Do you consider "dipping" to be a form of "coin doctoring" ?

[MarkFeld]

I have heard of numerous examples of both untoned and toned coins, toning or continuing to tone in PCGS and NGC holders. In some cases, fairly quickly and in others, slowly.

 

Can I PROVE that all of those coins had been "removed from the toning agent"? No. And in many cases, the "toning agent" might not even be known. So, on a practical basis, the coin can't be removed from it.

 

I have heard of enough examples of coins toning in their holders, such that I believe my "not necessarily" reply is correct.

 

So you are basing your opinion on hearsay evidence ? Without actually proof I cannot believe that a coin removed from the toning agent will continue to tone. I will have to agree with BillJones on this one that it may be due to an improper rinse.

 

I have also heard about coins continuing to tone in old no line fatty NGC holders but I would unscientifically attribute that to the fact that the coin is in close proximity to a paper label. Or perhaps these slabs were not inert or too porous to keep out the environmental toning agents. Not to the fact that the toning continues to progress on its own without assistance.

 

Does anyone have an example of a encapsulated coin that continued to tone despite being in a newer PCGS/NGC slab and being properly stored ? (ie., SDB, home safe, shoe box ect)

 

Yes, hearsay evidence from multiple sources, many of whom possess numismatic knowledge that I respect greatly. And many of whom know a heck of a lot more than I do about chemical reactions.

 

I seriously doubt that all of the white coins which tone, were previously dipped and improperly rinsed. And if a chemical reaction has started on a coin prior to encapsulation, it can continue in the holder, which is not air-tight.

 

Curiously, what type of "proof" are you seeking? In other words, how could I prove to you that coins which 1) have not been dipped and improperly rinsed and 2) have been removed from their "toning agent" can tone or continue to tone?

[James_OldeTowne]

Does anyone have an example of a encapsulated coin that continued to tone despite being in a newer PCGS/NGC slab and being properly stored ?

I don't anymore, because both coins I owned that toned in the slabs were sent off to NCS for conservation.

 

However, I do own a proof V-nickel in a PCGS PF-64 slab that is slowly LOSING it's toning over time! The color is literally fading year by year, although it's been about stable the last two or three years.

 

Needless to say, it was likely doctored, and I did not catch that fact upon purchase.

[MarkFeld]

I think this has been an excellent discussion and appreciate all of the opinions and contributions.

[Hard Times]

Mark knows my position, but I repeat it here simply as dipping IS a form of doctoring. However, some doctoring is good, some doctoring is bad. We tend to accept good doctoring, and file lawsuits over bad doctoring (tongue in cheek).

 

according to Q.D. Bowers in many of his books, the majority of 19th century silver coins in AU and uncirculated grades have been dipped

Does he really state that? Because I for one do not believe it to be true. I'd guess the vast majoriyt are NOT dipped, if only because BU Morgan dollars by the tens of millions in original rolls have never been dipped, and they outnumber everything else that's silver.

 

James, yes he does. In my early years (2005-2007) I read just about every coin help book Mr. Bowers has ever published. This was repeated in all of them. If you want, I can go back and find the pages in the books and list the quotes here and references. But this is clearly embedded into my brain, some things do stick in there and this is one of them. But note that Mr. Bowers was not talking about Morgans that were in bags in vaults with little circulating air for decades so your argument above is somewhat correct unless you exempt Morgans.

 

Best, HT

[Hard Times]

This question comes up every few months in some form or another. Each time, I mention that according to Q.D. Bowers in many of his books, the majority of 19th century silver coins in AU and uncirculated grades have been dipped, some many times. So if dipping is doctoring, then one would have to say that most of of these are doctored despite being in graded TPG slabs. I am thinking that this is why in the last few years it appears that silver and gold that have not had what appears to have had a recent (broadly defined) dipping to remove tone/patina are now in favor to many.

 

So by strict definition, dipped coins are doctored, but like michael notes, there is a fine line between doctoring and conservation, and one needs to look at this on a coin by coin basis.......... Certainly the graders at top TPG's are doing just that IMHO.

 

I believe that the vast majority of dipped coins in top TPG holders were not dipped for purposes of "conservation".

 

Mark, could you elaborate on this statement as to what the purposes were?

 

Best, HT

[MarkFeld]

This question comes up every few months in some form or another. Each time, I mention that according to Q.D. Bowers in many of his books, the majority of 19th century silver coins in AU and uncirculated grades have been dipped, some many times. So if dipping is doctoring, then one would have to say that most of of these are doctored despite being in graded TPG slabs. I am thinking that this is why in the last few years it appears that silver and gold that have not had what appears to have had a recent (broadly defined) dipping to remove tone/patina are now in favor to many.

 

So by strict definition, dipped coins are doctored, but like michael notes, there is a fine line between doctoring and conservation, and one needs to look at this on a coin by coin basis.......... Certainly the graders at top TPG's are doing just that IMHO.

 

I believe that the vast majority of dipped coins in top TPG holders were not dipped for purposes of "conservation".

 

Mark, could you elaborate on this statement as to what the purposes were?

 

Best, HT

 

Most often, by far, the reason for a dipping would be to make the coin more salable. And in a number of instances, at a higher price than it would bring, undipped.

[TonerGuy]

 

Yes, hearsay evidence from multiple sources, many of whom possess numismatic knowledge that I respect greatly. And many of whom know a heck of a lot more than I do about chemical reactions.

 

I seriously doubt that all of the white coins which tone, were previously dipped and improperly rinsed. And if a chemical reaction has started on a coin prior to encapsulation, it can continue in the holder, which is not air-tight.

 

Curiously, what type of "proof" are you seeking? In other words, how could I prove to you that coins which 1) have not been dipped and improperly rinsed and 2) have been removed from their "toning agent" can tone or continue to tone?

 

I will assume you are talking about white coins turning in slabs...

 

I am not.. I am talking about a toned coin that has been slabbed and has continued to tone while in the slab... in other words continue to darken.

 

It is my understanding that for toning to actually occur you need 1) sulfur (or some version of it) 2) air (possibly containing ozone) and 3) time. Silver is actual quite stable and will not tarnish without such...

 

From wikipedia... Silver is stable in pure air and water, but tarnishes when it is exposed to air or water containing ozone or hydrogen sulfide, the latter forming a black layer of silver sulfide which can be cleaned off with dilute hydrochloric acid.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver )

 

Again I do not know how inert a slab is but I would imagine that the more recent versions have probably been improved to a point where they do provide maximum protection. While I do not doubt your well respected numismatic sources I would need more information than merely anecdotal evidence.

 

Does anyone have a photos of a slabbed toner that was originally slabbed as a toned coin and has continued to darken in the slab over time ? I am not saying its impossible but without sulfide and/or ozone reaching the coin's surface, scientifically speaking - it shouldnt happen.

 

 

[MarkFeld]

 

Yes, hearsay evidence from multiple sources, many of whom possess numismatic knowledge that I respect greatly. And many of whom know a heck of a lot more than I do about chemical reactions.

 

I seriously doubt that all of the white coins which tone, were previously dipped and improperly rinsed. And if a chemical reaction has started on a coin prior to encapsulation, it can continue in the holder, which is not air-tight.

 

Curiously, what type of "proof" are you seeking? In other words, how could I prove to you that coins which 1) have not been dipped and improperly rinsed and 2) have been removed from their "toning agent" can tone or continue to tone?

 

I will assume you are talking about white coins turning in slabs...

 

I am not.. I am talking about a toned coin that has been slabbed and has continued to tone while in the slab... in other words continue to darken.

 

It is my understanding that for toning to actually occur you need 1) sulfur (or some version of it) 2) air (possibly containing ozone) and 3) time. Silver is actual quite stable and will not tarnish without such...

 

From wikipedia... Silver is stable in pure air and water, but tarnishes when it is exposed to air or water containing ozone or hydrogen sulfide, the latter forming a black layer of silver sulfide which can be cleaned off with dilute hydrochloric acid.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver )

 

Again I do not know how inert a slab is but I would imagine that the more recent versions have probably been improved to a point where they do provide maximum protection. While I do not doubt your well respected numismatic sources I would need more information than merely anecdotal evidence.

 

Does anyone have a photos of a slabbed toner that was originally slabbed as a toned coin and has continued to darken in the slab over time ? I am not saying its impossible but without sulfide and/or ozone reaching the coin's surface, scientifically speaking - it shouldnt happen.

 

 

I am speaking of white coins turning in slabs AND toned coins, toning further.

 

Even if I could present before and after images, it wouldn't prove that the "toning agent" had been removed. In essence, I don't know what proof would convince you. I respect your desire for verifiable facts, but can't provide them.

[physics-fan3.14]

Slabbing doesn't necessarily remove the toning agent, for four reasons:

 

- the toning agent may be adhered to the coin

- the toning agent may be in the environment sealed into the slab (it is not a vacuum in there)

- the toning agent may get into the slab after it is sealed (they are not perfectly airtight)

- the toning agent may actually be a part of the slab. Especially on early slabs, the paper insert is a toning source

 

 

[TonerGuy]

Slabbing doesn't necessarily remove the toning agent, for four reasons:

 

- the toning agent may be adhered to the coin

- the toning agent may be in the environment sealed into the slab (it is not a vacuum in there)

- the toning agent may get into the slab after it is sealed (they are not perfectly airtight)

- the toning agent may actually be a part of the slab. Especially on early slabs, the paper insert is a toning source

 

 

Okay can you provide an example of #1 ? What toning agent would be adhered to the coin's surface when it is slabbed ?

 

#2 & #3 and actually #1 and #2 are pretty much the same so in essence you really mean that the toning agent has to be adhered to the coin and/or the environment has to be able to continue to react with the coin while slabbed?

 

And #4 I agree with... but everyone keeps providing hypotheticals and no one has provided actual proof... Can someone from NGC/NCS provide an example of where a toned coin continue to tone while in one of their slabs ? I would imagine that in the course and scope of their guaranty somewhere along their 24 year history this must have come up....

 

Again I am not saying its not possible I have just never seen it happen...

 

Im going to post this questing in the Ask NGC forum....

[coinman_23885]

 

Okay can you provide an example of #1 ? What toning agent would be adhered to the coin's surface when it is slabbed ?

 

Maybe paper dust, trace elements that are difficult to see?

[James_OldeTowne]

Mr. Bowers was not talking about Morgans that were in bags in vaults with little circulating air for decades so your argument above is somewhat correct unless you exempt Morgans.

I'd have to ponder the issue awhile, but if we exclude Morgan dollars, then I might agree that 50% or more of 19th century coins in AU/UNC have been dipped or cleaned.

[Hard Times]

Toning agents for silver, copper, and zinc are sulfur and oxygen, which produces sulfides and oxides, respectively, on the surfaces via reaction with the metal. Sulfide of copper can be eye appealing with the blue-violet-gold-red observed on many toned silver coins. Some sulfides are black, and most oxides are dark earthen colors, these of course are not as eye appealing to most. Gold is a noble metal and does not react. When a coin is open in the air, with a steady supply of sulfur or oxygen, it can tone pdq. Sitting in a slab, it will depend on:

 

1. How porous to atmosphere exchange the container is

2. Whether the material in the slab - plastic, paper insert, etc., has S (of course these have scads of bonded O)

3. Whether some moisture is trapped in the 'sealed' container which can serve as a catalyst to reaction with S or O

4. Whether some chemical is on the surfaces when slabbed that continues to react with the coin

5. Ambient environment

 

Heat can accelerate any reaction process with the metal, so hotter ambient environments are less better for storage than cooler ones. Also, plastics are notorious for outgassing chemicals. I am sure the TPG's try to find plastic that minimizes this, but even in the best of circumstances one can envision that the trapped air in the slabs must be full of volatile chemicals. It would be interesting to extract the air from slabs that were sealed decades ago to see what is in there.

 

With this in mind, the less air contained within a slab the better, my take is that PCGS slabs have less air in them than NGC ones, especially the new pronged holders could conceivably be a problem given the greater volume of air relative to earlier holders.

 

So yes toning/oxidation of surfaces can take place in the holder depending on all of these factors. You best chance to minimize this is to store your coins in cool, dry environments.

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Toning agents for silver, copper, and zinc are sulfur and oxygen, which produces sulfides and oxides, respectively, on the surfaces via reaction with the metal. Sulfide of copper can be eye appealing with the blue-violet-gold-red observed on many toned silver coins. Some sulfides are black, and most oxides are dark earthen colors, these of course are not as eye appealing to most. Gold is a noble metal and does not react. When a coin is open in the air, with a steady supply of sulfur or oxygen, it can tone pdq. Sitting in a slab, it will depend on:

 

1. How porous to atmosphere exchange the container is

2. Whether the material in the slab - plastic, paper insert, etc., has S (of course these have scads of bonded O)

3. Whether some moisture is trapped in the 'sealed' container which can serve as a catalyst to reaction with S or O

4. Whether some chemical is on the surfaces when slabbed that continues to react with the coin

5. Ambient environment

 

Heat can accelerate any reaction process with the metal, so hotter ambient environments are less better for storage than cooler ones. Also, plastics are notorious for outgassing chemicals. I am sure the TPG's try to find plastic that minimizes this, but even in the best of circumstances one can envision that the trapped air in the slabs must be full of volatile chemicals. It would be interesting to extract the air from slabs that were sealed decades ago to see what is in there.

 

With this in mind, the less air contained within a slab the better, my take is that PCGS slabs have less air in them than NGC ones, especially the new pronged holders could conceivably be a problem given the greater volume of air relative to earlier holders.

 

So yes toning/oxidation of surfaces can take place in the holder depending on all of these factors. You best chance to minimize this is to store your coins in cool, dry environments.

 

But (there is always a "but"), is it doctored, via dipping?

 

I have a slight aversion to labeling nature and naturally occuring chemistry as 'coin doctors". I suspect it would cause me to have to avoid many thunder bolts aimed at me.

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

 

[CCM-migration]

PCGS has a new service. It's called secure plus. With this service they run a "coin sniffer" step. This is supposed to detect chemical dipping or altering. They also digitally map the marks on the coin in this service to identify the coin if it is resubmitted as to not change the grade. You can also choose the regular service still if you want it.

[MarkFeld]

PCGS has a new service. It's called secure plus. With this service they run a "coin sniffer" step. This is supposed to detect chemical dipping or altering. They also digitally map the marks on the coin in this service to identify the coin if it is resubmitted as to not change the grade. You can also choose the regular service still if you want it.

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

"Secure Plus" has been around for a while now - more than a year, I believe.

 

And I think one of it's main features is a scan of a coin. That is separate from the "sniffer".

 

Even with the "Secure Plus" scan being used, PCGS will still raise the grade of coins it feels deserve it. I know of a number of submitters who have had success in that regard. In other words, PCGS "Secure Plus" is not automatically used to prevent upgrades being awarded to coins which are recognized as having been submitted previously.

[Kurtdog]

.........opinions are like belly buttons...everybody has one

 

Why is it that when we were kids, we used to get lint in them, but now that we are older, there is no lint?

 

Chris

I learned in college that beer is actually a food. Needless to say, that was a watershed moment for me. Anyway, to answer your question, as men age and naturally consume more beer, our navels, if you hadn't noticed, are apt to turn from innies to outies, which, of course, can be expected to hold less lint.

[comicdonna]

.........opinions are like belly buttons...everybody has one

 

Why is it that when we were kids, we used to get lint in them, but now that we are older, there is no lint?

 

Chris

I learned in college that beer is actually a food. Needless to say, that was a watershed moment for me. Anyway, to answer your question, as men age and naturally consume more beer, our navels, if you hadn't noticed, are apt to turn from innies to outies, which, of course, can be expected to hold less lint.

At 47 I still get lint. Although I did give up drinking over 20 years ago. Perhaps there is some truth to this.

[comicdonna]

BTW, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, there is still a sound. If someone alters a coin and nobody notices, it's still been doctored.

[Kurtdog]

BTW, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, there is still a sound. If someone alters a coin and nobody notices, it's still been doctored.

I know this much. If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it I'm still wrong.

[James_OldeTowne]

BTW, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, there is still a sound. If someone alters a coin and nobody notices, it's still been doctored.

To continue your analogy, yes, there is SOUND, but is it NOISE?

 

And that's the key point, isn't it? If you cannot tell by any means whether the color on a coin was applied naturally or artificially, then it is just toning, and neither "artificial" nor "natural" toning, isn't it??

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

BTW, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, there is still a sound. If someone alters a coin and nobody notices, it's still been doctored.

To continue your analogy, yes, there is SOUND, but is it NOISE?

 

And that's the key point, isn't it? If you cannot tell by any means whether the color on a coin was applied naturally or artificially, then it is just toning, and neither "artificial" nor "natural" toning, isn't it??

 

But (you know the rest), the issue is not about how the color was applied, it is about how the color was taken off-dipping- and whether or not it is doctoring, according to the OP.

 

So, I must disagree that the point is sound and noise, or to be or not to be.

 

It is about it was there and now its not and is that doctoring or not.

 

Respectfully (always)

John Curlis

[physics-fan3.14]

But (you know the rest), the issue is not about how the color was applied, it is about how the color was taken off-dipping- and whether or not it is doctoring, according to the OP.

 

John, AT'ing a coin is doctoring it just as much as dipping or scrubbing or whatever else.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

But (you know the rest), the issue is not about how the color was applied, it is about how the color was taken off-dipping- and whether or not it is doctoring, according to the OP.

 

John, AT'ing a coin is doctoring it just as much as dipping or scrubbing or whatever else.

 

Thank You.

 

I am guessing that you are an accomplished speed reader, focusing on highlights.

 

The problem is, as I am guilty of constantly, interpreting to quickly.

 

Please read my thoughts. I do not state AT'ing is not doctoring.

 

I am merely suggesting that the words I replied to are not germane or an on par example to the OP question, and how the color was applied is not the point, and is opposite of the point of the OP.

 

But (you know the rest), I do appreciate that my comments are even noticed by others.

 

Respectfully, always,

John Curlis

[physics-fan3.14]

I see what you are saying, John... sorry for my misinterpretation of your intentions. Over the course of the thread, the discussion seems (in my mind, at least) to have progressed from the specific of "dipping" to the general of "doctoring". In light of the context, then, I hope you understand how I may have been confused.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I see what you are saying, John... sorry for my misinterpretation of your intentions. Over the course of the thread, the discussion seems (in my mind, at least) to have progressed from the specific of "dipping" to the general of "doctoring". In light of the context, then, I hope you understand how I may have been confused.

 

Absolutely I do, and I am, I admit, somewhat chagrined that that the issue Mr. Feld was presenting in the OP was lost, and the progression settled on what or how is something bad or acceptable, which was never the point of the OP.

 

The issue became silence is golden, and/or its evil twin alternative-ignorance is bliss.

 

I more than understand; I am your ablest partner of confusion, at this point.

 

I am going back under the kitchen cabinets, now.

 

Respectfully,

John

[Houston Investor]

Absolute not.

 

To me it is a form of conservation.

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Absolute not.

 

To me it is a form of conservation.

 

Good Morning.

 

I am not certain if your thoughts are in answer to my comments, or in answer to the OP question(s).

 

However, I am cognizant by choosing to reply, there is a consequence. I will accept the "risk".

 

Respecting your opinion, my questions are: Why is it conservation, and what is the form of conservation alluded to?

 

The OP is a 2 part question, - is dipping doctoring, and why or wht not.

 

It is not condemnation of the practice,or condemnation of the term "doctoring". It is not condemnation of an opinion that it is or is not acceptable.

 

The question starts from the fact that a coin has been dipped/cleaned/etc.

 

I think what you are stating is that it is not doctoring, because it is a form of conservation.

 

Accepting for the moment that your answer that it is a form of conservation is in reply to why or why not, you appear to be equating conservation with non-doctoring (good or bad). The question remains-Why?

 

I am interested in the logic of the position, from a numismatic perspective only.

 

Respectfully, Always

John Curlis

 

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

As I stated in another thread, I am extremely tired of the statement that "dipping is accepted, so it's not doctoring". That's absurd.

 

To dip a coin is unquestionably a form of doctoring. It's just that some doctoring is acceptable to many in the numismatic community.

 

Some just try to "excuse" dipping by claiming it isn't doctoring. That's just a lame avoidance of reality. The harsh truth is simply that some people want dipping to be acceptable, without having to label it for what it truly is: doctoring.

 

No matter how you slice it, no matter how you dice it, to dip a coin is indeed to doctor it.

[BillJones]

Well James, I guess you have settled the issue on your own, and there is not need for further discussion.

 

I disagree with you, but hey, if you don't want any dipped coins, don't buy them. Given your position however, I don't know how you can catalog coins for your employer's auctions with a clear conscience and avoid labeling any piece that has been dipped as “doctored.” Of could such a description would have a negative affect upon the bidding.