Proper way to dip a coin?

Zaneman,

Would it be too much to ask to see a picture of the coin you are talking about?

Thanks,

Linda

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My understanding of the process is still imperfect. It seems to me that the top few molecules of silver on a toned coin are something other than silver, i.e. silver sulfide. Unlike dipping, which chemically removes these few molecules forever, the electrochemical reaction described here removes only the "sulfide" part of the toning, by attracting the sulfur which combined with the silver to another substance which likes sulfur better than silver does. No silver is removed during the process - it's merely freed of the sulfur monkey on its' back.

Under strict definitions of the term "cleaned," it's cleaning, because a process which changes the appearance of the coin has taken place. After the cleaning, though, no silver has left the coin. A coin treated this way should weigh almost exactly the same as it did before any silver sulfide was formed.

I'm looking for a good candidate to try this process on - a nicely toned coin which wouldn't cost me much if I kill it. I already have a couple of extreme tarnish examples for a worst-case scenario attempt, but I want one which, if the process is successful, would become a very appealing coin.

 

I tried the baking soda and alum foil trick last night on this coin. The results were pretty good. The after pic coin is white, bright and shiny. After pic shows it a golden color because there is no sun today.

BEFORE: AFTER:


Edited to add: The fingerprint on the coin is still evident, but the eye is no longer drawn to that area of the coin.

 

Remember, your the only one you have to please. It's your collection and your coin so if you prefer it white and don't plan on ever selling it, then by all means do whatever pleases you.

 

The more lustrous the coin, the better it will handle the dip. Repeated dippings will strip all luster out eventually. I would experiment on some toned jfk halves, plenty of those. Advice here is correct, usually takes a few seconds, you can see the toning dissolve before your very eyes!! I have dipped some very ugly toned 64 halves and they turned out beautiful, but they had good luster to begin with. TGP will grade a dipped coin, unless you go to far with it.

 

You are allowed your opinion, but a VAST MAJORITY of the people in numismatics do not feel that properly dipping a coin is damaging the coin.

How can you call it damaging if you cannot tell it was dipped? I can guarantee you that you can not tell when a coin has been properly dipped. If you take your car to the car wash, do you now consider the car damaged?

A coin does not need to be "damaged" to be dipped. And I'm not sure what you are referring to as damaged before dipping. I dip coins all the time in order to remove toning that is not attractive, haze, fingerprints, or to just remove light film to enhance the luster or mirrors. You'd be hard pressed to find a person who didn't think the coin looked better after the dipping. How exactly is that damage, unless you weigh your coins with a super sensitive micrograms scale.

 

Linda
You coin may look alright in person but if I was buying that coin from the photos you posted CLEANED would jump right out....also that would lower the value IMO more than it was before.
Sure the fingerprint wasn't the best...but the coin just doesn't look its age now...it looks like someone gave it a make over.
If you really want to clean off fingerprints and such I would suggest pure Acetone...and only for a few sec...But DON'T rub....

Speedy

 

Speedy,

Firstly, I think it is order to tell you that I belong on the Do Not Clean side of the house. The coin I posted was junk before I tried the baking soda/alum foil proceedure on it. And IMO it is still junk and its final destination remains the same....the scrap pile.

You coin may look alright in person but if I was buying that coin from the photos you posted CLEANED would jump right out....also that would lower the value IMO more than it was before.

The coin does NOT look alright in person. All of the undesirable issues that were present before cleaning are still there, the cleaning just removed the blinking lights that announced their presence.

If I were selling this coin to you, I would be ethically obligated to tell you the history of the coin while it was in my possession and the price would be lowered accordingly. You would also have received both a before and after picture on the coin to help you make a decision on the purchase.

Sure the fingerprint wasn't the best...but the coin just doesn't look its age now...it looks like someone gave it a make over.

The fingerprint was actually pretty disgusting. No was(is) going to purchase that coin. A make over is exactly what happened.

If you really want to clean off fingerprints and such I would suggest pure Acetone...and only for a few sec...But DON'T rub....

I don't think acetone will remove fingerprints after a certain amount of time. I tried it on this coin, which is also now in my junk bag.

Linda

 

You CERTAINLY can tell its dipped if you look close enough. We had a whole discussion on the affect of dipping on the microscopic flow lines of the metal. As a fact, dipping is a chemical reaction with a reducing agent or an acid designed to remove part of the coins material.

This is damage. There is no other way to dispassionately look at it. All resortoration damages the object. Its the first rule of resoration. Everything else stated in this thread about dipping and cleaning is opinion, except this statement and related statements about the actual chemical and physical results of dipping. Dipping and "cleaning" a coin damages a coin EVERY TIME. Your using a chemical to react with the coin and remove a layer that you don't want. If it didn't, nobody would do it.

Toning is the oxidation of a coins surface from Au + O2 ==> AuO2

How in the world can you remove this without removing part of the coin? Do you really think this can't be spotted under a microscope? You can try to reduce the material back to plane silver but don't bet on keeping the surface the way it was. This is not theory. Its not about what someone might like or prefer. Its about the physical and chemical processes that stress the coin.

Real cleaning of a material is a Physical event only. Like removing grease from a shirt with soap. And even that is damaging to the shirt.

Ruben

 

Have to say that I dont mind buying a cleaned coin as quite often it might be the only way for me to gain that coin :smile and of course given time it will regain its toning. I dont like coins that have obviously been scrubbed with brasso etc LOL

De Orc

 

I'm not so sure about this statement Ruben. There seems to be a few folks at the Smithsonian who would also disagree with this satement, or so I have been let to believe.

Talked to a friend who had just returned from a visit to the Smithwonian, and while there was told by one of the people who work there that they use a certain polish on all their silver, gold, copper and copper alloys (bronze, brass and nickel) artifacts on display. They claimed that this was in the form of a wax and it was applied to everything including paper, parchment and you name it and it gets a coat. He was told that it is chemically neutral and contains no acids. These people are in the game of conserving, so should know what they are talking about. He called it Renaissance Wax and comes from England where it is made. I looked it up and found it called "microcrystalline wax". So maybe there is something that could be used to prevent all the damage that is caused by just laying around in unsafe environments.

Having now said what I did, I will admit that I don't know if they use it on their coin collection. But then again, they view these articles as pieces of display and want them to be as nice looking as they can make them, without having to clean them up every day or two. I may be worth looking into a little deeper. What say you?

 

They apparently use it at the British Museum and from what I gather this includes on the coins

De Orc :goofer:

 

It may be time now for the coin collecting community to reconsider lacquering of coins.

With modern science and technology, perhaps a safe, hard, and unnoticeable coat of lacquer could be one answer for long term preservation of coins, and without the thickness and yellowing of past lacquer applications that most collectors distain.

 

Linda
Sometimes it takes a few days for acetone to work through a fingerprint..

Wrong...about 90% of all Morgan Dollars have been dipped at one point in time but many of them have been slabbed...and many people don't think they look dipped....experts can miss a dipping sometimes.

Speedy

 

This is not correct. Just because an 'expert' choses to miss it doesn't mean that the footprint of a chemical dip can't be found. Of course it can. You just have to look for it correctly and know what your looking for.

BTW, the statement that "90% of all Morgan Dollars" is not substanteated and almost certainly not true. But this is entirely a different issue as to weather cleaning the coin damages it or not. Argumentively speaking, its called a red herring.

Ruben

 

Hot wax and buff!

Ruben

 

I can only comment on the chemistry of it since that's the only thing I have a degree and exprertise in. If you put a foriegn substance intentionally on a coin, eventualy it ages and reacts with a coin, especially since the coin is metal. Metal is very chemically active, except perhaps gold under nornmal conditions. But even gold will coause a voltage with another substance. Once you put a wax on a coin, it would be nearly impossble to safelty remove it in the future.

Most of the knowledgable coin collectors I've spoken with disdain the Smithsonian's treatment of coins. They base their opinions on the instituions polishing of the coins.

Ruben

 

Wrong---dipping can be done and no one can tell it...no hairlines...no dull luster...you just have to know how....

I would like to know how you can say that??...this is info that has been put together by experts in the coin world and by grading Co. and by people who know....it is true...how many WHITE Morgans do you see...a WHITE coin doesn't just stay that way....a RED Cent just doesn't stay that way without help.....a coin starts to tone from the min. it is struck...air hits the coin and it starts to tone...from that min. on a coin starts to tone its not going to stay that way for 100+ years white....a RED cent just isn't going to stay red without a dipping or maybe a recoloring...
I will say that there are FEW good WHITE and RED coins that aren't dipped...but the vast number is dipped.

Again...I don't know how you can say that or what proof you have.

Speedy

 

How exactly are you finding this footprint? Microscope or common sense (i.e. a 100 year old silver coin is blast white, so clearly it was dipped)?

Of the untoned uncirculated Morgans, a large percentage of them have been dipped at some time. You can easily tell an original Morgan from a dipped one if you know what they look like. What you usually find in the marketplace are dipped.

 

All I could find out about this stuff is as follows: (I believe somewhere around the early 1950's)

International conservationists directed a scientist from the British Museum to conduct research and find a "preservative." When he could not find any that met their exacting standards, he created a new one in his laboratory. The revolutionary formula he invented is a semi-synthetic microcrystalline fossil-origin wax entirely free of, damaging acids.
It remains chemically neutral and is therefore completely safe, even on vulnerable surfaces.

Like you, I also have heard collectors who aren't very thrilled with the way the Smithsonian handles their coin collection. But then I got to thinking and came up with the fact that maybe the reason for this feeling is because the Smithsonian isn't at all interested in selling or having their collection graded by TPG'ers and they never place their collection in those plastic coffins.