Why is Preservation such a bad thing?

I'm an archaeologist and I've restored just about every sort of artifact you can think of, but I am new to the world of U.S. Coins.

Proper professional restoration of coins shouldn't decrease their value. It doesn't in many other branch of numismatics. In fact it has exactly the opposite effect.

Why is it in U.S. currency that cleaning the coating of bacterial filth off a coin considered such a grievous sin; besides the coin grading companies having a monopoly on the service?

Details of "Cleaned": Not "Improperly Cleaned", "Harshly Cleaned" or "Whizzed", but just "Cleaned" still results in a details non-grade.

Had you paid the firm for restoration/preservation of the coin, the removal of the same potentially corrosive and usually biologically active residues, it would come out with a clean grade.

I don't understand. Is this just like movie theatre popcorn and a captive audience or is there something about U.S. currency that makes it impossible to clean properly.

I suppose if you are good enough the company would never know you did it, but it just seems absurd that bacterial matting makes something more gross in both senses of the word.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I acetone board bacterial filth before putting them in flips.

 

It's my understanding that well-conserved coins get clean grades from TPG's quite frequently. Is this not true?

 

Properly conserved coins are market acceptable and will receive numerical grades from TPGs. Coins that are bent, show corrosion, have hairlines from improper cleaning or album slide marks will get details grades. Initially, the intention was to promote sight unseen trading, but this never really panned out because not all coins of equal grades are created equal.

 

Since I collect ancients, ALL of my coins have been cleaned, and even the few moderns I collect get a bath in acetone, for the removal of biological and/or otherwise unsavory matter. At first I was apprehensive about cleaning coins because of the relentless mantra among US collectors about NOT cleaning coins. So I bought a handful of the dirtiest, most worthless coins I could find for practice. Here's one example that was covered in PVC gunk, before and after...



I don't believe an acetone bath could ever be considered improper cleaning. Taking a scrub brush or electricity to a coin is a different matter.

 

@Daenegger, I think you may be getting some of the terminology here confused. If a coin is deemed "Cleaned" by a third party grader then it's been determined to be improperly cleaned or harshly cleaned. The grading services don't use the same terminology but it means the same thing - a coin that shows evidence of a cleaning. The market has determined that these coins are less valuable then coins that show no signs of cleaning. Now a coin can be cleaned and show no trace and that is considered acceptable while another coin that has been cleaned is covered in hairlines or luster breaks and is less desirable. Does this make sense? It's not that it has been "cleaned" or not but if the cleaning has damaged or altered the coin in some way.

 

Given the hyperbole, I'm not certain if you are a troll or not...

 

I'm not a troll. My dexterity skill is way too low.

There is no hyperbole present; just genuine curiosity and excellent grammer with terrable spelling.

I am actually an archaeologist and preservationist who happened to recently became interested in American coins after splitting up my deceased grandfather's collection between my siblings, cousins and myself.

My background lies in prehistoric archaeology and I have a fair collection of Roman Denarius. I'm well versed in the preservation of silver coins.

Both NGC and PCGS will give a details grade that just says cleaned without further explanation. A quick scroll through Ebay will turn up several hundred of them.

I was and still am wondering at the rationale of keeping coins filthy just for the sake of keeping them filthy.

A side note on the hyperbole: I'm very good at what I do and the idea that doing professional grade conservation myself would somehow devalue my coin(s) is very strange and unsettling.

 

It is 100% possible to clean a coin and have it grade. I speak from experience. However, to answer your question, yes, the TPGs do it for the monopoly on the service as well as the duties performed whilst grading. If a coin is inspected and has evidence of cleaning, it is cleaned, period end of sentence. It gets, and deserves the details grade. And that is the key, if it is evident, it is improperly cleaned. Part of the comfort of buying a slabbed coin is the reassurance you know exactly what it is you are getting. I want that security, you want it too. Now, if you know what you are doing, you can clean a coin properly, and with your archeological background, I do not think it would take you much time if any to properly do so. Just start out on a cheapie, not a key date or rarity. I have some before and after photos of a Kennedy I experimented on that I will try to find to give you an idea of what I, a non-expert, is capable of.

 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I personally stay away from cleaned coins, and even dipped coins. For example I prefer a TPG 65 BN Indian cent to a TPG 65 RB Indian cent, the RB from what I've seem almost all of them appear to be dipped. Frankly, I find a bright shiny Indian cent to be unattractive, knowing of course it was recently dipped. I don't care if its got the "sticker" on there or not. However collecting is subjective, and I never knock anyone who enjoys collecting coins in whatever way they wish.

 

I don't think it's fair to compare the conservation of ancient and modern coins. US coins, by comparison to the coins I collect, are ALL brand-spanking new, even the ones dated 1793. They have not accrued the effects of time that 2000-year-old coins have. Since you're an archaeologist, I don't have to tell you that most ancient coins MUST be cleaned, unless you like collecting unidentifiable clumps of dirt.

Uncleaned, or properly restored US coins have a certain "skin" to them, a luster and/or color that is easily stripped by harsh cleaning. Over-dipping coins can leave them with a very lifeless, drab appearance. Whizzing will make them look shiny from a distance, but on closer inspection, you'll see that the surfaces of the coin are destroyed.

But as other posters have attested, TPG's frequently give grades to coins that have been properly conserved. We're not really discussing the virtues of cleaned-versus-uncleaned here, as much as what is and what isn't proper conservation.

 

In his book about Type I Double Eagles, Doug Winter includes an interesting description (by Bob Evans) of how the coins from the SS Central America shipwreck were "restored". Apparently there was some experimentation involved in finding the best way to remove foreign material without damaging the coins - and it seems they were quite successful.

 

Cleaned in general doesn't mean "not filthy." Removing surface dirt and grime in such a manner as the surface metal oxides are not disturbed (acetone, or even a soak in water if we're actually talking about dirt) is almost always acceptable. What is not acceptable is abrasive cleaning or chemically stripping the oxides in such a manner as to make the coin look like the oxides were stripped. Note that wiping a coin with a towel can look like abrasive cleaning if there were loose dirt particles on the coin.

Without knowing how your results would look on the coins you have, I can't tell whether your professional cleaning would be acceptable or not. Find a circulated, dirty silver Washington quarter, show us before and after pictures, and we'll comment.

 

Probably in your profession , you have seen museum coin collections including US coins. Most of them are what would properly be classified as altered surface~ harsh cleaning, polishing, use of dental explorers and picks, and even covering with an organic wax material to protect. Since many dug coins would be poor to present without this, they would be considered damaged by today's surface conscious collectors. But as few observers would get close enough to them, they would appear perfectly acceptable , as larger details would be sharp, and the scratches 'invisible'. The members who collect ancient coins on this site generally has a different idea as to what is acceptable , including bristle ( some metal) cleaning of debris , electrolysis, strong chemicals, etc. And since that is generally acceptable within that group, it is common. The US coin member who want to tell a MS70 from a MS?? cleaned with microscopic scratches ( maybe only visible as luster breaks) will write threads with 20+ pages of posts. I don't agree with either group completely, so you will find variations in acceptance. Some say one's eyes become less as you age, but what your brain can perceive through experience makes up for it. Welcome to the forum! Jim

 

Just to be clear, among collectors of ancients, yes, bristle cleaning is fine as long as it only removes dirt and does not scratch the coin. Electrolysis is always bad, especially when it comes to bronze, as it strips the coin of its patina. Chemicals are fine, again, if they do not damage the surface of silver or patina of bronze.

 

My apologies John, I am glad to hear that about electrolysis. Many in both groups of collectors use it as a 'secret or proprietary' cleaning method. In the group of chemicals you mention, I assume that includes organic ( olive or such) and inorganic oils that could damage/alter the bronze surfaces, although I still see them and stiff bristle brushes mentioned in many cleaning threads. Have those been replaced?
Thanks for the info for us. Jim

 

I don't know the specifics, Jim, as I don't clean coins myself. But just about any application is acceptable as long as it doesn't damage the coin. Toning is moot, because after thousands of years, newly-discovered silver will always be black. Once the dirt is removed from silver coins, they almost always get dipped. Sometimes they re-tone to pleasing colors, but most of my silver is blast-white.

The old methods of cleaning bronze, soaking in distilled water and olive oil, and gently scrubbing or picking away the dirt have been supplanted by chemical treatments. These have become sophisticated enough to dissolve dirt without damaging patina. In fact, they are preferable to any sort of scrubbing, because scrubbing always comes with the danger of scratching. Two members of this forum have given me the recipes for such chemical treatment, but I have not saved them as I don't clean coins.

Electrolysis is taboo - way too harsh. There's nothing that looks worse than a ancient bronze that's as shiny as a newly-minted penny.

 

Thanks, I appreciate the update. I have used BadThad's solutions on bronze ancients ( my son has a thing for them) with good result with out any major change in any patina present.

 

Thank you for the help guys and thank you forum moderator for explaining the wide variety of things that can fall under a generic tag of cleaned without further explanation to the person who paid to have the coin graded.

As far as my success rate is concerned I went a step further and bought some improperly cleaned coins processed them and sent them back in. They all came back downgraded to just cleaned.

I also haven't had any coins I cleaned come back other than cleaned or without details. Usually it's the case that it was cleaned poorly already once before I took the filth off of it.

Just as a heads up: acetone is inferior to acetic acid for killing bacteria and stripping off residues. It's harsher and it's vapor point is way too low to actually be useful. Both leave the same antimicrobial and water repellent surface treatment.