Artificial toning on gold

[nwcs]

I understand how to ID lots of AT on silver, but I have no experience with toning on gold and I can bet people have AT'd gold, too. What are some rules of thumb on gold and AT?

[jtryka]

I am not really aware of AT being an issue on gold, for a number of reasons:

 

1. Gold doesn't tone to the degree that silver or copper do. Gold is non-reactive, so toning can only occur when the air reacts with the copper (or in some cases silver) alloy portion of the coin.

 

2. Toning on gold is seldom very attractive as it is on silver. Usually toning on gold takes the form of orange or rose colored hues, but not the massive rainbow patterns seen on Morgans and the like. In the worst case, the toning can take the form of copper spots if the alloy had some irregularities, which is definitely not attractive nor desireable.

 

3. Most gold collectors don't really care about the toning, and many like myself prefer not to have toning on their gold coins. As a result, there is virtually no premium for toned gold.

 

4. Given the lack or reactivity of gold, artificially toning a gold coin would entail much more work than it would with silver or copper.

 

Since ATing gold is more difficult, and the payoff for toning is slim to none, I don't see how AT could become a real issue with gold. By the way, one of the main reasons I collect double eagles is because they don't naturally tone.

[nwcs]

Interesting! Thanks for the info. So, would then dipping be a big problem on the gold coin side instead of AT'ing? Myself, I've only seen 1 or 2 toned gold coins and they looked pretty cool. I thought that would be a great angle in the gold area.

 

BTW, I'm getting a 1908-D NM $20 MS-63 in the next month or so. Not that anyone would care, but I'm happy with it.

[MarkFeld]

Technically speaking, few gold coins have, what most would refer to as artificial color. However, gold coins often have a number of other problems/things done to them, some of those being:

 

1) various substances added to the surfaces, in an effort to mask imperfections

2) over-dipping

3) processes which artificially brighten the surfaces

4) removal of copper spotting/staining, which if not done properly, can re-appear

5) lasering of proof gold, which literally moves the metal and gives the coins the appearance of a higher quality

6) artificial frost added to the surfaces

 

Sadly, there are probably many other things which could be added to the above list.

 

PS - sometimes when a gold coin has been cleaned it will display a color/hue unlike that of an original piece.

 

 

[keithdagen]

3) processes which artificially brighten the surfaces

 

This seems to be one of the most common. A substance is rubeed over the surface of the gold piece to give it a uniform color.

[nwcs]

Is there any way to see it? Or is it one of those things that takes years of looking?

 

BTW, I'll only be able to afford common date MS62-64 gold. So are the problems as prevalent in this area as in other higher-end gold?

[MarkFeld]

Once you have examined/seen enough original pieces, you will hopefully be able to detect many (though not all) of the un-natural/un-original ones.

 

Any time there is a large enough spread between two or more grades/qualities and thus a financial incentive, I fear think that certain people will try to profit from it, in some way. That comment applies to all types of coins, as well as other industries

[Oldtrader3]

I happen to like the gold, green or pink oxide toning on gold. I feel that it signifies original (as struck) surfaces that have not been cleaned or dipped. Not all original gold coins have this oxide luster, but many do.

[nwcs]

The ones I have seen are kinda neat. Of course, I haven't seen many. Anyone have pics to share? How common (or uncommon) is naturally toned gold?

[keithdagen]

Is there any way to see it? Or is it one of those things that takes years of looking?

 

BTW, I'll only be able to afford common date MS62-64 gold. So are the problems as prevalent in this area as in other higher-end gold?

 

Neil,

 

Best thing is to just look at a LOT of gold pieces before you find one to purchase. Like Mark said, you find more chances of alteration the higher you go in grade or price, but it can be anywhere. Also, the older the coin, the more chances that it has had some work.

 

A dealer showed me some gold with surface alterations. He said to look at the rims and the area around the denticles. A lot of times, if a substance has been added to the coin's surface, it will not be applied completely and you'll see a different surface color around the denticles and stars that doesn't look like it is caused by circulation.

[nwcs]

So my next question would be, are PCGS and NGC good at detecting these things by and large?

[keithdagen]

So my next question would be, are PCGS and NGC good at detecting these things by and large?

 

All of the coins shown to me with problems were already certified. I would look at two or three gold pieces and ask which ones the dealer would purchase, and he would show me which one he felt had true original surfaces, and which ones had been played with. Now that I've had some practice, I think that I can spot problematic coins a little more easily.

[jom]

Best thing is to just look at a LOT of gold pieces before you find one to purchase.

 

NWCS: Isn't what Keith told you here what I told you in my PM "across the street". See?

 

Look look look until your eyes fall out before you spend a DIME on a gold coin. Looking is FREE!

 

jom

[jtryka]

The services are a little more challenged by alterations to gold than other types of coins it seems. Probably the biggest area for concern in my experience is the cleaning of copper spots and the alteration of surfaces for proof/prooflike qualities. As for copper and carbon spots, they are not very attractive to begin with, and when they are improperly cleaned they can really become worse. The other thing I've seen, and I've seen this much more in SEGS and PCI graded coins, is artificial PL coins. After looking at dozens of these coins (mostly Lib eagles) graded from AU-55 PL to MS-63 PL, these coins appears to be polished (not really abrasively polished, but more like surface alteration or lasering to create a mirror surface) and then the details were somehow buffed to make a cameo contrast. Now true cameo proof, or PL gold is very attractive, desireable and expensive, but these coins to me seemed suspect from the start.

 

My only advice to you is to look at as many coins as you can before buying. Also, I would not bother with a common date from 1922-28, but would instead spend the few extra bucks for a nice 14-S, 15-S or 16-S (especially this date, as it doesn't show up nearly as often as the other two). These three dates are still pretty common, but nonetheless more desireable than a 1924. When looking at a coin, look an many different angles, look in the cracks (the devices and tiny details, as dirt or discoloration from improper cleaning is often found there), and hold the coin at different distances and turn it to see how the light plays. Often a coin looks great up close, but held 18 inches away, you suddenly see discoloration on the high points.

 

Best of luck in finding a nice coin, and keep us posted. Many may not care, but as a Saint collector, I am always excited to see collectors bitten by the gold bug!

[Hoot]

Thanks to all of you gold experts for all your info. Now a question...

 

I have read that gold from the various mints over time and from different periods (dates) can have dramatically different color. What information can you provide on this? Specifically, in your series of interest, what colors/tints do you look for from the various mints in production at that time? What were the reasons for this? (Gold sources, alloy mixing processes, variations in techniques of refinement, etc.)

 

I know this is a big and complicated question, but perhaps we can get all kinds of input on this one. It would be greatly appreciated (by me, anyway) and very informative. Thanks in advance.

 

Hoot

[jom]

[evil setting]

Hoot: You think I'm going to give YOU anymore info? hahah! You fool! You'll never get it out of me...NEVER!! MUHAHAHA!

[/evil setting]

 

Hoot: I can't tell you exactly WHY the mix of copper/gold came to be on certain dates but after looking for a long time I have an "impression" for certain dates. Keep in mind this may not be accruate since I believe it would take many years to figure this stuff out.

 

The only series I can comment on would be the $10 Indian since I have my most of my experience there. Dates that I've personally noticed:

 

1911-P: It seems to be this date has a lot of specimens that are a nice "orangish" hue to them. I've actually owned 3 or 4 peice of this date with the same "look".

 

1926-P and 1932-P: Some of these dates come with real nice luster and orange/violet color. I think it might be that mix also was used at San Francisco in 1930 as many of these look an awful lot like the 32-P's. But I've seen so few 30-S's that I can't verify that for sure.

 

Early dates: 1908 NM's seem to have a rose hue many times as does the 08-D NM. For some reason the "with motto" versions don't come this way.

 

1913-P: often look like 1911-P's....but that is speculation at best.

 

Actually...most of this is speculation. I'm just giving impressions of what I've seen and is quite possible completely BOGUS. If I had to bet I would say I'm probably right on with the 11-P but the others..? I dunno.

 

Also, I'd refer you to David Akers's book on 20th Century Gold. I'm not sure if it is still in print but maybe you can go to a show and check it out.

 

[evil setting]

All that info is FALSE...HAHAHAH...sucker...

[/evil setting]

 

jom

[keithdagen]

Hoot,

 

Tough question, and one I'm definitely not qualified to answer as a Type collector.

 

Jeff,

 

You mentioned the three relatively common S-mint Saints. What is your opinion of the more common D-mint coins, like the 23-D or the 11-D. I was considering one of those for a nice MS-65 piece rather than just grabbing one of the generic P-mint coins of the '20's.

[Hoot]

AH HA! jom = screwtape!

 

Remember, the devil is a liar about all things, even those for which he feels the truth may benefit him.

 

Hoot

[jom]

KD: I've got a 23-D as one of my two Saints. I bought it specifically because it was NOT a 24 or 28, it had a mint mark and didn't cost much more than the 24 or 28.

 

The 11-D is certainly odd. In the other gold cons it is a rare date but the $20 it's common. I've never looked at the mintage but is it that much higher than the smaller series?

 

jom

[keithdagen]

AH HA! jom = screwtape!

 

Remember, the devil is a liar about all things, even those for which he feels the truth may benefit him.

 

Hoot

 

My dearest Wormwood,

 

Please tell your subject about the wonders of 20th Century Gold issues. When he purchases his first piece, you've won his soul.

 

[keithdagen]

The 11-D in Saints has half the mintage of the 23-D, but is still about 850K pieces minted, which makes it the largest of any of the Denver gold minted in that year. Next largest mintage is the $10 piece with 72,500 pieces minted that year.

[nwcs]

Ironic that I'm reading the screwtape letters this week.

[jom]

Remember, the devil is a liar about all things,

 

Ah! But if you directly asked him "Would you say YES if I asked if you could tell the truth?" how could he answer?

 

1) He can't say "YES" because then he'd be telling the truth.

 

2) He can't say "NO" since he then admits having to say "NO" to the direct question of telling the truth. Therefore he is forced to tell the truth either way.

 

During the Devil's utter confusion (and yours at this point, I'm sure) you steal his box of coins and run to Heaven!

 

jom

 

PS: BTW, if while running to "heaven" and you happen to see PCGS on the way you've run the WRONG direction. Uh..oh.

[keithdagen]

PS: BTW, if while running to "heaven" and you happen to see PCGS on the way you've run the WRONG direction. Uh..oh.

 

[jtryka]

Hoot,

 

Tough question, and one I'm definitely not qualified to answer as a Type collector.

 

Jeff,

 

You mentioned the three relatively common S-mint Saints. What is your opinion of the more common D-mint coins, like the 23-D or the 11-D. I was considering one of those for a nice MS-65 piece rather than just grabbing one of the generic P-mint coins of the '20's.

 

Keith,

 

You ask a great question (I apologize if someone else answered this, but I felt compelled to reply before I read the rest of the thread). My reasoning behind the common S-mints from the teens relates tangentially to the other questions on characteristics of the series. For Saints, there is a distinct difference in many years between the mints, and the differences seem to spread across the years as well. I am still not clear on the exact reasons why (my guess is the alloy, processing techniques, including the cleaning of blanks, and the dies and cleaning techniques), but from what I've seen the Philly coins tend to be the middle of the road in terms of strike, luster and overall appearance. They are usually pretty nice coins with an orange-gold sort of color. The San Fran coins tend to be much brighter, with many dates exhibiting absolutely blazing luster, and light gold color. Denver coins tend to be the worst of the three, often with rather dull luster, and a somewhat green-gold color.

 

With that in mind, I suggested the S-mints because it would be easier to find a truly gorgeous eye-appealing coin for a modest price. Relating specifically to the D-mints you mention, the 1911-D is exceptionally difficult to locate in what I would consider a truly eye-appealing condition. You can find many coins in the MS-63 to MS-65 range, but many will be rather dull looking, with weaker strikes and an almost "dirty" look about them. Certainly if you can find a nice clean lusterous one, go for it. On the 23-D, I think this coin is extremely underrated, and you don't find the strike/dull luster issues as much vs. the earlier issues, but the 23-D did not really survive in higher states of preservation. They are cheap and easy to find in lower MS grades, but when you get above MS-64, the price looks like a parabolic curve. For the price of an MS-65 23-D you could buy a lot of the scarcer dates in lower grades, like the 09-D, 08-S, 13-S and 09/08 (there would be a big grade difference though). So to me, the trade off for a high grade 23-D is not compelling. Sorry to be long-winded, but that was my logic for the S-mints I recommended (and to be sure there are many other options as well).

[jtryka]

PS-I would virtually ignore mintage figures on many Saints, as the melt factor is sgnificant! After all, the 1931 has triple the mintage of the 11-D, and I would certainly be happy to trade you any 11-D for a 31!

[keithdagen]

Thanks, that was exactly the kind of information I was looking for on my question. Will definitely give me some stuff to look for when I get around to choosing one for my Type set.

[jom]

With that in mind, I suggested the S-mints because it would be easier to find a truly gorgeous eye-appealing coin for a modest price.

 

That's probably true, for the earlier dates anyway. I all know is that San Fran got worse and worse as the years went on. I know that 08-S half eagles always come pretty nice but as you go thru the years they get pretty bad. It's also true for the $10's as well. I'm only guessing on the Saints based on that it is possible that ALL of production suffered at San Francisco...that doesn't have to be the case however. Just a guess.

 

I'd again suggest to try to find a copy of David Akers 20th Century gold book. Although it concentrates mostly on MS coin (saying "no one collects the series in circ condition". HAHAH..) but it is invalueable source of info.

 

jom

[jtryka]

jom, I will defer to your experience and expertise when it comes to the smaller denominations. For Saints however, the dearth of available S-mint coins after 1916 precludes me from making any judgement about the quality of San Fran coins in later years as it related to double eagles.

[jom]

Ah! OK. That's possible then...I was just considering that maybe it was "across the board" as far as mint production problems are concerned.

 

Maybe they corrected themselves? In the half eagle series 16-S's are somewhat better than the previous 4 years (the "low" being 12-S). 16-S Eagles aren't bad either. Certainly better than 11-S thru 15-S. After that the S-mint didn't do much on the smaller coins except 20-S and 30-S. 20-S had some strike problems and most 30-S's got melted but seem to be nice coins overall.

 

Maybe since San Fran wasn't doing much in gold after 1916 they could concentrate on only the Saints or maybe it was just some better quality personnel by 1920 (the next run of gold they did).

 

Interesting....

 

jom