| Author |
Replies: 20 / Views: 3,328 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
278 Posts |
Is it the spotty nature of the toning that lends itself to an old cleaning? Sorry, I'm just trying to learn more about silver. Thanks.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1158 Posts |
What is bothering me is that the toning has obvious gaps around all the details and letters, which seems to indicate it was painted or rubbed on. Look at "1884" and there is an obvious square outline in the toning.
Edited by tkbslc 05/19/2015 3:50 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
278 Posts |
Quote: What is bothering me is that the toning has obvious gaps around all the details and letters, which seems to indicate it was painted or rubbed on. Look at "1884" and there is an obvious square outline in the toning. I hear what you're saying, but this toning wasn't painted on. My brother-in-law got these from his Grandfather back when he was about 10 years old, or 1990. I just spoke to him to get alittle more information, and he remembers them being silver with your standard white luster. He doesn't recall them being toned with any color when he was a child. They've literally been in a case inside of tupperware for the past 20+ years in a garage. From what I've gathered, if they were cleaned, then it must have been before he received them in 1990. He also told me that while he did cloth polish a few of his Morgans, he doesn't believe that he did that to these two coins. I hope this information is of some help. And thank you for all of the comments and input that we've received so far. It is much appreciated.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
The main giveaway is the halo effect around the devices most prominently seen around the date, stars and lettering
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
278 Posts |
Quote: The main giveaway is the halo effect around the devices most prominently seen around the date, stars and lettering Yes, I definitely see this halo effect on the 84. No doubt this was cleaned at some point long ago. The 81 doesn't have this effect, although I'm assuming the pullaway you're referring to is that slight gap in toning around the 8's and some stars at the southern part of the coin? This indicated an old cleaning as well? Thanks again.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Yes that is pullaway and NO it does not indicate a cleaning, juse the oposite actually. Pullaway ia a good thing on toned coins as coin doctors cannot fake it so when seen on a coin with toning it I dictates that the toning is genuine (at leat in the areas where it is present). On the 81 the obverse dosent really scream old cleaning aside from the color but that's not a nail in its coffin per se, but look at the reverse, the fields around the eagle, see that halo effect again. That coin probably had nice genuine toning that was dip cleaned off in the 1950's or 60's which is why it has remnants of pullaway.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
This is pullaway toning:  This coin shows none of that. The "halo" is usually as it's been described otherwise, an artifact of cleaning not reaching the haloed areas. As for this coin, I really can't come up with an easy progression for how it got here, on one set of images. Too many contradictory bits of information here.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
278 Posts |
Interesting... but this is why I don't mess with silver too much. It's much easier for me to look at copper and tell if it's been cleaned/altered than silver.
I appreciate all of the information and with helping me learn something new. I'll pass this info along to my brother-in-law as well. Thanks again.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Dave, I was talking about his 81s post in regards to the pullaway 
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Quote: Dave, I was talking about his 81s post in regards to the pullaway
Oh, OK. That one shows a little bit of pullaway at the date and a few stars, but it doesn't explain all the color either on it or this one. This certainly isn't bag toning, that's for sure.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Ya my thought was the removal of bag toning causing retoning from whichever chemical was used. This and the 81 have almost the same type of color and issues so I'm wondering if these have been together for quite some time
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
278 Posts |
Cascade, we know they've been together since 1990 in the same ring box. We assume since they were passed down from my brother-in-law's Grandfather, that they have been together for a much longer period of time. He's not sure when his Grandfather would have acquired them though.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Rayzor, read this link about the treasury releases. There's a good chance his grandfather got them stright from a mint bag... Then he cleaned them to make them "pretty" as was the norm back then which is a big reason why original surfaces are prized by collectors today... http://www.pcgs.com/books/silver-do...r14-001.aspx
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
278 Posts |
Thanks for this link. Yes, that makes sense and it probably what happened. Thank you again.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 20 / Views: 3,328 |
Page 2 of 2
|