Before and After

The fact others say that about you indicates something.
I believe it stems from always having an explainable reason.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Three fourth-graders? Well, that explains a lot!

 

I know that there are things you can layer onto a coin to change its color, but my impression was that the AT most people are worried about is exactly the same reaction that causes NT, producing exactly the same chemical alteration to the coin's surface.

If the coin at the thread's start has a surface film, wouldn't it come right off with the proper solvent, unlike chemical toning (natural or artificial)?

 

That largely depends on what was used to create the artificial toning. Some AT methods do create the same silver sulfide reaction, albeit at an accelerated pace or with unusual air or fluid flow patterns (hence the splotchy appearance some AT coins have). Some AT methods just leave a film on the surface which can be removed. However, some AT methods use chemicals which interact with the surface in a different way than the silver sulfide. These may etch into the surface, or may stain the surface deep enough that a dip won't remove the evidence. There are many ways to AT a coin, and I don't know which one was used here - some of them can be conserved to remove the AT, and some of them can't.

 

Okay. My attention has mostly been focused on the sulfide-based AT, since it doesn't come off in solvent and can't be distinguished by any chemical analysis method. I figured most significant AT offenders would be using that and skipping the easily-detected methods.

 

I started this thread questioning the toning but the more I look at the replies it goes further than that. According to an article in Coin World magazine this is an Overton 107 variety of which only three are known which makes me wonder all the more how it slipped past the graders. With so few out there, you would think the TPG would have been more careful when examining the coin, and had their top people on it. There are definite marks on the obverse and reverse indicating they are the same coin that sold at auction in Nov. 2018. If the experts who pointed this out, hadn't done so, what then?

 

That is part of how it goes and that is why some of these experts can be very valuable. We hear that graders go through the process quickly, but it makes you wonder if they should slow down a bit to ensure better accuracy (especially with rarities like this).

 

I don't know what was done to the coin but it didn't turn out well. It may have looked better after being worked on but changed after a while.

Many coins that are cleaned and put in new holders will start changing really fast depending on how they are stored. The cleaning takes away toning that was actually protecting the surfaces. The fresh surfaces can do all kinds of crazy stuff.

 

Yeah, fresh surfaces could also be called "activated". That's why I have been thinking that after any acceptable cleaning process, there should be care taken in assuring the surface is clean and passivated.

 

So, how would you passivate silver in a market-acceptable way?

(quick consult with Google)

Hexavalent chromium? Ick. And if there is a way to passivate silver without impairing its reflectivity, I wonder why no telescope makers take advantage of it, instead of using less-reflective but more-durable aluminum...

 

I think aluminum is much cheaper than silver, and the aluminization process is cheaper, more durable and easier than silvering.

 

Good question, wish I had a good answer. Keeping the silver under distilled water would allow an oxide coat to form...???

 

Is it possible that the submitter was a large volume submitter and it got "pushed" through because of that ????

 

No proof Bust Half gets "pushed through." These are legitimately rare coins worth many tens of thousands of dollars. I would have thought that this coin would have been subjected to a bit more extensive analysis than a generic Morgan dollar.... but I guess I'd be wrong.

 

What sorts of controls and audits are in place to prevent:

1) Routing a "special" submission to a pre-selected, pre-informed set of graders

2) "Mentioning" in a morning meeting that a particular few coins are coming through, and that "there's a lot riding" on the decisions made for those coins

3) During a discussion between a finalizer and graders where there's a "disagreement", having someone bring up some "relevant mitigating factors" involving who submitted the coin

I'm not saying that any of these things are happening. I don't move in those circles, and I generally don't submit coins or buy slabbed coins, so I have no personal anecdotes. But I have been working lately in a heavily regulated and audited industry, where blinded processes are a very big deal, and we're taught to think about these sorts of things.

 

I would!
LOL
The TPG's changed the hobby. They have established themselves as THE authority.
Yet, its possible to get an AT crackout with that kind of grade?
Heck, at least those Chinese knock offs are cheap!