The "Wicked" White Thread (Bright White). Post yours as well....

Hello all. This thread is dedicated to all the "Bright White" coins out there. Please post one of yours too?
Here is just one of mine....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Good idea

 

@lordmarcovan when you get tired of looking at that seated dime....... I am Mister Blast White. Here's a couple I got decent photos saved of.

 

The "It's been dipped!" fanatics hate these two. I have gotten blow back when I have posted pictures of them in the past.

 

Washington Crossing the Delaware:

 

Let them hate all they want... And if that seated dime ever needs a loving home.....

 

The Seated Dime is the "No Drapery Type" made with dies by Christian Gobrecht. The micro type collectors also get the "With Drapery Type" which was struck with dies by Robert Ball Hughes who copied the Gobrecht design. Hughes' work features the same design, but it's not executed as well.

The "With Drapery" is the extra piece of cloth that comes down from Ms. Liberty's left elbow.

By Hughes



By Gobrecht






By Gobrecht

 

Gobrecht did much finer work.

 

Hughes did better work on the larger denominations. There was not a great deal of difference on the half dollar for example.

The Gobrecht "No Drapery" is a scarce partial year type coin.



Here is Hughes interpretation. The drapery is much smaller.

 

Ah, how quickly we forget. Or, more often, perhaps, don't even have the experience enough to recall. But when I was growing up I had young brats in my coin club who could spot a dipped coin virtually a mile away. And we bargained on many of those and at times got deals on them. The old guy at the hobby shop, "I didn't do it, don't look at me." Today, they're dipped the other way, to put color in them. Dipping to remove tarnish is market acceptable, now, lest it's a real horseship(sp?) job. How the times have changed.

But however we want it, whatever, in effect, floats our boat, one thing we have to concede is, when tarnish is added to these, the expression of the engraver, which, we'll also concede, is like a sculptor, an "artist," is completely destroyed. And now our eyeballs are going everywhere instead of along the controlled movement that engraver painstakingly intended, had he had any artistic skill, that is (which, BTW, if you look at most modern coins, I'll argue, for the most part, they don't). And we just lost the skill of the engraver to command that movement through the artwork, which, understand, he did, through the only element of art available to him, that being, detail. We lost the whole expression in the artwork. There's a different expression, now, half-controlled by the color. His use of detail is secondary to it. I'm by no measure saying it's by any means an ugly coin, some are strikingly beautiful. But you just lost the art, the skill. And, along with it, the artist. It's like watching a colorized a B&W movie. I know there are people who won't even watch a movie unless it's in color. I'm not judging them. That's their business, their the capacity to appreciate. I just think they're stupid.

 

Here's a 1838 No Drapery dime. Probably, almost certainly dipped sometime ago. Do I care? No, not at all.

And, yes, I am a "micro" type collector. Within limits, such as I won't be going after the 1861 Paquet Reverse double eagle.




And here's a 1839 Bust Half. Pretty bright and almost certainly dipped at some point. But I find it attractive.




Finally an 1892 Barber Half. Dipped? Probably not.

 

I agree with your comments re coins but also movies. I remember about 18 years ago talking to my son's girlfriend about Dr. Strangelove and of course she'd never heard of it. I warned her it was in B&W but we watched it together and she let me annotate some things about the Cold War. She seemed to be engrossed and the B&W didn't bother her. Of course she could have just been patronizing her b'friend's dad.

Other classic B&W's like The Third Man and Casablanca just wouldn't be the same in color, particularly The Third Man which IMHO is an absolute masterpiece.

The original Cape Fear, a noir thriller in B&W was a great movie. The remake was in color and it was just as good if better in some ways but it was a bit of a different movie from the original.

And of course, there are movies that don't suffer from being colorized because their original "artistry" didn't depend on the unique possibilities attendant with B&W filmmaking.

 

The same who claim that they want everything to be "orginal" would turn down a lot of the coins that ARE ORIGINAL because they are unattractive. The only way to sell some of those coins is to dip them.

Some of the coins THEY THINK are original are what a dealer I once knew called "original now." In other words they retoned after being dipped. Sometimes you get the "neon colors" some of these guys like so much from an improperly rinsed dipped coin.

The botton line is most all of the older coins you see have been dipped or cleaned at some point. The question is, is it "market acceptable" or more importantly, is it acceptable to you?

I am pretty sure that this Gobrecht Dollar is "mostly original." There is a spot in the right obverse field which may have had something lifted. That brought the coin down from PR-63 or 64 to PR-62. And yes, it has a CAC sticker.

 

I think that one of those is "Miricle on 34th Street." Chistmas should be red, and B&W. I have the DVDs that go both ways, and I usually watch the colorized version.

The film experts tell you that you are ruining the art that the film maker intended. That can be true from some films, but part of the reason for the B&W was that it was cheaper.

 

5 dollar Maple Leaf. Not a particularly fascinating one, but I don't care too much. I'm not a stacker, either, I just like big silver coins.