Does This Color Look Natural? 1833 Bust Half

Looks to me heavily cleaned or dipped one to many times. It doesn't look natural at all. Is it in a NGC problem free slab? If so someone fell asleep at work

It's in a straight AU 55 slab. I think NGC needs to up the caffeine in their coffee a bit.

The short answer to your question is that the coin has been dipped, and it has re-toned. The surfaces are not "original," but if it had not been dipped, it might have been very dark, and you might not have liked it. It is a "market acceptable" AU.

I'm getting a bit tired of this attitude about dipped silver coins. If you don't want to buy them, then don't buy them. But please don't go around complaining about the fact that such pieces have been given straight grades. There is a difference between dipped and cleaned. A cleaned coin has had the metal on its surfaces moved by a physical means. A dipped coin has had a very thin layer of oxidized metal removed by a weak acid solution. Coins can be dipped too often; they can be dipped for too long; and they can be improperly rinsed. All three of these problems can lower the value and perhaps result in a "details grade."

If you want 50, 100 or 200 year old coins that have never been touched, then don't expect them to be lightly toned or bright and shiny unless it is a Morgan dollar. Also you get this "original surfaces" distinction in the market get ready to pay some very high prices because the supply of such items is very limited. Also get ready for some healthy discussions because a lot of the purists who think they know which coins are "original" and which ones are not, don't what they are talking about. Many of these coins are "original now." They have been dipped and have re-toned.

That is my rant, but I hope you have learned something from it.

Billjones, thanks for the interesting rant; you certainly made some good points. My original question was purely regarding the difference in color between the shield and the rest of the coin which in my opinion decreases the beauty of the coin significantly. If it was some natural process then perhaps it could be accepted as the wonderful variations of nature. But if it's due to some artificial means it would not be so readily acceptable.

Nice looking AU-53/55. billjones has good advice.

Not my coin yet but thinking about it. I'm still put off by the strange color differential so I think I'll trust my gut on this one. This one goes back into the lake.

That Seated quarter looks over-dipped and dull to me. One issue we also have is that the "bright is best" numismatic philosophy went on for well over 100 years and probably just ended in the last quarter century. Bill singles out white Morgans and "possibly" being original and even many (perhaps most) of them have been dipped. Virgin frost on an MS silver coin is rare and a sight to behold. Once you've seen it it's pretty easy to discern those that are simply "market-acceptable" from others. Secondary toning can be be quite heavy on 19th century silver and that is another matter as well. Good topic that needs to be addressed IMO.

As a side note on semantics: SLQ=Standing Liberty Quarter & LSQ=Liberty Seated quarter.

Dipped many, years ago and has since begun to retone.