Wondering About Luster

[Bennett]

How is it that uncirculated coins can have impaired luster? Has there actually been some light wear that harms the luster but not enough to say the coin is circulated?

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

First, read my recent article about luster here to make sure you understand luster: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3264489#Post3264489

 

Impaired luster can be cause by many things. Toning will impair the luster, and a dip will impair the luster even further. In neither of these circumstances has the coin seen any physical wear, but the luster may be inferior. I once had a technically uncirculated Washington quarter that had been "dipped to death", all traces of luster had been dipped off, and the coin was dull and flat.

[coinman1794]

How is it that uncirculated coins can have impaired luster? Has there actually been some light wear that harms the luster but not enough to say the coin is circulated?

 

 

There are many different types of luster a coin can have depending on the quality of the dies. Thus, there are many diffeent appearances that a particular issue might have fresh off the dies.

 

To say that luster has been impared is to suggest that a particular coin has lost something that it previously had. Assuming that realy is the case, generally this only happens with oxidation (toning), which corrodes the tiny flow lines on a microscopic level, and with dipping, which strips that corrosion away (along with more of those microscopic flow lines). Many 19th century and earlier coins, even those that may "seem" totally original, but have impared luster, were dipped long ago and have since retoned.