What to do about a coin with no luster, but also no wear?

I disagree. It has a dead, lusterless look. It has been overdipped, and has retoned. I think it is best left alone, as it is still an attractive coin. Not every coin is a blazing, monster.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

i’ve seen this look many times on commems. I even own one. There is full luster under the toning. It is clearly evident in the pics.

 

I own 6 of them with heavy toning. My Oregon Trail has heavy red toning, and is MS 64. The luster is clearly visible, through the toning. Those of us that collect toned coins can see luster on a toner, despite the heavy color. What I suspect is that is a crappy picture that does not flatter the coin.

 

Some acetone soaks are definitely warranted to try and remove the green stuff... to each his own but as mentioned I wouldn’t dip it, some people really like that paper-toned antique look... but if you do I’m sure we’d all be curious to see the result.

 

Obverse shows wear on the high points. AU maybe. But not MS.

 

The high points on the coin are:


which I see no evidence thereof either in the photo or in hand with a 10x loupe.

The pics in the OP were with direct flash lighting, which usually will blow out the areas of luster, but there are no blown out areas. I've also tried to pick up luster with a handheld LED and a loupe. The following is using axial lighting, which IMO makes the coin look horrible.




I've decided I will be giving this an acetone bath today, and will post new images. Let's see what happens.

 

Take an indirect daylight picture. It the luster is as you say, there will be a glow. That picture does not show much punch.

 

It's currently taking a bath, and unavailable.

 

When I said "direct flash" in the post you quoted, it was at an angle and undiffused. I did not mean it was directly above the coin.

The flash was in approximately the same position as it was when I took this pic, which shows luster (just a random pic that was handy):

 

Yowza, pretty Pilgrim

 

I second and third the acetone comments. Any time you see that lightish green color, it is PVC residue from improper storage.

An overnight soak in acetone will take it right off and make it look amazing. The green will never come back long as you keep it in archival safe packaging.

I don't have a picture, but I had a Morgan that looked similar to yours, but looked pretty Gemmy after an 8 hour soak in acetone.

 

Pretty sure most of you forgot about, or lost interest in this thread, but I gave the coin a 3-stage acetone bath (24 hours/2 min/swish), and this is how she looks now. There is some muted luster visible on the reverse now, and I think I see a bit on the obverse. It is far from booming with luster, but it's peeking out now.

 

And now you should leave it. Dipping this coin would result in a really dead look with worse eye appeal than it currently has with the thick, hazy toning.

 

For my learning, is a coin considered to be "cleaned” after an acetone wash?

And not really being familiar with the "dipping", can you explain? Is this process considered "cleaned"?

 

Technically, I think the answer is yes, but it's also considered as having been "Properly Cleaned/Conserved" And wouldn't get a details grade as having been cleaned, if that is all that was done to it.

Dipping (from what I understand) is using a cleaning agent that has acidic properties (maybe base as well), and actually eats a microscopic amount of the metal it it's cleaning process, which kills the luster. I've never used anything other then acetone, but I believe products like TarnX (a silver cleaner/polish) is an example of the type of product that would be considered 'improper', and would body bag the coin.

This is an example of an improperly cleaned (dipped) coin. there aren't any marks (hairlines) on the coin to indicate a cleaning (that could bump it to a "Harshly Cleaned" annotation), but it was over-dipped, and that luster got knocked dow (it's still there, but muted).

 

Sort of. The dip reacts with the sulfide layer (toning) and breaks it up, basically knocking the sulfides loose of the surface (and releasing the rotten egg smell). The thicker these layers, the more they scar the remaining metal when removed. This is what causes a dipped-out coin to look dull. If there's no sulfide layer, the dip really won't do much of anything to the coin.

What's the grade on your Hawaiian? They tend not to be flashy, but they do get hazy toning or splotchy yellow toning.

 

NGC gave it an UNC Details - Improperly Cleaned.

 

I have shown these photos I took several years ago to demonstrate surfaces in a thread about Morgans vs Peace in toning ability and it also applies to "wagonwheel effects" . The Morgan is on the left and became PCGS64, the Peace on right became MS65. Both at a magnification of 100X ( Scientific, Not USB definition). You can see the sharper peaks ( ridges on the Morgan than the Peace) that is why the untoned Morgans reflect/refract light more and when rotated flash light at different directions ( wagonwheel effet) . They can become slightly corroded and the silver compounds ( colored) can now exhibit a Toned appearance which varies by the chemicals and thickness. So over time the toned layer becomes thicker ( if dark and thick)-> ugly to most, if 'perfect thickness' and varied colors > $$$.

Now the Peace has shorter peaks so natural toning is flatter and less apparent, so natural toning is muted and lower refraction by the peaks, unless artificial means are used to enhance ( IMO) as people can disagree.

Ok the bottom photo is the Morgan at 400X, so the ridges are more in alignment than the Peace.
So, when we dip, the product removes the surface layer . In chemistry it is Time X Concentration is directly related to the removal. A quick dip with a diluted substance such as an Acid, rinse to remove ->done ( is best) . Repeated dips with full strength --> bad, you can't put metal back on the coin, so once damaged it is as said " Putting lipstick on a Pig" If you "Have-to" dip, dilute the agent 1/10 and pull and check often. rinsing each time. Remember you can't undo a coin.

Jim

 

So @desertgem (or whoever), what causes the difference in the surfaces between the Morgan and the Peace? Was it the quality of the silver used at the time, or was it something to do with the dies used? Or is there something else that caused the higher peaks on the Morgan?

 

That might be hard to get a single answer. I doubt it was the silver metal itself , as although major studies have been done on Ancient coins, I do not know of any on the appropriate Morgan-Peace age. I suspect it was more advances in the techniques and materials the mint used along with the changes in the machinery to make the coins.

I too am open to other possibilities. Maybe XRF results on US coins as to material separate from silver /copper, etc. There are a few threads on the internet forums on it, but not a specific line of research along the transition from Morgan to Peace. If I ever get time, I can take such photos with other silver coins than dollars , but I do not know when Jim