also say that what you are getting is advice from people who are fellow collectors...you can take it or leave it...this is a coin forum...no one here speaks for the hobby as a whole no matter how much they would like you to think they do (including myself) and many often do not even speak from experience or from any real knowledge as I have found...

I have dipped a few coins...with these I would do a very quick dip to just cut the tone a bit but not to completely remove it.

In the end its your coin, your collection...who cares what joe schmoe on a forum said...if you dont like the tone, dip it...or leave it as it is if you like...just be careful

 

I was wondering if _anyone_ had the same impression that I did!

Arizona Jack wrote: "Those are georgous and highly desirable coins" -- so (to Ariz J): you have a price I can't refuse?!