Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 100430, member: 112&quot;]The luster may still be there. But it isn&#039;t readily apparent in the pics, and this may be due to the pics themselves. With luster &amp; coin pics you always have to take this into consideration. Scanners do a lousy job of capturing luster unless you use a few tricks. And some folks have a heck of time capturing luster in a pic with a digital camera.</p><p><br /></p><p>But if I viewed this coin in hand and no luster was visible under the toning, then yes I would assume the coin had been over-dipped because there is not enough wear to have removed all the luster. And I say dipped instead of harshly cleaned because there are no real tell tale marks or abrasions like you would get if the coin were cleaned with a soft brush or cloth and cleaning agent.</p><p><br /></p><p>But that is why this coin underwent what it did. It is semi-important and worth a few bucks. But nobody in their right mind would buy a badly corroded example - except perhaps as a filler. So in order to maximize the sales price, somebody cleaned this coin and retoned it.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in