"Altered Surface" NCS Response to Question?

[Smilie Puss]

NCS Response to Question ? previously posted as "The need for a more comprehensive definition?"

 

NCS [response]

 

"........ Coins that are in NCS holders with "altered surfaces" most often are coins that have had their surfaces specifically altered in a way to make them appear to be something they are not. Most often this is a treatment to either the devices or fields to give the appearance of a cameo proof."

 

itsnow24u [response]

 

Paraphrasing: "...most often are coins that have had their surfaces specifically altered.." Most? What of the other coins that appear different for an unknown reason? How does one prove a coin has NOT been altered? NCS doesn't give a reason or explanation to this descriptive term that is put on a the holder label, "Altered Surfaces".

 

Yes, this is exactly what I was trying to point out and you responded so as not to reveal information to the submitter as to HOW or CAUSE of the alteration. This may be that NCS does not know the cause or is unable to define 'alteration' in a clear and concise manner. This opinion is worthy of payment for services rendered? I think not.

 

Therefore I have posted this question on the Collectors Societies and other Message Board's which you may have already accessed and read both pro and con on the question that was asked. "Altered Surface", The need for a more comprehensive definition?

 

Before we can limit or eliminate this deceptive practice of alteration we must first identify the cause and then identify the observable evidence such as chemical or physical applications or methods and then categorize it just as NCS or any other third party grading service would do for a counterfeit coin.

 

This term "Altered Surfaces" at times, leads to disappointment and loss in value of raw coins, as well as, resubmission's to grade and loss of grading fees to the third party grading services. No specific cause or evidence is given when a coin is returned with the generic term "Altered Surface". The return is based on an opinion that may or may not be true.

 

Can the submitter challange the NCS opinion? How?

 

itsnow24u

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Great Deals on Dell Laptops. Starting at $499.

[Schatzy]

If I submitted a coin to NGC or NCS and it came back "Altered Surface" thats all I need to know, I think that NCS already does a great job with there service.

If the coin looks to good to be true maybe it is!!

[bsshog40]

I don't know about challenging them. I would think that if there was something questionable about a surface, that a description should go with the coin that such and such area or mark looks to be altered. Grading fees are not refunded and I would think for the cost, a more definate answer would be associated with the returned coin, if nothing else, for Customer Service. This would be like taking your car to an automotive repair shop and paying for an estimate to have it checked out. You return and the shop says, "Somethings wrong with it", but doesn't tell you what. No refund!

[James_OldeTowne]

The NCS response implied to me that "altered surface" refers to something added to the surfaces (artificial cameo frost). However, I have many times seen "A.S." used in reference to whizzed coins.

 

Perhaps a better breakdown for "artificial surfaces" would be: (1) artificial surface residue, and (2) mechanically altered surface

[Smilie Puss]

Yes. Newbie

 

The NCS definition of "Altered Surface" is a 'catch all phrase' that is used at times when no definitive evidence can be assigned or given.

 

The term carries a negative connotation like saying this is a 'bad' coin because it doesn't fit into any known alteration catagory like:

 

Mechanical: whizzing, polishing or rubbing with an abrasive material or cloth.

 

Physical (heat): laser ablation, electroplating. Also alteration can

mean adding or removing mint marks, tooling, and filing.

 

Chemical (etching): acids, bases, or solvents, in addition, to thiourea dipping to

remove toning or surface residue (PVC) and/or toning.

 

Additives or covering with lacquer, varnish, epoxy, wax or low volatile oil (nose).

 

So then what is left as a cause or method? The only remaining department is the "I haven't a clue" department. Why? Because "it doesn't look right" You know like porn! You know it when you see it. And then you pay NCS to label it "Altered Surfaces". Go figure!

 

itsnow24u

[realone]

It is a time thing, they take a second or two to check it out and then they say "hmmm somethin don't look quite right", next. And the coin you get back is marked by the mail room "Altered Surfaces" like that really means something. I rather they just return with a red "F" or the dreaded "D"" on the plastic flip, just to bring me back to the good ole school days because that is how it feels.

[RareSov]

Why are people guessing and fumbling with issues over this ? you send your coin to the experts, if they say it is altered, well it is. I know it would be NICE to have a comprehensive report but I doubt that will ever happen for a standard sort of fee. Ask someone who knows how to detect the problem and they will tell you face to face, FOR FREE

[Jakeblue]

The NCS response implied to me that "altered surface" refers to something added to the surfaces (artificial cameo frost). However, I have many times seen "A.S." used in reference to whizzed coins.

 

Perhaps a better breakdown for "artificial surfaces" would be: (1) artificial surface residue, and (2) mechanically altered surface

 

If they were to break it down, this would be a excellent start.

[bsshog40]

Why are people guessing and fumbling with issues over this ? you send your coin to the experts, if they say it is altered, well it is. I know it would be NICE to have a comprehensive report but I doubt that will ever happen for a standard sort of fee. Ask someone who knows how to detect the problem and they will tell you face to face, FOR FREE

So are you a person that knows how to detect these issues? I know this is not the first time that this issue has come up in this forum. I also know that there are alot of people that would like to see some sort of explanation for certain BB issues that never are explained. By the wording of your post it sounds like you are able to figure this out instead of fumbling and guessing over the issue.

[Smilie Puss]

Yes Sir:

 

I have a background in science and have had some experience with surface analysis by Differential Image Characterization, DIC and Optical Microscopy.

 

I am a retired Senior Research Chemist but rely on metallergical expertise on a fellow numistist who works for Carpenter Technology. I also have ties to Lehigh University in the Materials Science Department.

 

Coin chemistry is of interest to me and I am attempting to bring science to the production of coinage metals. I have written Letters to the Editor in the Numismatist (Oct 2008) regarding Rainbow Toning and providing insight into why we see various colors of the rainbow.

 

I also want to take issue with the TPGS and certain definitions they provide in characterizing the conditions observered or not observed on coins graded or certified. It is my intent to bring science cause and effect factors in describing surface conditions.

 

I am also doing research on Morgan dollars and have been instrumental in providing information on a surface effect of late 19th century proof gold coins called 'orange peel'. This information was reported in a Seminar at FUN 2008 and ANA's World Fair of Coins 7/08 in Baltimore.

 

Any thing else you would like to know I would be happy to respond.

 

itsnow24u

[bsshog40]

Yes Sir:

 

I have a background in science and have had some experience with surface analysis by Differential Image Characterization, DIC and Optical Microscopy.

 

I am a retired Senior Research Chemist but rely on metallergical expertise on a fellow numistist who works for Carpenter Technology. I also have ties to Lehigh University in the Materials Science Department.

 

Coin chemistry is of interest to me and I am attempting to bring science to the production of coinage metals. I have written Letters to the Editor in the Numismatist (Oct 2008) regarding Rainbow Toning and providing insight into why we see various colors of the rainbow.

 

I also want to take issue with the TPGS and certain definitions they provide in characterizing the conditions observered or not observed on coins graded or certified. It is my intent to bring science cause and effect factors in describing surface conditions.

 

I am also doing research on Morgan dollars and have been instrumental in providing information on a surface effect of late 19th century proof gold coins called 'orange peel'. This information was reported in a Seminar at FUN 2008 and ANA's World Fair of Coins 7/08 in Baltimore.

 

Any thing else you would like to know I would be happy to respond.

 

itsnow24u

My post was intended for Raresov, who I felt was being a slight sarcastic in his response. You may not have noticed that I responeded to his quote.

[realone]

Yes. Newbie

 

The NCS definition of "Altered Surface" is a 'catch all phrase' that is used at times when no definitive evidence can be assigned or given.

 

The term carries a negative connotation like saying this is a 'bad' coin because it doesn't fit into any known alteration catagory like:

 

Mechanical: whizzing, polishing or rubbing with an abrasive material or cloth.

 

Physical (heat): laser ablation, electroplating. Also alteration can

mean adding or removing mint marks, tooling, and filing.

 

Chemical (etching): acids, bases, or solvents, in addition, to thiourea dipping to

remove toning or surface residue (PVC) and/or toning.

 

Additives or covering with lacquer, varnish, epoxy, wax or low volatile oil (nose).

 

So then what is left as a cause or method? The only remaining department is the "I haven't a clue" department. Why? Because "it doesn't look right" You know like porn! You know it when you see it. And then you pay NCS to label it "Altered Surfaces". Go figure!

 

itsnow24u

 

I am just a bit confused, are you saying that if the TPG determines any of the above mentioned explanations then those explanations are mentioned and not Altered Surfaces, since if it says Altered Surfaces then they really don't know what it is and it isn't one of the items mentioned above?

[Smilie Puss]

realone

 

 

From NGC's Understanding "No Grade" Coins, a definition of Altered Surfaces is given: "A coin that has been treated in some way that changes its gereral appearance is said to have ALTERED SURFACES. A coins surface can be altered in many ways,......".

 

Therefore, if no cause or method is evident then the TPGS says that 'it doesn't look right'. the TPGS assumes that "A coin [that] has been treated in some way" In other words something has been done 'but we haven't a clue' " that changes its gereral appearance". Now all that need to be done is to define what is "its gereral appearance". Mint state? Toned? Rainbow Toned?

 

As I stated previously [Altered State] may be a 'catch all phrase'.

 

Remember, certified/graded coins are guaranteed to be authenic and if it can be shown that the certification/ grade is flawed or incorrect then the TPGS must buy the coin back usually for what the buyer paid. Now for the sake of illustration suppose a coin was purchased for $100,000 and evidence was provided that the certification/grade was not correct. Then the TPGS would forfeit $100,000 to the buyer.

Now it wouldn't take many buy backs of this magnitude to have a change in grading policy or to assign a term that would avoid legal entanglements.

 

"Altered Surfaces" may be such a term that there is no submitter recourse available but to accept their opinion. Like or not.

 

Yes? Maybe? or Definitely not? You be the judge.

 

itsnow24u

[Smilie Puss]

RareSov

 

What I am looking for is a comprehensive definition for the term "Altered Surface"

so that everyone can understand what it means. Not a report!

Yes?

[RareSov]

I'm sure if you visit a coin show with a coin you were told was altered, someone will give you advice. Aren't there lots of experts at coin shows ? your local dealer ?

 

Just trying to help.. I'll gladly examine coins and give an opinion you pay shipping of course..

[RareSov]

I don't believe there is a comprehensive definition ! therein lies the same thing that was mentioned last week on this topic and we seem to be going around in circles about.

 

You know they baked coins inside potatos right ? do you want that as your response ? NGC or NCS couldn't tell you ! it would just be.. ok this toning is wrong. No extra info given. Exactly what they tell you now, no extra info just a stock standard term.

 

In an ideal world, everything would be ideal.

 

Don't get me wrong... I know exactly where you are coming from. Personally I would rather the challenge of finding the problem myself.

 

Make a formal request though, not complain on the forums. And not ask them on the forums. Write a proper essay including your suggestions for the new form and every possible situation you can think of, from questionable toning to putty to dip residue to unknown. Maybe then you will get what you want ? no.. because you want a definition for something I can't see a definition to. The words say it, maybe the reasoning behind it requires a bit of coin knowledge

 

Maybe they could change it to Doctored Surfaces

 

Did you get a little book when you joined/renewed with NGC ? hmm deja vu I have already asked that

[Oldtrader3]

A collector pays a grading fee for a fyuing eagle cent and gets the coin looked by a grader for (4) nanoseconds and subsequently gets an envelope back saying "altered surfaces". This is all fine and good but the problem on this coin that I submitted was not evident until you discovered at a spot the size of a flea egg with a 10X loupe and saw that this "flea dropping" was probably mechanical removal of something on the surface. The something, maybe verdigris, given that it was a 150 year old cent.

 

It would be much more satisfying to the collector to not have to send the coin to NCS to verify what the original problem was and incur an additional fee. Having some inkling of what the problem was before straining one's eyes for two hours with a 10X loupe to find the problem would also be helpful.

[RareSov]

Someone made a post along that lines elsewhere, a merging of NGC and NCS where problem coins automatically get the NCS piece of paper..

 

Sounds perfect to me

 

Now on the 4 nanoseconds part, I don't know where you get that from. Watch the PCGS grading video, he's spending a lot more than 4 nanoseconds and thats just to grade. If a coin is questionable I'm sure it gets A LOT closer attention (possibly microscope). A bit of a low blow towards the graders IMO, they deserve some respect..

[realone]

A collector pays a grading fee for a fluing eagle cent and gets the coin looked by a grader for (4) nanoseconds and subsequently gets an envelope back saying "altered surfaces". This is all fine and good but the problem on this coin that I submitted was not evident until you discovered at a spot the size of a flea egg with a 10X loupe and saw that this "flea dropping" was probably mechanical removal of something on the surface. The something, maybe verdigris, given that it was a 150 year old cent.

 

It would be much more satisfying to the collector to not have to send the coin to NCS to verify what the original problem was and incur an additional fee. Having some inkling of what the problem was before straining one's eyes for two hours with a 10X loupe to find the problem would also be helpful.

 

You know here is the real interesting thing, that flea egg probably wasn't the problem, they don't use 10x and wouldn't spend the time that you did with it, if you could only see it with 10x because you were trying to figure out what they saw they probably missed the egg and you probably missed what they were finding wrong, just a hunch from what i have gathered on the boards.

[WoodenJefferson]

One of the problems with a ridged education such as yours, you believe that “grey areas” do not exist in the realm of science and that there is always an exacting answer to the question at hand.

 

A grey area is a term for a border in-between two or more things that is unclearly defined, a border that is hard to define or even impossible to define, or a definition where the distinction border tends to move.

 

Also, it would be a good idea to familiarize yourself with the term “perceived

subjective analysis” if you are going to study coins and then ask professionals for their opinion.

 

I am however, interested in the “orange peel” effect and why it occurs.

[realone]

Wooden Jefferson, may I ask to whom are you speaking with?

[WoodenJefferson]

~Re: "Altered Surface" NCS Response to Question? [Re: itsnow24u]~

 

************************************************************************************************

 

Look at the header above each of my posts....in this case, my comment was directed at "itsnow24u"

 

I attempt to direct without naming names.

 

Should my comment include you as well?

 

ie; this comment should now have your handle in the header.

[realone]

Wooden Jefferson,

wasn't sure if you were talking with me in particular and if so I would have responded, thanks.

Thanks for alos pointing out about the handle in the header, never knew it or noticed for that matter.

[Smilie Puss]

RareSov

 

If your opinion were objective taking physical evidence or observation of cause and effect into account then perhaps I will some day ask for your experrtise.

 

Otherwise, I will post the question for the need of a more comprehensive definition for "Altered Surfaces".

 

Anyone who has bought an altered coin thinking it was genuine would, I think, want to know how to avoid that experience again especially if it was an expensive item.

 

Providing the information on how to determine a coins condition is a reasonable request. Yes?

[realone]

Look I am a simple meat and potatoes guy. I take any classic coin to a couple of my ole time dealer buds ( with 100 years between them) and show any coin to them, immediately I will get an ohh ahh or a nope and an immediate reason why, like color is off it's is AT or it has been overdipped and luster is impaired etc etc. I have never gotten ughh it is definitely Altered Surfaces, that is just too dumb of a catch all phrase, they would be embarrassed to say such a minimalist opinion. If it doesn't look right o them and they can't immediately tell me why, out comes a small loupe and then I will get an immediate reason.

 

So tell me lets cut the ussy footing around protectionism garbage and tell it like it is, it is far easier to say Altered surfaces because then they still don't have to get the damn loupe out, no additional time given to the customer, next coin please. And then you hear the leather straps slam onto the floor and the graders shudder and quickly look down and keep on grading as a bead of sweat falls from their forehead and on to their fingertip and ever so slightly splashes on to the Kennedy that they are grading and now you know how milk spots occur. This subject is so about time and money it isn't funny.

There I said it, flame away cause I am a hard headed newbee, well almost.

[RareSov]

Anyone who has bought an altered coin thinking it was genuine would, I think, want to know how to avoid that experience again especially if it was an expensive item.

 

Exactly. I have been of this opinion the whole time. Hope you don't think I haven't.

 

I think most of the coins you would encounter are covered by the examples in the booklet on page 8. Whizzed, polished, burnished, laquer. You will read about many other on here and would need to see examples where possible but they are out there. Putty comes to mind..

 

I wish you luck, I am glad to say most of this doesn't apply to my favourite coins although dipped sovereigns can be common as can cleaning

[Smilie Puss]

realone

 

No the milk (white) spots, I think, come from washing coins in a dilute solution of alkali metal hydroxide (NaOH) or lye to neutralize the acid rinsed/annealed planchets. Not from sodium chloride in sweat droplets. Without proper rinsing with DI or distilled water the remaining salt solution or residual sodium hydroxide adheres to the planchet. Upon striking the planchet with residue becomes part of the silver alloy surface and presto! you have permanent milk (white) spots. ICP-MS analysis of an acid extraction of the white spot shows high levels of sodium as the primary contaminate. Do you have a better theory? I don't think you should sweat over this question. Yes?

 

 

itsnow24u

[realone]

24,

thanks btw for the milk spot definition, I was only messing around but I am sticking to my main point, I want reasons and not basins that catch everything that drops in especially when I am paying the fees that I am paying.

[Smilie Puss]

realone

 

I agree.

 

Your the customer and your the one that is paying a fee for services rendered. That service ought to give you a reason why a coin was body bagged. These are the people who you would think have the greatest expertise in evaluating coins and/or a coins condition. I think PCGS went over to this 'Genuine' label was precisely to extricate themselves from the negative terminology of the "Altered Surface" quagmire. In addition to codify a problem as to reasonable cause and effect for an observed problem. If the problem is not known or reasonable doubt is found then return the coin with that explanation and a return of most of the submission fee. That I think I could live with. Agree?

[realone]

24u,

I completely and whole heartedly agree with you!

Too bad more aren't on board, more voices complaining could someday make a difference but then maybe it would just push NGC to do what PCGS did. When you mix their business with our pleasure we will always get the short end, I can understand it but I don't have to like it or agree with it.