Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;John Burgess, post: 7890200, member: 105098&quot;]I think, and just an opinion, the coin was toned and it was heading dark, otherwise it wasn&#039;t gunked up. I would think they thought the coin would benefit from stripping off the toning with a dip, and the only real reason conservation would have been requested. if it was gunk they would have done acetone or xylene which wouldn&#039;t&#039; of affected the toning.</p><p><br /></p><p>the issue at hand though is the coin was cleaned at some point earlier, acetone, or even a coin dip, when done correctly will not details a coin for cleaning, only doing it wrong, by a damaging method would do that.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think the coin was damaged from an improper cleaning, and toned to hide the cleaning damage, which is unfortunate, but I guess it would be likely worse to have not conserved it, and been told it was cleaned still. </p><p><br /></p><p>&nbsp;is this a clash possibly on the reverse? F-121 Reverse T maybe?[/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