Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;coinman0456, post: 1001253, member: 18177&quot;]I would ask him if he is of the opinion,&nbsp; that all brilliant white encapsulated coinage , lacking any toning ,&nbsp; regardless of series or issue has been enhanced by this process prior to being encapsulated . I truly don&#039;t think that he would make such a statement . Now , I said before doug , I don&#039;t disagree that many pieces that exist in this condition , and&nbsp; encapsulated have been re-touched by this process. I&#039;m not debating that . But to simply say, because a coin is 100 years old and shows no indication of toning that it assuredly has been dipped , implies that all that exist in that condition have . That is simply un-true , and it is a mis-leading position . The statement comes across as being&nbsp; an absolute, and you know that it should not be taken that way or perhaps you do . I am well aware of some of the amazing results with this process if done properly . Do many collectors , even dealers do it, you bet they do . The way I hear you&nbsp; though , is that we should assume that ALLl of these similar condition coins most assuredly have been enhanced using this technique , and to have a truly &quot;original&quot; mint state specimen is an&nbsp; absolute impossibility because of the natural process that occurs more often than not , toning . I&#039;m not disagreeing with&nbsp; the premise that probably 85% or so have been worked in this manner . No argument there . I&#039;ll agree that it is probably more likely than not that most have been dipped, just not all .[/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