1921 Peace S $1, thoughts?

[wdrob]

 

Acetone will not stabilize natural toning. Proper storage should though. Acetone will only remove any organic contaminants from the coin's surface.

 

Nah, Kenny. I meant that I was neutralizing any of the dip solution and final rinse water. I went straight from the dip, to rinse, and then into a teacup full of acetone where I am certain it will separate the residual water.

 

Last photo, laying flat, lights at lens height, wide aperture, 3 Jansjo LED lights (which I hate, sort of). Oh, and once again on "Natural" setting not "Neutral". Natural gives a 0,0,0 across the board on colors. So there is not any juicing in any of the pictures.

 

I think I liked the previous one better where I had the lights closer and the coin tilted 1 penny height. This picture looks a somewhat lifeless.

 

I appreciate all the opinions.

 

Lee, sorry buddy but I just had to do it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Sorry: That is an ugly coin, and no amount of shifting and tilting and re-positioning lights is gonna make an ugly coin look any better.

[wdrob]

Sorry: That is an ugly coin, and no amount of shifting and tilting and re-positioning lights is gonna make an ugly coin look any better.

 

Jason ... Your jealousy is unbecoming.

 

It actually doesn't look half bad in hand. But still nothing to bring home to Momma!

 

 

[wdrob]

OK. After that last "opinion" I decided to bring out the big guns.

 

This thing has MS65 luster all day long. I would have never known what beautiful luster lay beneath that terminal toning.

 

My pictures may not be great but the coin looks incredible - for a white coin.

 

 

 

 

 

[coinman_23885]

OK. After that last "opinion" I decided to bring out the big guns.

 

This thing has MS65 luster all day long. I would have never known what beautiful luster lay beneath that terminal toning.

 

My pictures may not be great but the coin looks incredible - for a white coin.

 

 

 

 

 

That took a lot of guts. I would have never guessed that the coin would have conserved so well. That was incredibly risky, but it looks like it paid off.

[wdrob]

What do you know. (maybe there was supposed to be a question mark after that since it did not come out like I meant it to. ).

 

It is a 1921 TOP-50 PEACE S$1 VAM-3 RAY THROUGH "L" also!

 

After closer examination I was mistaken. I think it is actually a small area of PMD that gave the illusion of the ray through the 'L'.

 

 

It has some very smooth fields and face. It is actually a rather nice 1921 that was hiding under that terminal toning.

 

I have always been The Gambler, Kenny!

 

 

[coinman_23885]

Send it in!

 

Edited to add: I would start a new thread.

[wdrob]

I will.

 

I have already broke my promise to myself not to ever submit a single coin ever again.

 

I decided instead to send in 7.

 

Only because my NGC Membership was due and I think these folks over here at NGC (the company - not us) have half a brain. I let ATS drop.

 

These powers to be on this forum are very tolerant and don't smush .... well no more needs to be said on that. It has all been said before.

 

 

 

 

 

[Mark T]

I had one similar with much lighter gold tone . I don't have a problem with your coin other than its a bit dark .

[wdrob]

I had one similar with much lighter gold tone . I don't have a problem with your coin other than its a bit dark .

 

Are you talking about this coin when you say it is a bit dark, or were you thinking that they were all different coins?

 

This coin is the same coin that is in the very 1st picture and all the way throughout the thread.

 

 

 

 

 

[jpcienkus]

Incredible difference Bill. Congrats.

[leeg]

(thumbs u

 

Way to go Bill. Nice work.

 

Glad it worked out for you.

 

 

[wdrob]

Thanks fella's.

 

Lee, I would have never thought there would be so much luster under all that tarnish. I was afraid to take it all the way back down but Jason motivated me and I am glad he did.

 

Not only is the luster all there now, but that coin has not one bag mark on it and the fields and device on obverse are free of scratches, luster breaks, etc..

 

But now I feel both thrilled you let me have seconds on that but I also feel guilty that it came out looking like it did.

 

I will try and get over the guilt.

 

 

[Mark T]

The original coin was dark - I see you dipped it , actually looks better now.

[wdrob]

 

I hated to do it but I did it the right way.

 

It was in a MS63 PCGS holder with all that near terminal tarnish. It looks really good in hand now and I don't think it will ever see another MS63 holder. There is just no possible way.

 

Never say never.

 

 

[TonerGuy]

... Another toned Peace $ bites the dust in the interest of financial profit...

 

Sorry I cant get all giddy about dipping out coins to increase their worth. I would have the same opinion if you placed some really nice multicolor toning on a blast white 21 MS 63 Peace $ and then got it upgraded for eye appeal.

 

You took an original, albeit somewhat unattractive coin, and dipped it out. Good for you. Hopefully you can make a $1000 or so when it comes back as an MS64+

[RWB]

Tarnish is tarnish. Sometimes it looks good and most of the time it looks bad.

[wdrob]

... Another toned Peace $ bites the dust in the interest of financial profit...

 

Sorry I cant get all giddy about dipping out coins to increase their worth. I would have the same opinion if you placed some really nice multicolor toning on a blast white 21 MS 63 Peace $ and then got it upgraded for eye appeal.

 

You took an original, albeit somewhat unattractive coin, and dipped it out. Good for you. Hopefully you can make a $1000 or so when it comes back as an MS64+

 

 

 

 

I can be accused of a lot of things but making a profit in this hobby is not one of them.

 

You never saw the coin in hand, you can not possibly know how close to terminal the toning was, however you do seem to acknowledge that the toning had reached a point that made it "unattractive".

 

I believe what I find most ironic about your comment is that YOU are the only person here that seems to be placing such an emphasis on money, profit, and selling coins.

 

Truth be known, I could have bought that coin for a discount (the same discount that Lee had offered), yet I chose to just pay the guy the full amount they originally wanted since I did not want to go through the hassle of writing and sending a check or MO, waiting until it cleared, and then receiving the coin. Seems as though I started out on the wrong foot for the "profit" motive to pan out.

 

Should I possibly start collecting by tailoring my preferences to your liking? Is that your objective with that analysis?

 

If you wish to criticize me for taking a nearly terminal Peace Dollar and bringing it back from the dead by dipping and conserving it properly then fine, take your shots, but bringing money or the objective to make a profit into the equation is unwarranted.

 

 

[RWB]

Sadly, too many now approach coin collecting as a money-oriented activity, not a knowledge and history field.

[leeg]

Sadly, too many now approach coin collecting as a money-oriented activity, not a knowledge and history field.

 

Exactly.

 

 

 

(thumbs u

[rrantique]

Sadly, too many now approach coin collecting as a money-oriented activity, not a knowledge and history field.

 

Exactly.

 

 

 

(thumbs u

 

(thumbs u (thumbs u

[TonerGuy]

 

 

 

I can be accused of a lot of things but making a profit in this hobby is not one of them.

 

You never saw the coin in hand, you can not possibly know how close to terminal the toning was, however you do seem to acknowledge that the toning had reached a point that made it "unattractive".

 

I believe what I find most ironic about your comment is that YOU are the only person here that seems to be placing such an emphasis on money, profit, and selling coins.

 

Truth be known, I could have bought that coin for a discount (the same discount that Lee had offered), yet I chose to just pay the guy the full amount they originally wanted since I did not want to go through the hassle of writing and sending a check or MO, waiting until it cleared, and then receiving the coin. Seems as though I started out on the wrong foot for the "profit" motive to pan out.

 

Should I possibly start collecting by tailoring my preferences to your liking? Is that your objective with that analysis?

 

If you wish to criticize me for taking a nearly terminal Peace Dollar and bringing it back from the dead by dipping and conserving it properly then fine, take your shots, but bringing money or the objective to make a profit into the equation is unwarranted.

 

 

Dipping is doctoring. You call it conserving. Its a 1921 Peace $ not the Mona Lisa or the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. If you dont like the coin you have, return it. Get your money back and buy one you like. You didnt "save" a coin. Please. You bought a coin that you thought you would like, someone on the forum called it ugly and you took out the dip jar.

 

OK. After that last "opinion" \:\/ I decided to bring out the big guns.

 

The coin was in a PCGS and wasnt going to get any worse - unless of course PCGS plastic is now a toning agent. If it is - please school me.

 

You even said that the coin wont see the inside of another MS63 slab - which I interpreted to mean you believed the coin would upgrade.

 

It looks really good in hand now and I don't think it will ever see another MS63 holder. There is just no possible way.

 

If there's no increased value for a 1921 Peace $ between an MS63 and MS64 grades, please school me.

 

So if you just did to make your coin "prettier" so be it. I cant agree that a dipped out 21 Peace $ is prettier than a naturally toned 1921 Peace $. I find the new coin ugly.

 

But as long as your happy and pleased that is all that really matters. Thats the great thing about silver and toning... stick it in an album and perhaps someone's grandchild or great grandchild will be able to buy your cleaned and attractively retoned 1921 Peace $ when you and I are nothing but dust.

[wdrob]

If you dont like the coin you have, return it. Get your money back and buy one you like. You didnt "save" a coin. Please. You bought a coin that you thought you would like, someone on the forum called it ugly and you took out the dip jar.

 

I had written a rather aggressive response earlier to the above. Sadly I lashed out and after reading it and thinking about it, I wanted to make this change.

 

You and a few others may have read my previous post, and to a degree it was not necessary nor dignified (even subjective to my low standards). I was crass and should not have been for I believe you and I have always been very civil in our communications on this forum.

 

The point I was trying to convey to you is that, although it may have disturbed you very much that I chose to do what I did to a coin I purchased, it was never a decision that was made only after posting pictures here with my camera.

 

I told leeg in a PM that I was planning on trying to lightly dip the coin to lighten the center devices and leave the outlying edges with toning, however not as dark as it was at that time. That was said before I even purchased the coin.

 

I never made the decision based upon anything anyone said on this forum, although I did make a joke (noticed the man with the stick jabbing at the other) based off Jason's predictable finicky opinion of another persons coin.

 

After I tried to experiment with a coin that I purchased and then realized that the toning was terminal and that was a fact. I decided to get the e-zest out instead of continuing to try to use the less effective Linders. That was what I meant when I said I was bringing out the "big guns".

 

The bottom line that I finished the previous post with is this; I purchased that coin with MY MONEY. I did not borrow any money from you, I did not ask for a partnership in the coins ownership. It was simply MY COIN.

 

Since you have no vested interest in that coin I feel that you are trying to make a point that has already been made by you, and understood by all.

 

It is doubtful that I will send it in for grading since I had swore off of grading for a long time. I busted many coins out of problem free holders only to sell them later (untouched by any chemical solutions) for a loss. But I don't mind losing that money because I gained a great amount of knowledge learning about each and every one that I had.

 

However, I did send in 7 coins last Thursday or Friday to our host and figured I would give it another shot. So even if I did in the future decide to send this particular coin in for grading, once again, it would not be because I busted out a coin, dipped it, and am now going to try and make a killing off of it.

 

I hope that came out much more civil and tactful than my last response. I believe it has and I think there is really nothing more that needs to be said about the coin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RWB]

All tone is tarnish; all tarnish is not tone.... Some coins benefit from careful cleaning - this was one of them. (Most, however, do not benefit.)

[jpcienkus]

You even said that the coin wont see the inside of another MS63 slab - which I interpreted to mean you believed the coin would upgrade.

 

I don't believe Bill is going to re-submit. I think it will stay raw and be put in his new display case.

[coinman_23885]

The coin was in a PCGS and wasnt going to get any worse - unless of course PCGS plastic is now a toning agent.

 

Slabs are not air tight, and coins can continue to tone in slabs. Granted, if stored properly, it is often slowed to a point that it might not happen within his lifetime or might only slightly darken. Nevertheless, in my opinion, it is not correct to say that the coin wasn't going to get any worse.

[TonerGuy]

If you dont like the coin you have, return it. Get your money back and buy one you like. You didnt "save" a coin. Please. You bought a coin that you thought you would like, someone on the forum called it ugly and you took out the dip jar.

 

I had written a rather aggressive response earlier to the above. Sadly I lashed out and after reading it and thinking about it, I wanted to make this change.

 

You and a few others may have read my previous post, and to a degree it was not necessary nor dignified (even subjective to my low standards). I was crass and should not have been for I believe you and I have always been very civil in our communications on this forum.

 

The point I was trying to convey to you is that, although it may have disturbed you very much that I chose to do what I did to a coin I purchased, it was never a decision that was made only after posting pictures here with my camera.

 

I told leeg in a PM that I was planning on trying to lightly dip the coin to lighten the center devices and leave the outlying edges with toning, however not as dark as it was at that time. That was said before I even purchased the coin.

 

I never made the decision based upon anything anyone said on this forum, although I did make a joke (noticed the man with the stick jabbing at the other) based off Jason's predictable finicky opinion of another persons coin.

 

After I tried to experiment with a coin that I purchased and then realized that the toning was terminal and that was a fact. I decided to get the e-zest out instead of continuing to try to use the less effective Linders. That was what I meant when I said I was bringing out the "big guns".

 

The bottom line that I finished the previous post with is this; I purchased that coin with MY MONEY. I did not borrow any money from you, I did not ask for a partnership in the coins ownership. It was simply MY COIN.

 

Since you have no vested interest in that coin I feel that you are trying to make a point that has already been made by you, and understood by all.

 

It is doubtful that I will send it in for grading since I had swore off of grading for a long time. I busted many coins out of problem free holders only to sell them later (untouched by any chemical solutions) for a loss. But I don't mind losing that money because I gained a great amount of knowledge learning about each and every one that I had.

 

However, I did send in 7 coins last Thursday or Friday to our host and figured I would give it another shot. So even if I did in the future decide to send this particular coin in for grading, once again, it would not be because I busted out a coin, dipped it, and am now going to try and make a killing off of it.

 

I hope that came out much more civil and tactful than my last response. I believe it has and I think there is really nothing more that needs to be said about the coin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No need for being more civil. This isnt personal. There's really nothing you can say on a message board to even come close to bothering me. Im not questioning your civility. You are an esteemed and valued member of the forum. I am not questioning when you decided to dip the coin, I am questioning the fact that you decided to dip it at all.

 

Unless the coin is going with you in your coffin, its not your coin. You are a steward for the coin when you own it. Others will own it after you either decide to sell it or die.

 

Sure you can do whatever you want to it while it is in your possession. You could turn it into a ring, you could drill a hole it and hang keys from it, you could use it as a ball marker for when you golf, you could colorize it and add political stickers to the back of it, you can do whatever you want to it but that doesnt mean you should.

 

I look at so many mid to late nineteenth century coins that blast white and all nice and shiny and wonder what tool along the way decided to remove the original skin from that coin.

 

All dipping bothers me... so this just isnt about you.

 

But dipping toned Peace $ really bothers me since it is what I specialize in. And dipping 1921 Peace $ bothers me even more since very very very few 1921 Peace $ have any toning on them.

 

I would have bought the coin off of you and given you a profit just to save the coin from the dip jar.

 

Okay I will step off the soapbox now. Just remember dipping = doctoring.

[physics-fan3.14]

Dipping is doctoring, sure.

 

However, I'm not entirely opposed to it, in certain cases. This is one of them.

 

You took a blatantly ugly coin that I wouldn't even touch, much less pick up and look at.

 

You now have a coin that, while blast white, appears to have good luster. As long as the dip was properly performed and the dip was thoroughly rinsed and neutralized, there should be no long-term adverse effects. I am quite surprised by the results (I would have cautioned against the second dip, and would have expected the luster to be dull and lifeless afterwords, honestly).

 

Put the coin in an album or envelope, carefully monitor it for the next 20 years, and let it regain some skin. If you truly are not concerned about money, and have no intention of selling this coin, then this is the best option for the coin.

 

Yes, you are a conservator of history. Yes, you are only temporarily holding the coin in safe-keeping for the next generation. However, you now have a coin which has the potential to be attractive that the next generation wants and will cherish, instead of a dark ugly thing that only a couple of die-hard originals will want.

[thebeav]

It sure does have a nice strike for a '21......

 

I've had unc's that were no where near that sharp.

 

Paul

[braddick]

Sadly, too many now approach coin collecting as a money-oriented activity, not a knowledge and history field.

 

One does not exclude the other.

No reason both approaches cannot be incorporated into one.