How do I spot fake desert patina?

I found this affordable AE but I’m not so sure about this desert patina. Are there any good indicators for real vs fake patina?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

if the coins have been in the hands of someone who's name starts with an A or Z its screaming FAKE! as far as the patina goes.

 

Not all sand patina is "fake"; however, many sellers have an affinity to enhance their coins using a fake patina to highlight devices which are not strong. One way to be a little more certain is to buy from well known dealers and to avoid those dealers suggested by @ominus1. To be certain, you need the coin in hand. One of our posters, @TIF, has found some dealers have used "makeup" to make it appear as sandy patina. Depending on the price, I would take a chance with this coin barring that it was not being sold by dealers notorious for applying fake patina.

 

if patina is fake it would be better "spread"on the coin,

 

here a coin of mine, with does "probably"have sand put on it.

 

The OP coin patina does not appear to be fake.

That coin comes from a desert area where many of the coins found look like that.

 

Appears genuine to me.

 

Here is another with fake sand patina from my collection:

AUGUSTUS
AE As
OBVERSE: DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER, radiate head left
REVERSE: S-C either side of large altar, PROVIDENT in ex.
Rome 22-30 AD
10.5g, 28mm
RIC I (Tiberius) 81

 

I agree with the others that this one is not applied. Unfortunately I think you need to handle a lot of examples to know a fake patina. He is my example of that coin.

 

LOL, reminds me of the "Naturally Toned" or "Artificially Toned" discussions, video and seminar presentations, etc. that have been especially numerous since the late 1980's!

This is only as complicated as we choose to make it. First, I'll clue you in to a very dark secret and then I'll offer my personal solution.

Depending on what we collect, the number of "non-original" coins on the market can be as high as 95%! When a coin is altered in any way it can improve it or ruin it. When the coin is improved, it is a good thing and no one will know. When a coin is altered in a "bad" way that can be detected, it is ruined for "picky" collectors.

Now the secret. More coins than you can imagine are altered and the alteration is undetectable or so good that it does not matter.

Now my personal opinion. I don't care (I'll stick to ancients) if the OP's coin has been altered in any way because it LOOKS OK to me and others posting! I found my collecting interests are much less stressful with that approach. Get a little education (as the OP is doing) and then try my approach.

 

I wish I were more confident in this question. I imagine that we condemn a certain number of good coins when, in fact, their only problem was that the cleaner was careful not to remove the sand that once covered the entire coin with great skill making the details show through and the fields fully covered. I avoid any coin that has a surface texture that is filled with sand but does not look reasonable to have existed before the coin went into the sand long ago. Cleaning scratches should not be filled with sand. Neither should corrosion pits unless we believe the coin was scratched and corroded two thousand years ago and then dropped in the dirt. I look at such coins under magnification and decide if I believe or doubt. Judging with certainty from photos is not a skill in my set.

 

Simple solution to those who worry about alterations. Click on sellers other sales. Examine all of their lots. If they exhibit a range of surfaces they are most probably not altered in any way. If they ALL show signs of the same surface tampering they most likely have been altered. That is especially true if the coins cover a large range of dates and time periods. A previous poster showed a lot of coins that all exhibited the same orange tone. A follow up poster then showed lots of coins with a yellow tone.

 

Thanks everyone! This input has been valuable for me. I’m always trying to learn and everybody here is always so helpful.

 

I know people prefer short replies. Complicated questions take more, so I hope the reader has patience.

There is no one test that will cover all the bases. Here are some pointers in how to regard sand patina, from my own limited experience. I offer this for whatever it is worth to you.

1. How much sand patina are you seeing? Since fake sand patina is intended to enhance the appearance of the coin, sand patina which does not do this (as in the case here) is more likely to be authentic. However, authentic sand patina can also look very attractive, depending upon the degree of original coverage and the skill of the person doing the initial cleaning of the coin. So this "test" alone is not enough in a case like that. It helps to know that prior to the most modern faking methods well preserved sand patina was comparatively rare.

2. Q-tip test. Natural sand patina is composed of tiny particles of sand which are clumped together in a matrix of other material from the ground. The trick in making fake sand patina is finding the combination of substances that will emulate that matrix, when added to a powdery sand, and still brush onto the surface and adhere. Shellacs, varnishes, and glues have all been used to accomplish this. Test a small part of the surface with a dab of turpentine or mineral spirits on a Q-tip to see if it causes the sand patina to gum up or decompose. If so, it is probable that the patina was artificially applied.

3. Thumb and forefinger. At "excavation" in removing an original accumulation of sand, it was necessary to buff the sand away. Cleaning it with oil would leave the sand patina looking discolored and smooth like stone. Rubbing a coin having genuine sand patina between the thumb and forefinger should begin to darken and smooth the "sand" surface a bit. However, when this is done on a polymer based finish, the texture and tone do not change as much. It's a judgment call that only comes with experience.

4. Test surface durability. Brushing an oil affected natural sand patina with a pliable bristle brush could restore the surface granularity of the sand and give it a brighter appearance, but this would appear particulate, as if covered with a fine-grain substance. Depending upon the tools and technique used this same treatment could leave a polymer based patina looking "distressed," i.e. surface shredded and irregular.

5. Fake until proven innocent. As an artificial patina, fake sand patina is the first choice when the original coin surface has blemishes such as pitting, scarring, or decomposition. Fake sand patina will cover over such blemishes and present a viewing surface with enhanced contrast, allowing design features to stand out. Since the only way to determine the actual condition of the metallic surface is to remove the "sand" there is some justification to regarding coins with a sand patina as having damage until proven sound.

 

It occurs to me that 'sand patina' is a misnomer. As it has become a hot button topic here for some years I have to think back and wonder at where this term originates. As a dealer for some 30 years I think back and for the life of me I cant remember where or when this term originated. Certainly it wasn't around in the 80's nor the 90's (that I am aware of). Maybe not even the 00's. I dont really know. Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but I've never run into anyone who ever used the term, except online within the last decade.

Nevertheless, sand doesn't create a patina. Patina and sand are mutually exclusive. Sand could be (but I have never seen it nor has anyone ever mentioned it) be an adhesion to the surface of a coin.

So, what could it be? Well, obviously what we are seeing is soil and not sand. Soil adhesions are often a very good indicator of where a coin originates. Often the color and type which are so contentious here in discussion are actually very common and expected of coins which are found in various places.

How does one tell if it is modern or ancient? Well, thats the debate, and has been discussed. I wont get into that. I just wanted to point out that this term is actually incorrect.

 

This one I suspect of having "sand" applied but not sure. This was not a well known seller and I don't remember what his other coins looked like. maybe I will check it out. The investment was not that big though.

 

Greetings Johnnie—Your question is an excellent one and there is a good deal of truth to what @ominus1 said about a couple of the dealers who are rather frequent enhanced patina applicators —however all A dealers and all Z dealers are not in the same category. Most of the dealers on VCOINS are selling coins with authentic patination. Don't include Ancient Imports in the A list and don't include Zuzim in the Z list. Both of those dealers have stellar reputations and can be totally trusted. Many of my coins are from the Levant region and the tan colored earthen mineralization is very natural.

Back when I was having my coins slabbed I had a few of them labeled "Repatinated" because of the applied desert patina on them. Most of the one hundred or so coins with desert patina that I submitted to NGC for slabbing had legitimate patination. I trust the opinions of NGC's Mr. Vagi and Mr. Murphy and 3 out of 100 is not bad.

 

This is only a dream for a research paper as in real life no one is going to pay the money to see if his "sand" passes muster for the region.

I should like to see a university group or the British Museum analyze coins found in the same regions with mineral encrustations when the source is undisputed. All soils are not the same. I know this has been done for the alloys in ancient coins.

 

Can someone PM me the A and Z dealers to avoid please? I know of one Z dealer from my time here so far...

Thanks again for the insight everyone. Really helps to know that a community like this is available for newbies like me.

 

I've moved my response to a PM.