XF45 VS AU50 w soft reverse strike

If you look at the devices, you will see a dark halo around them. This represents the previous layer of patina that was missed during the cleaning. Since then, the coin has retoned, and the new patina has built on top of the old one, making it darker.

Also the surfaces have a dull light grey, which is indicative of an old cleaning. I'm sure there are hairlines in-hand. This seated half I own has the same story on the obverse. Though you can't see it in the pictures, the obverse is covered in hairlines. Note the dark halo around the devices.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I certainly see the halo you speak of on your coin. The last one I posted, not so much - in hand the toning is even more consistent than in the pictures I posted. Not that I doubt your premise - but I just don't see it. I have seen coins with residual spots from cleaning - I don't see any of that sort. Perhaps, if you do, you could be more specific. And I don't see any hairlines with 10x magnification. I can see that the toning on your coin is irregular and the toning at the edges/rim has been disrupted. Again, not the case on the last one I posted. However, I'm still interested in whatever specific characteristics you can identify that would indicate previous cleaning.

 

Your half I can see was dipped once. The seated dollar I see no evidence of cleaning. It looks really original to me and the halos are the original luster in the devices

 

I agree with @Mainebill. Your pictures are showing me a nice, original seated dollar. In hand you might see hairlines, in which case, maybe don't jump on it right away, but I think what you've got there is a nice, original-looking coin. I hope I look that good at 176. A circulated coin that age should look the way that one does.

Also, notice that the halos you see on the dollar around the devices (most prominently around the stars) are actually lighter than the fields. That's a sign of remaining luster, not cleaning. Dark halos are a bad sign. Light halos not so much.

I doubt this coin was cleaned, but let your eyes and your loupe be the judge.

 

So you don't see this dark outline around the devices that is plainly evident from your pictures? I see the halo on your coin more easily than mine.



I don't have your coin in hand, so I cannot comment on the hairlines.

In hand, the toning on the half is an even steel grey. The colors are the result of my lighting setup. No irregular toning is present. The patch of irregularity at 5:00 is the result of someone trying to scrape away a datk spot.

How can you tell that? I can assure you this coin has never been dipped. The obverse has had a mechanical cleaning, while the reverse is completely pristine and original. There are no hairlines present.

No. Luster has a brighter halo, not a darker one. Look at the 1842 and 1825 halves you posted to see what I mean.

Here is an example of residual luster around the stars. Note the lighter color. Contrast that with the dark halo to the right of Liberty's arm and drapery.

 

I don't think there is sufficient evidence to convict! Particularly because the toning on the 1840 $ is completely intact around the edges (not the case with the half), the lighter areas look to me like exactly the areas where a circulated coin would have changed color due to actual people touching it repeatedly - that is what happens when a coin is circulated, right? This pattern matches exactly the patterns I've seen on silver coins with severe/heavy toning - bordering on, or identified as environmental damage by PCGS. There are areas in the fields where the toning/damage is worn off. However, this is only non-expert observation and maybe some common sense! If a coin has been dipped enough to remove toning, it seems logical that the toning in protected areas would be gone - or left even with the toning in the fields - as it is in the xf45 example in original two coins I posted - and on the obverse of the 1858 dollar that was posted.

It warms my heart to see how reasonable people have different perspectives on this!

"So you don't see this dark outline around the devices that is plainly evident from your pictures? I see the halo on your coin more easily than mine". Actually, no. Because the "halo" on your dollar is focused and literally around the devices, and the darker toning you reference on the dollar I posted is wider and in all of the unprotected areas with equal measure, i.e., the toning around the edges isn't outlining anything!

 

I've been doing research on the toning of circulated coins, and this was a point that was brought up. I may have to rethink that diagnostic for cleaned coins. I would like to examine your coin in hand under my lighting to get a better idea of what I am looking at and seeing in the pictures.

Here is an example of a SLH that I think is completely original. Upon closer scrutiny, I see the dark halo indicative of the circulation patters you described. Perhaps I just don't like the higher contast on your coin as that is what I have seen on most retoned cleaned coins I have handled. Again, those were in-hand, and all I have here to judge are pictures.

 

It has been pointed out in some other threads that various issues do age differently and it's difficult to identify specific patterns or patterns that indicate originality among silver coinage. Nice SLH.

 

The dollar I posted is your dollar.

 

I was referring to the coin you posted - I guess it was a half-dollar. I think I knew which was which - probably (the 1858 - I take it that was a half dollar?)

 

I can't say I'm positive on which coin we're talking about any longer, so I'll offer opinions on both.

The original AU50 coin with the PVC - something I never mentioned because of the PVC discussion - should have graded Damaged (because of the marks on the shield and the scratch thru the third left star, too much for an AU coin although they'd probably ride if it were VF20) and is beyond a doubt (to me) cleaned. All you have to do is look under the date and at 5:00 obverse to see what didn't get removed. In fact, I'll bet the PVC came from the container it was put into after that cleaning - PVC flips have only been invented during my lifetime.

The "follow-up" coin - Post #56 - is a tougher study. Contemplate: These coins circulated in a day and age when, in the cities at least, atmospheric sulfur was present at levels which would cause the EPA to blow a gasket and fall out. Ever notice how dark Seated and Barber coinage can get? That's because the atmosphere of the Industrial Age was so poisonous.

So - and it's something few seem to factor into their thinking - we have to contemplate the probability of the coin toning while continuously in circulation. This can lead - mind, I'm theorizing here, not stating fact - to a look where the periphery of the coin is dark while the areas capable of being finger-rubbed stay clean. Don't forget, baths were....less common back then and even the average pocket was a pretty dirty place. I wonder how much of that is silver sulfide, and how much would come off in soap & water?

So that one's a far more complex evaluation to me. I know silver toned far faster and far more deeply in those days - Seated and Barber coinage - and the "circulation cameos" we (mostly) love prove it. It's tough for me to believe that circulation cameos weren't caused by dark-toned coins being handled in circulation. With that in mind, I cannot apply the "traditional" rules of halos and "clean" fields to issues which circulated at the end of the 19th Century - they deserve rules all their own.

To make a long story short, I think it very likely this second coin is righteous and original. But in view of the above, I cannot and never will be sure.

 

Well said, SuperDave (as usual)

 

I have very little experience in identifying problem coins. How did you notice the pvc plasticizer problem and what books can I buy to help detect problems on coins such as dipped, artificial toning, etc. Your help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

 

Look at the circled areas:



See the greenish tint (also in other areas not circled)? That's a dead giveaway for PVC plasticizer infection. It is a color which can occur in the toning progression, but not on its' own like that. Whenever you see this color, assume you're looking at PVC and treat the coin accordingly.

 

Just a quick comment as I need to read this thread. Seems we all understand the "Halo effect" that is seen around a coin's relief. That's a good thing as it is a very helpful indication of originality.

In my experience the color of the halo can be DARK or LUSTROUS on original coins; however, in most cases "light" is best.