Cleaned or not cleaned 1877cc seated liberty dime

I'm not arguing with you. Words have meanings. The more we all understand the usage the more we can visualize things. I'm not saying you are wrong. You can choose whatever words you wish BUT THEN your description goes over my head and I don't understand what you are saying. Yes, I see something unusual in the right field of the OP's coin. If someone chose to call it a "hole" I would try to have him change his view, Just as I would if someone said the coin had a scrape. In my world, and I'll even bring in the world of countless grading seminars, there is no "scrape" on the coin.

I bring up grading seminars because for the most part in the ones I have been in, the first day is spent defining the numismatic terms we will be using so that when one student sees a "scratch" at 10 o'clock all the others in the class know what he/she considers a scratch and where to look for it.

The more education we all can bring to everyone the better it is. I'll bet we could all spend a day defining all the different degrees/types of scratches & scrapes and the differences between them. Not saying I'm correct but at least you and I have been open for a good discussion. I definitely got a great idea from your posts so THANKS!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Will you go with "LIGHTLY brushed?"

 

How about a light scratch on the reverse? (Upper left quadrant). I only mention it because a modern coin wouldn't grade clean with such a mark. The obverse is porous, especially the field to the right. Again, maybe this is overlooked with older, low grade coins but I think it can still be mentioned.

 

I'll just go with wiped.

 

I'll just go with a circulated coin. We don't know and will never know if those very faint scratches occurred in circulation or by a collector. I picture a kid rubbing it too strongly across a wood surface in 1899 causing it, but we will never know.

 

I had a coin get caught under a desk interior drawer in my 250 year old desk (ca 1750-65) and get fine scratches like this. It's a very good chance what happened to this. Was a low grade barber quarter in my junk silver drawer

 

That is a nice "hit" on the reverse at 10 O'clock and a shiny, silver scratch at 5. IMO, this coin will be straight graded anywhere and sold as such "raw." Those fine hairlines are typically found on old coins. In fact, very minor hairlines like this can be caused on dark, old, gray circulated coins (especially the larger 18th Century pieces) when they are at a grading service. Next time you are at a show, take a look at some of the coins in slabs under bright light. Tip and rotate the coin and they will pop out. I've seen old toned bust dollars with a bright "patch" of FRESH hairlines where its surface color was disturbed.

 

@ldhair Just a suggestion and not an argument: While we all know what it means to wipe something with a rag or across a shirt, etc. I've learned that the professional's at TPGS's and seminar instructors have applied that word (without our say) to describe a shiny, often PL patch on a coin where a "wheel" of some type left a group of parallel lines INTO the coin's surface. I do not claim this is a correct definition of their usage but it should convey the meaning of that word as they use it. I personally call this characteristic a "Wheel Mark." As such, IMO there are no wipes or wheel marks on the OP's coin, only some hairlines.

Now, taking your side and that of @TypeCoin971793, there is an unusual patch of color in the right field. IMO, there is an extremely thin chance that something more than a few hairlines (like across "Liberty's" head) could have happened to that spot in the past. Nevertheless, it just looks like some rubbed-off gray toning only slightly more than on the other fields.

 

A Modern coin worn all the way into the rims would receive the same consideration as a Classic - a mark like that is generally considered "condition-appropriate" for a coin that worn.

 

I think the coin was just laying there when a small rat ran across it. It slid across something and left the tiny scratches.
Just for the fun of it. Would this coin straight grade at PCGS or NGC?

 

In my opinion? Likely.

 

I agree, and I agree it should. Its a well circulated coin, having been used in commerce like it was intended. As such, it should be given the benefit of the doubt. Same issues on an AU or BU coin, not so much.

 

+1

 

Just out of curiosity, could a coin be artificially toned so that it looks dark like that? I ask because it's possible it was wire brushed harshly on obverse, then possibly darkened up to hide it. I see some cleaning/abrasion glimmering through on the obverse, so I don't think we can rule out harsh cleaning from just one picture. Yes it's low grade and some of us are being supercritical, but it's also a coveted CC coin and may have been touched up to cover up something more unsightly.

 

Easily; that's the natural end-stage state of toning, and the chemical process of AT is identical to NT. Had it been done the way you're theorizing, though, the lines on the obverse would be toned too, and not catching the light the way they do in the OP's pics.

 

Folks, just about all of you need to CHANGE YOUR PERSONAL DEFINITION OF HARSH CLEANING! Your standards are NUTS and that is not just my opinion.

Take a coin, any coin out of your pocket, Scrub it with bathroom cleanser, then take a pencil erasure and scrub it, then finish off with a Brillo pad. Look at the coin. That's what HARSH CLEANING LOOKS LIKE. Learn it.

The OP's coin has NEVER been harshly cleaned!

 

I honestly think you could have stopped there...and I bet you agree with me.

 

I am thinking of TPG grading. Are you telling me they only details grade coins like you describe? Are you kidding? Have you never seen a minimally cleaned coin details graded as cleaned? I guess their actual wording is "improperly" cleaned. This includes harsh cleaning and light cleaning. There's no difference to them. My usage was just substituting harsh for improper. In any case, the point of my question was to ask if this coin would grade clean or not - and I don't think there's a definitive answer from that pic. If a coin is given a details grade due to cleaning, I think it's appropriate to say it was harshly done; otherwise, it would have graded. Note that harsh has 2 meanings: 1) rough to the eyes or other senses; 2) severe or cruel. Even the second meaning could apply if you're comparing an uncleaned/market-acceptable coin to a lightly cleaned one.

 

@joecoincollect said: I am thinking of TPG grading. So am I Are you telling me they only details grade coins like you describe? NO, I'm trying to get members who see a few hairlines on a coin to STOP calling them harshly cleaned. Are you kidding? Have you never seen a minimally cleaned coin details graded as cleaned? Yes actually, on a daily basis. I guess their actual wording is "improperly" cleaned. That's what they call it unless it is buffed, polished, or HARSHLY CLEANED!!! There are DEGREES of improperly cleaned coins. Some do not even show hairlines. This includes harsh cleaning and light cleaning. Yes, this is true... degrees. There's no difference to them. That's the problem I'm addressing here. Degrees matter. To call a coin with very light IMPROPER CLEANING (that would still rate a "details" grade) harshly cleaned is misleading nonsense that will confuse members who are not as knowledgeable as yourself. My usage was just substituting harsh for improper. Words mean things. Remember, degrees. To even suggest that the OP's coin is improperly cleaned is nonsense. However, I will grant you this due to the appearance of its OBVERSE (ONLY) surface. There are signs of old cleaning under the toning so sometime in the past the obverse was probably cleaned. In any case, the point of my question was to ask if this coin would grade clean or not - and I don't think there's a definitive answer from that pic. Perhaps not to you; but several posters including myself are of the opinion that it will straight grade. If a coin is given a details grade due to cleaning, I think it's appropriate to say it was harshly done ABSOLUTELY NOT! In my experience, TPGS professionals would not either; otherwise, it would have graded. I see no indication on this thread that the coin was EVER submitted to a TPGS. Note that harsh has 2 meanings: 1) rough to the eyes or other senses; NOT applicable to this coin. 2) severe or cruel. DITTO, as severe or cruel is not the case with this coin either. Even the second meaning could apply if you're comparing an uncleaned/market-acceptable coin to a lightly cleaned one.

Almost forgot. This post is entirely IMO. I hope you will agree with this.

 

The question I have is why would anyone send this to a tpg in the first place. The submission fees even in economy are what the coin is worth. I'd grade it at g-4. Pcgs lists that at $18 unless it had sentimental reasons I'd leave it raw