Improper Storage of Gem Proof Copper Coins (with Images)

[Bruceswar]

One thing’s for sure – I won’t be buying any toned copper in the future. I bet

the auction houses are about to get flooded with them.

 

Hays

 

 

Hays, You have gvin yourself some great advice. Don't deal in coins you don't know about. I am not saying your dumb, but if you know little to nothing about toned copper, its best to stay away until you feel comfortable buying them.

 

Don’t worry Bruce – I know you’re not calling me names. Not your style

anyway. BESIDES – it is good advice whether you are buying coins or

cows: Never invest in something you know little about. I’ll learn as much as

I can though even if I never try to buy any.

 

As Maul put it – the jeanie is out of the bottle now. I just wonder how long

has MS70 been around? Why wasn’t it’s use of finding “hidden” toning

common knowledge?

 

The way this information came about still looks fishy to me. My solution is to

not buy any toned copper – for me that’s the safest thing to do. I hope

other newbies do the same for their own sake.

 

Hays

 

Hays I don't think all toned copper is bad, and just because a few bad apples are out there does not mean you should avoid it all together. Knowledge is the key to buying anything like you said. That goes for walkers to toned coins to moderns. Your doing rather well for your short time in coins. I wish about a year into coins I was where you are.

[Brotherman]

 

Hays I don't think all toned copper is bad, and just because a few bad apples are out there does not mean you should avoid it all together. Knowledge is the key to buying anything like you said. That goes for walkers to toned coins to moderns. Your doing rather well for your short time in coins. I wish about a year into coins I was where you are.

 

Thanks Bruce. There is a LOT of information to absorb. I don’t think all

toned copper is bad either – it’s just I can’t tell the good from the bad yet. I

will only avoid it while I can’t tell the difference – that may be many years

from now.

 

Don’t mean to continue harping on my first question but something has

been nagging at me.

 

If people’s reasons for keeping MS70’s ability to find hidden toning a secret so

that they could cherrypick – why would anyone write ANY books about

this hobby? Wouldn’t it follow that increasing the knowledge of the masses

also reduces the ability to cherrypick?

 

Hays

[Bruceswar]

 

Hays I don't think all toned copper is bad, and just because a few bad apples are out there does not mean you should avoid it all together. Knowledge is the key to buying anything like you said. That goes for walkers to toned coins to moderns. Your doing rather well for your short time in coins. I wish about a year into coins I was where you are.

 

Thanks Bruce. There is a LOT of information to absorb. I don’t think all

toned copper is bad either – it’s just I can’t tell the good from the bad yet. I

will only avoid it while I can’t tell the difference – that may be many years

from now.

 

Don’t mean to continue harping on my first question but something has

been nagging at me.

 

If people’s reasons for keeping MS70’s ability to find hidden toning a secret so

that they could cherrypick – why would anyone write ANY books about

this hobby? Wouldn’t it follow that increasing the knowledge of the masses

also reduces the ability to cherrypick?

 

Hays

 

You bring up a good point. MS70 to some is preserving a coin and to some is cleaning a coin. Why would anybody put thier name on a coin book about how to clean coins or with anything that could be considered cleaning by some? On the other hand people do want thier name to be asscoiated with certain series and therefor they are seen as experts, and maybe to go down in History as such. Walter Breen, Overton, Sheldon, etc. If they did not put out the books, articles, findings etc who are they going to sell the rarities to? You need a market for a coin to be able to sell it. You could have the rarest coin ever,but without a market for it you would not have the most valuable. Just think Hays.. if you came up with the next big thing in coins and people for generations after you spoke of your work and findings. Or the new grading system. The Coin industry as whole has lived off of knowledge and flurrished. Rarity does not always mean there will be a market for it. People have to know about it and want it. ... I will use a a reference from a guitar we just sold. It was a 1960's "The Grammer" acoustic guitar, which is every bit as good as a Martin, if not better. This guitar sold for $1000.00 and it was a better instrument, but a 1960's Martin would cost you $5,000.00 or more and play no better. Martin marketed itself well and The Grammer is lesser known. Did I mention The Grammer is a nuch rarer guitar as well. 50 to 1. Just some thoughts...

[Connecticoin]

Even with Truthteller's experiment, I am not convinced that MS-70 does anything more than strip layers of "skin" off the coin, even in the case of BN IHCs supposedly "turning" blue. If the result is a coin which is no different than a NT "blue" IHC, I am not seeing how this is any different than "improving" hazed modern cameo proofs, dipping fugly toned Morgans white, "dip and strip" upgrades of MS seated coins, or NCS "conserving" hazed 19th century proof gold.

 

I am certainly not a proponent of coin doctoring or artificial toning. But it seems here that a conservation tecnique considered acceptable for most coins is being criticized as not acceptable only when it results in stripping a layer of skin off BN IHCs resulting in a more attractive toned coin. I am failing to see how this is much different than everyday activity performed on coins at NCS.

[WinstonWare]

I ordered two rolls of 1980 copper Memorial cents because they appear to be closer in composition than the medals - 90% copper to 95% copper. 1980 Cent Indian Head cent

 

I also ordered a bottle of MS70 and coin tongs - I don't want to turn my fingers blue. I hope to recieve all the items sometime next week and will post my results.

 

BTW Guys - save your sphincters and stay away from taco hell. Good grief!

[MarkFeld]

Even with Truthteller's experiment, I am not convinced that MS-70 does anything more than strip layers of "skin" off the coin, even in the case of BN IHCs supposedly "turning" blue. If the result is a coin which is no different than a NT "blue" IHC, I am not seeing how this is any different than "improving" hazed modern cameo proofs, dipping fugly toned Morgans white, "dip and strip" upgrades of MS seated coins, or NCS "conserving" hazed 19th century proof gold.

 

I am certainly not a proponent of coin doctoring or artificial toning. But it seems here that a conservation tecnique considered acceptable for most coins is being criticized as not acceptable only when it results in stripping a layer of skin off BN IHCs resulting in a more attractive toned coin. I am failing to see how this is much different than everyday activity performed on coins at NCS.

Connecticoin, it sounds as if new/different colors, which were not present previously, are sometimes added through the process. If you don't consider that type of color to be "artificial", how would you feel about heat and/or chemicals being used to impart new colors to a coin?

 

I'm frequently opposed to dipping coins, but I see a big difference between removing a haze or toning which was not present when the coin was struck, vs. a process which adds colors (which were not previously present) to a coin.

[CTcollector]

I’m new to this hobby. I’ll admit that I don’t know enough about toning on

copper to give an opinion on the subject. Since I don’t know enough – I don’t

buy it. So, I don’t have a dog in this fight and I’m not accusing anyone here

of doctoring coins.

 

But I wasn’t born yesterday either - I know that coin doctors exist.

 

As someone that cares about the future of this hobby, recent events have

brought some questions to mind:

 

If removing lacquer would reveal astonishing toning underneath – why wasn’t

there any articles in any trade magazines of this amazing discovery?

Wouldn’t the person that discovered it want to share this information with

the world?

 

Why wasn’t there talk of this technique and the results it produces previous

to someone posting before and after photos of the same coin?

 

I think if there were a chance to debate this issue BEFORE any coins were

sold, then emotions wouldn’t be so high. The fact is, the way this information

has come to light makes it looks suspicious.

 

One thing’s for sure – I won’t be buying any toned copper in the future. I bet

the auction houses are about to get flooded with them.

 

Hays

 

Hays - Great analysis. You have absolutely nailed what is going on. In addition, you are approaching this in the correct manner. Don't sweat the fact that you are not an expert in toned copper. Not many people are. I'm certainly not and after all these shenanigans coming to light, I really don't care. In addition, If you read through the thread ATS you will see that some really high profile dealers were fooled also. You are maturing as a collector and you are beginning to develop that sixth (coin collecting) sense that is critical for survival in this hobby.

[John Martinez]

I’m new to this hobby. I’ll admit that I don’t know enough about toning on

copper to give an opinion on the subject. Since I don’t know enough – I don’t

buy it. So, I don’t have a dog in this fight and I’m not accusing anyone here

of doctoring coins.

 

But I wasn’t born yesterday either - I know that coin doctors exist.

 

As someone that cares about the future of this hobby, recent events have

brought some questions to mind:

 

If removing lacquer would reveal astonishing toning underneath – why wasn’t

there any articles in any trade magazines of this amazing discovery?

Wouldn’t the person that discovered it want to share this information with

the world?

 

Why wasn’t there talk of this technique and the results it produces previous

to someone posting before and after photos of the same coin?

 

I think if there were a chance to debate this issue BEFORE any coins were

sold, then emotions wouldn’t be so high. The fact is, the way this information

has come to light makes it looks suspicious.

 

One thing’s for sure – I won’t be buying any toned copper in the future. I bet

the auction houses are about to get flooded with them.

 

Hays

 

Hays - Great analysis. You have absolutely nailed what is going on. In addition, you are approaching this in the correct manner. Don't sweat the fact that you are not an expert in toned copper. Not many people are. I'm certainly not and after all these shenanigans coming to light, I really don't care. In addition, If you read through the thread ATS you will see that some really high profile dealers were fooled also. You are maturing as a collector and you are beginning to develop that sixth (coin collecting) sense that is critical for survival in this hobby.

 

I agree with you both. I've just recently gotten reacquainted with the hobby, so I'm no expert. Like I've said before. Will I get rid of a toned coin that I own? No. Will I buy one? No. Are the previous two statements absolute? No.

 

Don't take this as a knock to those who do. I respect what you want to spend your money on and what you consider beauty. Also like I said before, I can admire a toned coin. It's just not my cup of tea and this thread has only solidified my belief that toning is just another form of surface damage. This post has also made me start thinking whether or not is there really a difference between coin doctoring and restoring a coin? I have not come to a conslusion on that one.

[MAULEMALL]

Even with Truthteller's experiment, I am not convinced that MS-70 does anything more than strip layers of "skin" off the coin, even in the case of BN IHCs supposedly "turning" blue. If the result is a coin which is no different than a NT "blue" IHC, I am not seeing how this is any different than "improving" hazed modern cameo proofs, dipping fugly toned Morgans white, "dip and strip" upgrades of MS seated coins, or NCS "conserving" hazed 19th century proof gold.

 

I am certainly not a proponent of coin doctoring or artificial toning. But it seems here that a conservation tecnique considered acceptable for most coins is being criticized as not acceptable only when it results in stripping a layer of skin off BN IHCs resulting in a more attractive toned coin. I am failing to see how this is much different than everyday activity performed on coins at NCS.

I think you pretty much have a true grasp on the situation.

Mark thinks that conservation and cleaning are (From what I've seen posted) Coin doctoring.

Thats his opinion and neither you or I will dissuade him.

Personally I think that he is being short sighted.

I also think that his problem with this is misdirected.

As are his statements.

Truth has posted the address of the manufacturer of MS70 and If Mark wanted to he could go straight to the source.

It is my understanding (As I have never seen MS70 and wouldn't know it from shoe polish) They state that MS70 will NOT tone coins.

Eric T did this though and he (Again as I understand it) is still in court.

But Eric has the courage of his convictions.And even in Ill health Stood taller than those around here who are telling us the sky is Falling.

[MarkFeld]

"Truth has posted the address of the manufacturer of MS70 and If Mark wanted to he could go straight to the source"

 

Frankly, it doesn't matter to me what is contained in MS70. As I just posted in another thread on this topic:

 

If a substance is applied to a coin and/or something else is done to it and the coin appears to change color, I believe the burden of proof should be on those claiming that pre-existing color is simply being revealed, rather than on those who believe the color has been changed/added.

 

Of course if one is not concerned about whether the color is "artificial" or not, there is no need to worry about or try to prove anything.

[MAULEMALL]

"Truth has posted the address of the manufacturer of MS70 and If Mark wanted to he could go straight to the source"

 

Frankly, it doesn't matter to me what is contained in MS70. As I just posted in another thread on this topic:

 

If a substance is applied to a coin and/or something else is done to it and the coin appears to change color, I believe the burden of proof should be on those claiming that pre-existing color is simply being revealed, rather than on those who believe the color has been changed/added.

 

Of course if one is not concerned about whether the color is "artificial" or not, there is no need to worry about or try to prove anything.

I think that one needs to prove it's artificial before insinuations and innuendo are spoken.

I'm still waiting for Mikeinfl to post his original unedited post.

Since you came over here to back him up maybe you could have some influence there.

I only bring this up because I feel that if we are to have a pertinent discussion on this topic we should know all the facts.

 

I have also posted in the NCS area asking their participation as I think this is more their area of Expertise.

 

I hope you will take the time to add your request for their assistance in hopes of better understanding exactly what processes are at work here.

I have contacted a friend of mine who is preeminent in the field of metallurgy (He still teaches Micro structural analysis and anyone with a PHD would know him.) to see if he might have any input. I have as of yet been unable to reach him but as a past President of ASM and a recipient of many awards he may have some input.

[MarkFeld]

"I think that one needs to prove it's artificial before insinuations and innuendo are spoken.

I'm still waiting for Mikeinfl to post his original unedited post.

Since you came over here to back him up maybe you could have some influence there.

I only bring this up because I feel that if we are to have a pertinent discussion on this topic we should know all the facts."

 

That's not why I "came over here", but, since, as do I, you advocate "a pertinent discussion", let me ask you and others a question about what you stated above:

 

Let's say a professional grading company learns that something was done to a group of coins which has changed their appearance (and resulting "value") noticeably, and they are not sure whether the color is "original" or "artificial". Is it better/preferable that they grade and encapsulate the coins, before finding out, or is it better to no-grade them, due to "questionable color". I have an opinion on the matter and will be happy to share it, but would like to hear your thoughts and those of others, first. Thanks.

 

"I hope you will take the time to add your request for their assistance in hopes of better understanding exactly what processes are at work here."

 

I first contacted NGC about this issue several weeks ago and did so again today.

[MAULEMALL]

Let's say a professional grading company learns that something was done to a group of coins which has changed their appearance (and resulting "value") noticeably, and they are not sure whether the color is "original" or "artificial". Is it better/preferable that they grade and encapsulate the coins, before finding out, or is it better to no-grade them, due to "questionable color". I have an opinion on the matter and will be happy to share it, but would like to hear your thoughts and those of others, first. Thanks.

 

To answer this question I think I would like to know the responses of PCGS and NGC.

 

I first contacted NGC about this issue several weeks ago and did so again today.

 

Obviously it is your right to share this info if you choose.I respect everyones rights and will respect yours if you choose not to share.

 

But,In my opinion and with the weight you cary across the street,I believe you should have waited till you recieved a response from both companies and if no response was given you should have noted such in your original post.

[gmarguli]

I first contacted NGC about this issue several weeks ago and did so again today.

 

And yet rather than let them take their time, look into this situation, look into MS70, do tests, examine the coins again, compare them to the thousands of other examples out there, talk to people who have used the stuff for 20+ years, learn exactly what it does, try to reproduce the results, learn about its stability, etc, you've decided to continue to pound the drums and fan the flames. And this is in hopes of what?

 

I understand you love the fluffing you're getting across the street, but don't you think it would be prudent to allow NGC to take the time to do the above and come to a decision without the beating of your drums ringing in their ears while you try to push the outcome you so clearly want?

 

Given all the threads there are probably 1,000+ posts on this subject. The last 900 nothing new has come out. It's just a giant regurgitation of the first 100. How about moving on for a while to a real important topic, like whether or not Satin Finish coin belong in their own Registry or with Business Strikes, and let this one play out at it's own due time?

[MarkFeld]

Let's say a professional grading company learns that something was done to a group of coins which has changed their appearance (and resulting "value") noticeably, and they are not sure whether the color is "original" or "artificial". Is it better/preferable that they grade and encapsulate the coins, before finding out, or is it better to no-grade them, due to "questionable color". I have an opinion on the matter and will be happy to share it, but would like to hear your thoughts and those of others, first. Thanks.

 

To answer this question I think I would like to know the responses of PCGS and NGC.

 

I first contacted NGC about this issue several weeks ago and did so again today.

 

Obviously it is your right to share this info if you choose.I respect everyones rights and will respect yours if you choose not to share.

 

But,In my opinion and with the weight you cary across the street,I believe you should have waited till you recieved a response from both companies and if no response was given you should have noted such in your original post.

Patrick, you didn't really answer my question, other than to say "I think I would like to know the responses of PCGS and NGC."

 

I'll ask once more, and if you don't answer, will figure you didn't really want to have a pertinent discussion, after all.

 

Place yourself in the position of a grader at a major grading company and let us know how YOU would respond/what YOU would do, based upon the scenario I first mentioned above? In order to try to make it easier on you, I will tell you that I don't claim there is necessarily a "right" answer, so you can't really be "wrong".

 

I think the grading company is in a very difficult position. They can grade and encapsulate coins, which they might later learn are not "original". That would be bad for buyers of such coins, as well as for owners of other similar coins which are "original" but might end up being unfairly lumped together with the "artificial" ones. Or, they can no-grade the coins, which they might later learn are "original". That would be bad for the submitters of such coins. Either way, somebody gets a bad deal. So, do you choose door #1 or door #2 ? On which side do YOU chance erring?

[EZ_E]

I think that the bottom line that this thread is getting such a heated response is because of the resultant influence upon the coin's price and grade.

 

If this was not a consideration then I think that, in general, any conservation that improves the coin's appearance is a good thing. Hoot's 1804 Lg Cent, for example, became a much more desirable piece after the service of a coin "doctor".

 

The issue of market acceptability, however, becomes a different matter all together.

 

To answer Mark's question: No, a questionable batch of coins should not be graded before any questions are resolved. If this approach is not followed then the TPGS's reputation is called into question as well as the market acceptability of similar looking coins.

 

I applied MS70 to a BU 1930's Lincoln and got some unintentional blue toning on it. It was certainly not uniformed and any increase in eye-appeal is questionable. Whether or not it would be body bagged for AT, I have no idea.

 

So, I can find no easy answer to the vein of this thread. As I already stated, the coins in question had a marked increase in eye-appeal. Should this translate into a huge premium for the coin? I don't think so although it should make the coin more saleable.

 

Should they be graded or body bagged? This is the dilemma that we are all debating upon now.

[MarkFeld]

"Given all the threads there are probably 1,000+ posts on this subject. The last 900 nothing new has come out. It's just a giant regurgitation of the first 100 How about moving on for a while to a real important topic, like whether or not Satin Finish coin belong in their own Registry or with Business Strikes, and let this one play out at it's own due time? "

 

Greg, I think you are giving some of the more recent posts, such as Truth's, far too little credit. Of course I can understand why you might want to downplay them.

 

I can't contribute on the Satin Finish/Registry topic - sorry. But, I'll move on, for now, at least. Have a good weekend and maybe I'll see you at the show tomorrow. If I do, PLEASE don't wiggle your finger (or a 2x4) at me, though.

[IGWT]

And yet rather than let them take their time, look into this situation, look into MS70, do tests, examine the coins again, compare them to the thousands of other examples out there, talk to people who have used the stuff for 20+ years, learn exactly what it does, try to reproduce the results, learn about its stability, etc, . . . .

 

Perhaps it also would have been wiser to obtain the answers to these questions before using the chemical on copper coins and then selling the results.

[gmarguli]

Greg, I think you are giving some of the more recent posts, such as Truth's, far too little credit. Of course I can understand why you might want to downplay them.

 

Not at all. I just think that enough has been said by people who don't know. Let's wait for some talk from people who do know. However, that will take a little time.

 

 

I can't contribute on the Satin Finish/Registry topic - sorry. But, I'll move on, for now, at least. Have a good weekend and maybe I'll see you at the show tomorrow. If I do, PLEASE don't wiggle your finger (or a 2x4) at me, though.

 

Don't worry, no finger wagging for you at the show.

[gmarguli]

Greg, I think you are giving some of the more recent posts, such as Truth's, far too little credit. Of course I can understand why you might want to downplay them.

 

Not at all. I just think that enough has been said by people who don't know. Let's wait for some talk from people who do know. However, that will take a little time.

 

 

I can't contribute on the Satin Finish/Registry topic - sorry. But, I'll move on, for now, at least. Have a good weekend and maybe I'll see you at the show tomorrow. If I do, PLEASE don't wiggle your finger (or a 2x4) at me, though.

 

Don't worry, no finger wagging for you at the show.

 

 

Oops, meant to link the "pat on the back icon" and not the knife in the head. See you tomorrow.

[WinstonWare]

Ohhh I hadn't seen the stabbed head gremlin. I had to save that for my personal collection.

[MAULEMALL]

Patrick, you didn't really answer my question, other than to say "I think I would like to know the responses of PCGS and NGC."

 

I like to get all my information before I post anything that might inflame or cause a disterbance in someones wallet and or reputation.

 

I'll ask once more, and if you don't answer, will figure you didn't really want to have a pertinent discussion, after all. Please see the above bold response and draw your own conclusion

 

Place yourself in the position of a grader at a major grading company and let us know how YOU would respond/what YOU would do, based upon the scenario I first mentioned above? In order to try to make it easier on you, I will tell you that I don't claim there is necessarily a "right" answer, so you can't really be "wrong".

Thanks for trying to make it easier.I am not a grader nor do I make as much as a Grader.But I am a builder.My own little company.And If I guaranty something it's Guaranteed.It's also why I have insurance.I don't take the assurances of a fellow builder that something is right or wrong.I do my own homework and I insure my ability to give a guaranty.You have yet to do any research and you have waited for no one with the applicable abilities to answer your questions.You have only proven to me that you are wanting to discuss things on your terms and you are neither big enough or have enough creadability to dissuede me or my opinion that Greg has done nothing wrong and I fear you are so far entrenched into your own ego that you are unable to admit you and Mikeinfla are wrong.

If I turnout to be proven wrong I will sincearly appoligize to you, The board and whom ever thinks I may have injured.

I just hope that you are Man enough to do the same.

 

I think the grading company is in a very difficult position. T.S. ...It's the profession they chose.....THEY CHOSE TO BURDEN THEMSELVES WITH THIS RESPONSABILITY. They can grade and encapsulate coins, which they might later learn are not "original". That would be bad for buyers of such coins, as well as for owners of other similar coins which are "original" but might end up being unfairly lumped together with the "artificial" ones. Or, they can no-grade the coins, which they might later learn are "original". That would be bad for the submitters of such coins. Either way, somebody gets a bad deal. So, do you choose door #1 or door #2 ? On which side do YOU chance erring?

 

NGC HAS GRADED THESE COINS AND HAS GUARANTEED THEIR GRADE. They are what they are.....And there is absolutely nothing you can say about that to Greg. The thread you started is as miss directed as any to have EVER been posted...AND YOU OWE GREG A PERSONAL APOLOGY.

 

 

MANN UP

[James_OldeTowne]

((( So, the pertinent question seems to be whether MS70 imparts a blue tone (by chemical reaction or otherwise) or reveals a pre-exising blue tone underlying a brown surface. We ought to be able to get an answer to this question. )))

 

I know for a fact (again from unfortunate experience) that MS-70 will turn at least SOME brown copper coins blue.

 

((( "coin doctor: someone who attempts to improve the appearance of a coin by cleaning, repairing, plugging and/or any other deliberate alteration". )))

 

I think this is a pretty good definition of a coin doctor. But to me, the term "coin doctor" doesn't automatically have a negative connotation. I have deliberately placed cleaned (not by me) coins in Kraft envelopes, Wayte Raymond holders, and paper tissue, then left them in warm areas in hopes that they will retone. This qualifies as coin doctoring, but I don't think it's a negative thing. I always describe such coins as having been cleaned and "naturally retoned".

 

I think the problem is when a coin is doctored, then sold as if it were original. That isn't being a coin doctor, that's being a crook, or at least unethical.

 

I absolutely do not believe that proper coin conservation is doctoring, since it removes something that is not part of the coin, such as dust particles, spilled coffee, or PVC.

 

((( Here's my definition: Doctors move metal in quantities visible to the naked eye. )))

 

JamminJ, the only danger I see with this is when something, such as putty or varnish, is placed on the surface of a coin to hide something.

 

One more quick statement I'd like to make regarding the "lacquer" issue. I've purchased several lacquered coins over the years, and I will say that removing the lacquer with acetone can indeed change the apparent color of a coin dramatically, and likewise, it can reveal vivid toning that was in fact rendered invisible by the lacquer.

 

I consider lacquer to be potentially damaging to a coin, and it's removal constitutes coin conservation, not cleaning or doctoring.

 

James

[IGWT]

Welcome back, James.

[Stanley]

Hi James,

((( Here's my definition: Doctors move metal in quantities visible to the naked eye. )))

 

JamminJ, the only danger I see with this is when something, such as putty or varnish, is placed on the surface of a coin to hide something.

 

I thought when JJ made that comment he was talking about doctor’s making a lot of money. Sending you a huge bill, thus moving lots of metal or removing money from your pocketbook.

 

Eddited to add: Medical Doctors. They will definitely move your metal

[MarkFeld]

" Here's my definition: Doctors move metal in quantities visible to the naked eye"

 

If meant seriously, the above definition of "coin doctoring" is absurd, I would bet, even in the eyes of coin doctors, themselves.

 

The issue of the application of MS70 to copper coins aside, there are numerous methods that people use to hide/mask imperfections on coins and which almost everyone would consider to be "coin doctoring". In fact, the above definition would exclude even "moving metal" which was NOT visible to the naked eye. So, for example, someone could use a laser on a coin to remove hairlines or turn a non-FH Standing Liberty Quarter into a FH example and that wouldn't be coin doctoring. That definition needs some serious refinement.

[IGWT]

We need to move away from terms like "coin doctor" -- which is both vague and ambiguous -- if we're going to have a meaningful discussion on what work on coins is generally acceptable and what work is not.

 

I'll leave it to someone more knowledgeable than me to initiate a thread, but the distinction between conservation and restoration might be a good place to start. Hoot's thread prompted a discussion on this subject a while ago.

 

I think there'd be nearly universal agreement that conservation, e.g., removal of PVC or verdigris to prevent further damage, is a good thing. Restoration is likely to be more controversial with valid points of view on both sides. Any other alteration that isn't intended to either conserve or to restore a coin -- whether by putty, toning, whizzing, adding a mintmark, etc. -- is more likely to be condemned by a majority of collectors.

[James_OldeTowne]

((( We need to move away from terms like "coin doctor" -- which is both vague and ambiguous)))

 

I completely agree, and I also believe that certain parties shouldn't instantly finger some action as being good, bad, ethical, unethical, or otherwise. Things CAN be done to coins without them being subjective, and I hate it when someone tries to instantly pigeon-hole certain actions according to THEIR standards.

 

For example, plugging a holed coin is not an evil thing to do. It is neither good, bad, ethical, unethical, nor is it slimy, shady, dishonest, dirty or immoral. It is simply an action. Ethics comes into play based on how someone might leverage that action - in other words offering a plugged coin as an original coin with no damage. But if I want a hole in my coin plugged and repaired, I am fully within my rights to do so. If I want to swab MS-70 onto a proof Indian, I am fully withing my rights to do so.

 

"Coin Doctor" is not automatically an evil connotation for me. "Crook" is.

 

So if someone takes a Proof Indian and turns it purple with MS-70, that is not an evil act in my book, not by any means, and that's whether I believe in such actions or not. I personally don't want a proof IHC that's MS-70 purple, but if somebody else does, then I'm all for him being allowed to buy it in peace. I would only have a problem if someone turned an IHC purple, then sold it with a description that implied the coin turned purple as a result of sitting in an album for 50 years.

 

Nobody should have the authority to mandate what's allowed to be collected by others, so long as a coin is represented honestly.

 

James

[fhcoins-migration]

Just a couple cents here. I have used MS70 for many years and can pick the copper coins at any show that will turn blue with it a high percentage of the time if not all the time. It is not just lacquer, and is an indication of something that is currently on the surface of the coins. The blue/purple color is a byproduct of the removal of certain contaminants on the surface of the coin. A couple other older cleaning chemicals will impart this color as MS70 combines a couple different chemicals that were in use many years ago. Since it is removing a long term harmful layer of stuff off of the top I dont believe it is doctoring although I do not pick coins exclusively for their tendency to turn blue/purple. MS70 will also make some nasty color runs if used on a coin with a carbon spot...... Not a big deal to me if it has the color although I do find myself avoiding them out of habit. Just a personal preference. MS70 is a great "light" cleaner for silver and copper-nickel. Makes gems out of 43 cents also. In many cases the colors on copper mimic old W raymond album toning with the only usual difference being the lack of irridescent red and green toning. The coin is truly conserved after MS70 as many that turn blue/purple would have become junk in 20 years...

[Arizonadesertrat]

Does anyone know what the chemical composition of MS70 is?