Altered Color cents! (pic posted)

[JOBESSI]

It seems that lately, all the indian heads and licoln cents I send to NGC are coming back with the attribute of "Altered Color." To whoever keeps coloring these coins...STOP IT! Is there a way to fix these coins?

[WinstonWare]

Are they purple? If not, what color are they?

[MarkFeld]

It sounds as if it might be a good idea not to spend additional money on copper coins unless or until you can distinguish original from recolored examples.

 

The learning process can be very difficult, even if you get help from others. While buying NGC and PCGS coins won't completely solve the problem, it could go a long way.

 

We might be able to offer some assistance if you can post a few good images.

[JOBESSI]

They're red. I still don't see it. ugh. I have been submitting Indian heads for years now, but in the last couple of months I have had the worst luck with altered color. especially on key coins.

[Kurtdog]

JOBESSI, while I can't quite make out all the marks on that 1908-S IHC for the small pics, arguably, based on those pics, you've got a nice, problem-free, MS-64 coin, there. Now, that's just my opinion. To put that into context, should you require it, there are six billion give or take other people on this planet with opinions, too.

 

Now, that understood, do you want to play the money game? Then, get used to what that market, in all its insane pedantry, is tolerating, at present, as "acceptable" coins. Immerse yourself, head-first, into that, and never look back. OTOH, do you want to collect nice, problem-free coins? Then, again, based on those small pics, at least, that's a nice, problem-free, MS-64 coin you've got, there; IMHO...

[Coindude]

You can't really tell much on color from the NGC bulk photos.

[MarkFeld]

The images make the color look somewhat tan, as opposed to red or brown. And if that is representative of the coin's true color, it would be unusual (though not unheard of) for an original example.

[JOBESSI]

The images make the color look somewhat tan, as opposed to red or brown. And if that is representative of the coin's true color, it would be unusual (though not unheard of) for an original example.

 

It is a little on the tan side. I guess I'm just grumpy because I was looking forward to beefing up my Indian registry. I'll take some pics of my own once it gets back. Argh!

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I am skeptical that the ability to learn to distinguish original from recolored examples, other than well known and documented conditions that can be proved, will solve the issue.

 

There must be an equal starting point for this learning process.

 

At a minimum, the equality would consist of all individuals having the same ability to distinguish colors exactly the same and interpret the colors exactly the same, and in the exact context of original vs. enhanced/recolored examples, and then agree.

 

What would be the point of reference to determine an artificial/altered color, with accuracy?

 

I do not agree that a coin being any particular shade-red/brown/tan etc. is or is not an example of originality.

 

Nor do I agree that a person deciding the worthiness of color originality is correct simply because a color is or is not unusual, regardless of how many past examples the person has observed.

 

Would it not be proper for the Evaluator to clearly and precisely explain the reason for the decision, rather than labeling without explanation?

 

Is this any more or any less a subjective opinion than using a number system to decide the grade of a coin?

 

Was a chemical analysis done? Was any scientific method used to determine with absolute finality that the coin is altered?

 

If the answer is no, and the decision to label the coin as altered color is based solely on the color perception of the Evaluator and their vast(or not) experience in observing other coins, then the coin should not be labeled at all, rather than labeling it Crayola.

 

What if this same color/date/coin is the same as 5,10,15 etc. examples that the evauator has not seen?

 

If a coin is labeled as altered color, this denotes a precise human effort to do so.

However, a coin can be altered simply by contact with how it is stored, or handled, or, for that matter, made.

 

It may just be possible that certain Evaluators may need their eyes evaluated. I do not proffer this with humor. I would think that the eye strain and color memory that occurs from evaluating thousands of coins on a continuous basis has to have altered perception somewhat.

 

Now, if the Evaluator is confident because of information that the TPG has, then this information should be shared with the numismatic community.

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

 

[coinman_23885]

. I have been submitting Indian heads for years now, but in the last couple of months I have had the worst luck with altered color. especially on key coins.

 

Exactly, the larger the disparity between the brown, red brown, and full red prices, the greater the odds that the coin will be tampered with to restore a "full red" appearance. The larger the price spread, the more skeptical all top grading services will be.

[relicsncoins]

I'm assuming that is the coin from this "Test your grading skills" post.

 

1908 Indian

 

If so, the color in the new photos of the slab don't look anything like the color in the photos you posted in that other thread. Did NCS address the green on the cheek?

[JOBESSI]

Yes, they removed it. It is the same coin. That's what baffles me too. The color looks a different. I guess I'll have to inspect it once I have it in hand.

[James_OldeTowne]

I am skeptical that the ability to learn to distinguish original from recolored examples, other than well known and documented conditions that can be proved, will solve the issue.

 

There must be an equal starting point for this learning process.

 

At a minimum, the equality would consist of all individuals having the same ability to distinguish colors exactly the same and interpret the colors exactly the same, and in the exact context of original vs. enhanced/recolored examples, and then agree.

 

What would be the point of reference to determine an artificial/altered color, with accuracy?

 

I do not agree that a coin being any particular shade-red/brown/tan etc. is or is not an example of originality.

 

Nor do I agree that a person deciding the worthiness of color originality is correct simply because a color is or is not unusual, regardless of how many past examples the person has observed.

Extremely well stated!

 

I think there is too much fret and worry about how "correct" the color of copper is. Let's just accept that MANY have been altered, and MANY of those have already gotten into problem-free slabs.

 

Personally, I have no problem with that.

 

The only concern is whether a coin will suddenly "turn" in color, but to tell you the truth, I don't think that happens nearly as often as some would have us believe. But then again, I have a large preference of red-brown (or brown-red) or so-called "red" anyhow.

[MarkFeld]

I am skeptical that the ability to learn to distinguish original from recolored examples, other than well known and documented conditions that can be proved, will solve the issue.

 

There must be an equal starting point for this learning process.

 

At a minimum, the equality would consist of all individuals having the same ability to distinguish colors exactly the same and interpret the colors exactly the same, and in the exact context of original vs. enhanced/recolored examples, and then agree.

 

What would be the point of reference to determine an artificial/altered color, with accuracy?

 

I do not agree that a coin being any particular shade-red/brown/tan etc. is or is not an example of originality.

 

Nor do I agree that a person deciding the worthiness of color originality is correct simply because a color is or is not unusual, regardless of how many past examples the person has observed.

Extremely well stated!

 

I think there is too much fret and worry about how "correct" the color of copper is. Let's just accept that MANY have been altered, and MANY of those have already gotten into problem-free slabs.

 

Personally, I have no problem with that.

 

The only concern is whether a coin will suddenly "turn" in color, but to tell you the truth, I don't think that happens nearly as often as some would have us believe. But then again, I have a large preference of red-brown (or brown-red) or so-called "red" anyhow.

 

James, regardless of whether you and John are correct or not, when a submitter is getting coins graded so that he can add them to his registry set (or make them more liquid and/or add "value") what counts is the opinion of the grading company. So it is advisable to to try to get a grasp on their "standards". And that applies, whether you agree with or believe in those standards or not.

[James_OldeTowne]

James, regardless of whether you and John are correct or not, when a submitter is getting coins graded so that he can add them to his registry set (or make them more liquid and/or add "value") what counts is the opinion of the grading company. So it is advisable to to try to get a grasp on their "standards". And that applies, whether you agree with or believe in those standards or not.

Alternatively, when the registry is a driving factor, simply buy the coins already holdered. That way, one need not be frustrated by ever-changing "standards".

 

[MarkFeld]

James, regardless of whether you and John are correct or not, when a submitter is getting coins graded so that he can add them to his registry set (or make them more liquid and/or add "value") what counts is the opinion of the grading company. So it is advisable to to try to get a grasp on their "standards". And that applies, whether you agree with or believe in those standards or not.

Alternatively, when the registry is a driving factor, simply buy the coins already holdered. That way, one need not be frustrated by ever-changing "standards".

Fair enough, and I suggested that earlier in this thread.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I,unfortunately, disagree, again.

 

Before doing so, I will state that being correct was not and is not the basis of my thoughts and/or opinion.

 

The issue I was offering thoughts on was the ability to learn and distinguish original from re-colored examples.

 

The issue MAY be the opinion of the Grading Company, but I don't believe so, and will state my opinion as to why I don't agree.

 

If, in fact and practice, the opinion of the Grading Company is all that counts, I suspect that a majority of Dealers/Collectors/Investors/Buyers/Sellers, etc., would no longer be employed/in business/interested.

 

Why try to upgrade, then? Why pay a premium for that certain visual appeal that an individual pays a premium for?

 

Why re-submit a coin?

 

The added value and/or liquidity would be meaningless, because IF the opinion of the Grading Company was correct, there would be no need to do anything but buy the Holder, so to speak. The choice of the individual would simply be buy it or not.

 

This type of grading finality of opinion would be a very silly Business Model for a TPG, of course. Thus, the TPG thru their opinions, offer a continuous and economically enhanced Market, by offering a Business Model that encourages diversity of opinion, re-submittals, and subjective Standards.

 

I note that the conversation has now evolved from learning to distinguish original from re-colored examples, to learning the Standards of the Grading Company.

 

Fair enough.

 

But (there is always a "but"), no foundation for the Standards being correct and/or anything more than an opinion of an individual on any given day has been offered in support of the learning process that is advised- grasping the Standards.

 

Does the ability to grasp air and capture it exist?

 

Diversity controls. Standards, to a rather significant degree in Numismatics, exist in numbers that are as subjective as opinions.

 

If the only thing that counts is the TPG Standards, and if a person must learn the Standards, then the person must (again I state my earlier posit) have an equal starting point to do so.

 

A Crayola condemnation based on an opinion and not supportable by fact, is not allowing an ability to learn.. It is preventing it.

 

I will use as an example the dreaded phrase "Stamp Collecting/Philately".

 

The determination of a color of a stamp is finite, and can be supported by fact, not an opinion or changing Standard or unexplained Standard. Every Philatelist refers to the Standard color references to determine listing/quality/value/etc.

The particular condition may be subjective, but the color is not. A Lake Red may not be as valuable as a Red. Thus, a Merthod of determination of Red v. Lake Red was established. A person may not agree that the Lake Red Standard is what his eyes would cause his Mind to determine is Lake Red, BUT there is a Standard that all adhere to. This makes -and supports- a learning process.

 

I do not understand the logic being offered that the opinion of the Grading Company is all that counts. It is the parental verbal "because I said so" equal.

 

So, where is the opportunity to learn the Standards, grasp the Standards, or agree or disagree with the Standards, if there is no singular Standard?

 

The original Post was not about whether the coin was red or purple or tan, etc.

It was about the TPG determination that it was Crayola.

 

Tell me, teach me, explain to me, the Standard to follow in the future quest I would attempt in the next Submittal.

 

Now, it is my football and I am taking it and going home, and the Game is over because I said so.

 

With Respect(of course)

John Curlis

[Kurtdog]

OK, I heard enough. Somebody please tell me why this coin is "altered color." I'm going to bet, if that call was made on a "standard," it's a totally irrational one.

[dean1345]

I bought a 1904 red IHC proof from GreatSouthern Coins several years ago off ebay. I sent it into NGC and it came back altered color. It's appearence had changed dramatically. My

thoughts were NGC had applied some sorta solution to test it's color authenticity and it failed miserably. I contacted GSC and told him and he refunded my money back immediately. Maybe Mark or someone else can comment on this event. It is purely speculation on my part.

[Keigwin]

It is not clear to me...has the coin changed color since its trip to NCS/NGC? PVC is commonly removed with acetone. And acetone can affect the color of red copper.

 

Does NCS have input on the grading decision? Given that they treated the surfaces, might something have been detected there?

Lance.

[Kurtdog]

Dean, no tarnish is stable, even, so-called, "mint bag tarnish." And, copper...hell, that's the most unstable of the bunch! Honestly, I'd be very curious to know what "standards" are being applied, here, so as to, let's just call it, "convict" these coins as having "altered color," and, as such, not worthy of a grade. Especially as regards the subject coin in this thread. I doubt they're even articulable, much less, very rational, at all.

[MarkFeld]

I bought a 1904 red IHC proof from GreatSouthern Coins several years ago off ebay. I sent it into NGC and it came back altered color. It's appearence had changed dramatically. My

thoughts were NGC had applied some sorta solution to test it's color authenticity and it failed miserably. I contacted GSC and told him and he refunded my money back immediately. Maybe Mark or someone else can comment on this event. It is purely speculation on my part.

Dean, my guess is that NGC didn't do anything to the coin and that it changed on it's own, some time after having been messed with. The seller you mentioned sells a lot of coins that I would avoid.

[chinook]

I bought a 1904 red IHC proof from GreatSouthern Coins several years ago off ebay. I sent it into NGC and it came back altered color. It's appearence had changed dramatically. My

thoughts were NGC had applied some sorta solution to test it's color authenticity and it failed miserably. I contacted GSC and told him and he refunded my money back immediately. Maybe Mark or someone else can comment on this event. It is purely speculation on my part.

 

 

Copper coins that are recolored are highly unstable. I am highly confident that the coin changed on its own and NGC did absolutely nothing to the coin.

[Kurtdog]

What are we, detectives, or coin collectors? Sheesh!

[e1cnr]

it will be interesting to see the coins pics once you get it back

 

 

was this coin diverted to NCS before grading?

 

 

I wonder if in the process of removing the green spot, they removed something else that gave the coin the full red appearance?