what about this?

[Debbie 58]

Hi all. I wondered if you could let me know what you think of this shilling it looks different from my others. It has a strange rim – sort of flattened… and on the reverse the “beading†seems to be created by the grooves on the outer rim edge rather than stamped on the flat surface. Would you grade this as VF? And does very dark toning affect the grading? Thanks in advance.

[Debbie 58]

Woops - heres the other side!

[Rob 3,152]

Woops - heres the other side!

Looks EF or thereabouts to me. There is obviously a small amount of friction, but not a lot. It could be that the coin has had a light wipe or clean in the past if the toning looks a little odd. Don't worry about the reverse rim as you often see it looking like this on coins of this type and era.

The best way to image coins is perpendicular to them. Angled shots highlight the relief, but don't help grading where you are looking for wear on the high points of the relief. Toning has no effect on the grading which is an assessment of wear. It can however be nice or ugly, beauty being in the eye of the beholder etc.

[Peter 615]

Woops - heres the other side!

Looks EF or thereabouts to me. There is obviously a small amount of friction, but not a lot. It could be that the coin has had a light wipe or clean in the past if the toning looks a little odd. Don't worry about the reverse rim as you often see it looking like this on coins of this type and era.

The best way to image coins is perpendicular to them. Angled shots highlight the relief, but don't help grading where you are looking for wear on the high points of the relief. Toning has no effect on the grading which is an assessment of wear. It can however be nice or ugly, beauty being in the eye of the beholder etc.

The toning does effect price.Our US buddies love copper coins red rather than brown.A nice bluey tone on silver is desirable.Beware of bright silver coins which may well have been dipped.

Your coin is very pleasant IMO with a nice defined strike.

[Debbie 58]

Thanks for this information guys. So how can you spot if a coin has been cleaned / dipped in the past if it has re- toned? What do you mean by “odd†Rob? Am I correct in assuming that if a cleaned / dipped coin has re-toned in an appealing manner than this will not affect the grading or the price?

I’m sorry if each answer leads to a new question!

[Rob 3,152]

Thanks for this information guys. So how can you spot if a coin has been cleaned / dipped in the past if it has re- toned? What do you mean by “odd†Rob? Am I correct in assuming that if a cleaned / dipped coin has re-toned in an appealing manner than this will not affect the grading or the price?

I’m sorry if each answer leads to a new question!

There are many different pointers to whether a coin has been cleaned, dipped or doctored in some way. If you search for cleaned, dipped, artificial toning you will find many references on the forum. In 99 cases out a 100 these will reduce the value.

The harshest is the brillo pad treatment where you get a uniformly shiny surface, frequently associated with lines across the coin which are scratches from the abrasive used. Dipped coins tend to be uniform in colour and have no original lustre. Dipping can produce an attractive coin if you are lucky, as there is a fine line to be drawn between removal of the top layer of toning and getting into the fabric of the coin. If you over-dip the coin becomes lifeless. Cleaned copper tends to a lighter colour than what you would expect. Toning by natural means is usually random and so until a coin is completely toned gives a pattern that is variable, but rarely vividly coloured (see rainbow toning below). Polished coins can be identified by the shiny surfaces on the raised parts of the detail. Very often, these will be toned by whatever means to try and hide the fact that it has been cleaned. Fields can be proof-like where the die has been polished at the mint to produce mirrors, but if accompanied by similarly reflective detail then you should suspect cleaning. Those cleaned using metal polish will often tone to a very dark, nearly black colour with underlying reflectivity.

Artificial toning is something that is more prevalent in the US where some people will pay silly sums for "monster or rainbow toning" on coins that are only a couple of years old. These have been produced either by chemical reaction or heating in an oven.

Coins cleaned by electro-polishing will lose their lustre because it is the microscopic detail on the surface that produces the effect by dispersing the light and giving a characteristic sparkle. This is lost with electro-polishing because the surface is dissolved away and so tends to a flatter microscopic profile.

The question of cleaned coins always raises debate as to whether or not a particular piece has been done and you really need to see a range of original surfaces and cleaned coins to identify which is which. You can start by searching some of the images in previous posts where some coins are shown with obvious cleaning.

[Debbie 58]

Have spent a bit of time searching on the forum about cleaning and lustre and toning and found it very informative, thanks all. I also found this on the net which explains exactly how lustre is created - thought it might be interesting to someone - please don't think I am trying to teach you to suck eggs -just trying to contribute something too!

http://www.coin-forum.com/Feature_Articles/Understanding_Lustre/last

[declanwmagee 122]

Here's an example of a horrendously dipped coin. If it still looked like old silver it would still have been a nice coin, although I suspect the dipping was intended to cover up a harsh clean judging by the surface abrasions...

[azda 979]

Debbie, a poorly dipped coin can look like a brick, its very flat, no lustre, a cleaned coin can look "too clean" in other words, the same coin can look like both ends of the spectrum in different hands.

If a dipped coin is left to long in its little bath, then it will come out a very dull grey and really lacks anything to it. If anyone finds something to show you the 2 differences then am sure pictures will be applied or links posted so you can see the 2 differences for yourself.

There is a very prominent ebayer who regularly uses this practise to enhance (or at least tries to) his coins, which in turn leads him to enhance his grade, which in turn enhances his selling price

Oh and if harshly cleaned, you see a lot of hairline scratches on the surface of the coin.

Edited December 6, 2011 by azda

[Debbie 58]

Opps - looks like I may have bought a dipped coin here then? It has a surface look of aluminium - would you still call it NVF?

[Red Riley 2]

Opps - looks like I may have bought a dipped coin here then? It has a surface look of aluminium - would you still call it NVF?

NVF looks reasonable (although I can't reaaly see enough detail on the obverse to be certain) and as you guessed has probably been dipped. Personally I dislike the treatment but it has to be admitted that it doesn't affect the price as much as it used to, for the simple reason that more and more coins are being dipped and acquiring one in its original form is becoming increasingly difficult. If you were selling that coin, you should really describe it as 'NVF, probably dipped' or similar but sadly, fewer and fewer people will make mention of the dipping.

[1949threepence 3,367]

Hi all. I wondered if you could let me know what you think of this shilling it looks different from my others. It has a strange rim sort of flattened… and on the reverse the "beading" seems to be created by the grooves on the outer rim edge rather than stamped on the flat surface. Would you grade this as VF? And does very dark toning affect the grading? Thanks in advance.

Actually that obverse is not at all bad. I'd certainly run with EF for both sides, but what I notice about that one, is the decent hair detail on the King's head. I've got a complete date run of mostly UNC shillings from 1902 to 1936, but my 1915, although BU, has very poor hair detail, in common with many from that year and 1916, in particular ~ probably due to the fact that during the years of the first world war, minting processes were probably not up to the same standards as usual, maybe finances were stretched, and thus, worn out dies were used.

Edited December 6, 2011 by 1949threepence

[Debbie 58]

Many thanks for all your replies. That's really interesting about the 1915/1916 coin strikes Threepence, I had noticed that my 1917 and 1918 seemed to have much more detail, I thought that perhaps it was a different design variation. That 1915 shilling only cost £5 so am very happy you think its a grade higher than I thought!

[Rob 3,152]

Many thanks for all your replies. That's really interesting about the 1915/1916 coin strikes Threepence, I had noticed that my 1917 and 1918 seemed to have much more detail, I thought that perhaps it was a different design variation. That 1915 shilling only cost £5 so am very happy you think its a grade higher than I thought!

The beauty of the George V war years shillings is that they are cheap. £5 certainly is and with a bit of searching you can quite easily pick up uncirculated examples for tens of pounds not exceeding your stated £50 max. The difficulty is in finding examples with a sharp reverse. Very few uncirculated shillings from 1914-18 have a full lion's nose which is the norm for 1911 to 1913. After 1920 it reappears.