Question on NGC Net Grading- light cleaning

[PocketArt]

Does NGC have a standard deduction on coins that have been lightly cleaned, but yet aren't harsh enough to receive a details grade? How many grading points lower from technical grade are net grades- 1 point, 2, or, more? Is there such a standard, or, does it very from coin to coin?

 

As a hypothetical example- If a Morgan dollar has a MS65 technical grade, but has been lightly cleaned but not harsh enough for details grade- how many points would typically be deducted for the net grade if there are no other distracting blemishes on coin?

 

Thanks,

 

Rich

 

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

There is no set formula. It depends upon considerations such as the degree of cleaning and which area/areas is/are involved.

 

At a certain point, cleaning is bad enough, such that the coin would have to be down-graded so much, that the grade would appear to be silly. It is typically then, that a details-grade (rather than a straight grade) is assigned.

[PocketArt]

Thanks Mark, this makes sense. I'd seen a M62 graded Morgan last week that appeared to have light cleaning, luster was somewhat subdued but had retoned quite beautifully on the obverse. When I first saw the coin I was shocked that it wasn't in a MS65 slab as condition looked much, much better than a 62. It was then I realized light cleaning on piece- it was an 1881-O and apparently these go for quite a premium in higher grades which may explain the previous light cleaning.

[Nutmeg Coin]

I have seen NGC tougher on lightly "cleaned" coins than PCGS. "Market acceptable" is open to debate, and if they are seeing guarantee/warranty submissions of "cleaned" coins that might sway the line they draw.

[PocketArt]

Thanks Nutmeg Coin. I asked a local dealer to set this 1881-O aside with a group of a few other certified Morgans I plan to purchase later this month. I never thought I'd buy a "cleaned" piece but this Morgan has nice surfaces condition wise, and has an old retone, and it's beautiful.

 

Have you, or, other collectors looked beyond a light cleaning to purchase a coin when weighing other qualities?

 

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Thanks Nutmeg Coin. I asked a local dealer to set this 1881-O aside with a group of a few other certified Morgans I plan to purchase later this month. I never thought I'd buy a "cleaned" piece but this Morgan has nice surfaces condition wise, and has an old retone, and it's beautiful.

 

Have you, or, other collectors looked beyond a light cleaning to purchase a coin when weighing other qualities?

 

 

I view coins under the premise that most have been cleaned in some fashion at some time. The degree of cleaning you are suggesting is certainly acceptable to the TPG, and is supported by viewing the myriad of coins that have been encapsulated.

[Nutmeg Coin]

I have bought a lot of coins that look ok to me and on second submission sometimes they straight grade.

[PocketArt]

Thanks for your insight John, and Nutmeg Coin. I'll be sure to post the Morgan when I pick it up.

[coinman_23885]

Since when did the services start openly acknowledging that they will encapsulate cleaned coins with straight grades? I know it has been happening for years (even back in the old holder days), but I specifically remember seeing disclaimers from both services that they would never grade a problem coin. (This was before the advent of details grading and NCS).

[PocketArt]

I'm not sure when it started- but the 3rd paragraph of the introduction to "Understanding NGC Details Grading," refers to a point deduction, or, net grading for a coin that isn't quite details but yet it is assigned a lower grade. At least that's what I gather.

 

https://www.ngccoin.com/pdf/details_grading_brochure.pdf

 

Also, page 10-11 of the brochure under Improper Cleaning it states: "Light, non-destructive cleaning,particularly when found on older coins, may still permit numeric grading."

 

TPG's must know the market tolerance for those coins I guess, and are willing to assign a lower grade?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Nutmeg Coin]

As others have said, when "conservation" is done officially it is different when others do it. There are no absolutes on bright lines on "cleaning" but rather degrees that may or may not be market acceptable.

[RWB]

Not sure how light can be used to clean a coin. Short wave UV....?

[numisport]

Most Morgans have been cleaned. That said, if you can tell it was cleaned I wouldn't buy it. Professional conservation can only be done if it enhances the eye appeal and thus its value. My experience with NCS has been very positive if not outstanding 9 of 10 times I asked their opinion.

[Nutmeg Coin]

Conservation has to be done right. A dip in acetone does not affect anything except surface matter. I know dealers who use ms70 as well as thiourea silver dips and regularly get the coins coming back on bulk submissions 63-66. If coins have ugly or dark toning they don't grade well as eye appeal is critical. But you have to know what you are doing or let the "experts" do the job.

[Star City Homer]

I always equated 'cleaning' to an abrasive process (or outright scrubbing) leaving hairlines to some degree. And the process is occurring at the 'macroscopic' level. 'Toning over' was something that might conceal the hairlines.

 

Dipping is a chemical reaction and, by some and per some, might be done 'properly'. But, as a chemical process, there is an effect on the metal at the microscopic level. That is not to say there are not visible effects from it, but the actual process is a microscopic one.

 

Washing a coin off to get gunk off of in is just a wash (ie acetone/surface contaminants). I thought MS70 was more of a wash/detergent/bath--gets stuff off the metal without changing or having a chemical reaction with the metal (unless you are aluminum, that has a reaction). Perhaps I am wrong about the MS70, but certainly acetone.

 

Conserving (I thought) was to get anything off the metal that was/had been reactive and may or may not be a wash of some sort or a dip--but one done by the 'proper' methods.

 

What is 'proper' is a mystery to me...but anything that restores or reveals the good parts that are already present. NOT adding something new. Spot removal/ugly toning might be removed (and reveal the underlying metal) but damage is not concealed.

 

This is my thought process and when someone says 'cleaning' or 'harsh cleaning' this is the way my mind works.

[Nutmeg Coin]

I don't think anyone who does professional or even "competent" conservation does anything abrasively. Even the ms70 application is only Qtip and application, no rubbing. Roll on surface and pat air dry.

 

Unfortunately many of the silver dips involve metal loss. And over the years people dipped out nice original coins to get more luster, which is never good. People should let the experts do it generally. Not sure if the grading services have any videos on how coins get "improperly cleaned" or not, it would help, but their conservation methods are proprietary.

 

One product I have used with a video:

[WoodenJefferson]

About 20 years ago, I bought 10 raw Walking Libs from a dealer that was in his show case. They were all 63/64's with a possible 65 mixed in, long story short, in 10 years time they all grew a yellowish haze. They were all improperly dipped, I sold them in a bulk silver deal at a overall loss.

 

They may look pretty now, but might turn ugly down the road. Let the pros do what they know best!

[PocketArt]

I don't think anyone who does professional or even "competent" conservation does anything abrasively. Even the ms70 application is only Qtip and application, no rubbing. Roll on surface and pat air dry.

 

Unfortunately many of the silver dips involve metal loss. And over the years people dipped out nice original coins to get more luster, which is never good. People should let the experts do it generally. Not sure if the grading services have any videos on how coins get "improperly cleaned" or not, it would help, but their conservation methods are proprietary.

 

One product I have used with a video:

 

Holy Cow! Appears to be acetone on steroids- my only concern would be the effects on copper/bronze, and nickel. Based on your experience, does the substance bleach out nickel, or, create pink salmon effect on copper/bronze? Thanks for sharing.

[PocketArt]

Most Morgans have been cleaned. That said, if you can tell it was cleaned I wouldn't buy it. Professional conservation can only be done if it enhances the eye appeal and thus its value. My experience with NCS has been very positive if not outstanding 9 of 10 times I asked their opinion.

 

Good to know, thanks for sharing your experiences. I typically wouldn't buy a cleaned coin purposely- however, the surfaces of this coin are exceptional, and have an attractive retone. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder for this instance.

[PocketArt]

About 20 years ago, I bought 10 raw Walking Libs from a dealer that was in his show case. They were all 63/64's with a possible 65 mixed in, long story short, in 10 years time they all grew a yellowish haze. They were all improperly dipped, I sold them in a bulk silver deal at a overall loss.

 

They may look pretty now, but might turn ugly down the road. Let the pros do what they know best!

 

Do you think if you gave these an acetone bath when you bought them; it might have prevented the yellowing? Would have that prevented them from turning?

[PocketArt]

I always equated 'cleaning' to an abrasive process (or outright scrubbing) leaving hairlines to some degree. And the process is occurring at the 'macroscopic' level. 'Toning over' was something that might conceal the hairlines.

 

Dipping is a chemical reaction and, by some and per some, might be done 'properly'. But, as a chemical process, there is an effect on the metal at the microscopic level. That is not to say there are not visible effects from it, but the actual process is a microscopic one.

 

Washing a coin off to get gunk off of in is just a wash (ie acetone/surface contaminants). I thought MS70 was more of a wash/detergent/bath--gets stuff off the metal without changing or having a chemical reaction with the metal (unless you are aluminum, that has a reaction). Perhaps I am wrong about the MS70, but certainly acetone.

 

Conserving (I thought) was to get anything off the metal that was/had been reactive and may or may not be a wash of some sort or a dip--but one done by the 'proper' methods.

 

What is 'proper' is a mystery to me...but anything that restores or reveals the good parts that are already present. NOT adding something new. Spot removal/ugly toning might be removed (and reveal the underlying metal) but damage is not concealed.

 

This is my thought process and when someone says 'cleaning' or 'harsh cleaning' this is the way my mind works.

 

Thanks for your insights- I'm curious about your avatar...is that a Soviet medal, or, Eastern Bloc medal? The reason I ask is because the "mother" appears to be holding a PPSH41 automatic.

[Star City Homer]

 

 

I collect mother/baby themed medals and found this on eBay. I did not know the weapon and now I have something to look up--thank you!

 

Now, if you could translate it for me that would be great. Hopefully it's not something unnerving.

------

<>

[PocketArt]

I'll see what I can find- I have a few books on WWII medals buried somewhere. Looks like a civilian presentation medal of sorts. Could be post war- neat!

[PocketArt]

 

 

I collect mother/baby themed medals and found this on eBay. I did not know the weapon and now I have something to look up--thank you!

 

Now, if you could translate it for me that would be great. Hopefully it's not something unnerving.

------

<>

 

I looked through my reference books and could not find anything related to your table medal- however; I did translate the medal using google conversion from czech to English. It's not a perfect translation but this is what I came up with:

 

Eventful Medal

35th

Anniversary

Relief of Czechoslovakia

by the Soviet Armada (forces)

Centrals Committee

 

The Centrals Committee was a branch of the KSC; which was the communist party in Czechoslovakia. I'm not certain if these were presented to committee members only, or, were distributed to others in the KSC. I would guess the mother symbolizes Russia, and the Babe Czechoslovakia.

 

Here's a link about the history of the communist party of Czechoslovakia:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Czechoslovakia

 

I couldn't find your example online either, and I used just about every combination of words in my search related to this table medal. A very interesting piece, and fun side track!

 

Okay, back to NGC Net Grading- light cleaning

 

 

 

 

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

Most Morgans have been cleaned. That said, if you can tell it was cleaned I wouldn't buy it. Professional conservation can only be done if it enhances the eye appeal and thus its value. My experience with NCS has been very positive if not outstanding 9 of 10 times I asked their opinion.

 

Good to know, thanks for sharing your experiences. I typically wouldn't buy a cleaned coin purposely- however, the surfaces of this coin are exceptional, and have an attractive retone. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder for this instance.

I definitely do not believe that "most morgans have been cleaned". While many have been, my experience is that non-cleaned examples far out number the population of those that have been cleaned.

[Nutmeg Coin]

I know several dealers who get around gem grades on Morgans using silver dip or ms70, definitely "cleaned" but properly.

 

Look at the definitions of the 60-62 grades and how hairlines figure into the the grade assessment.

 

A coin graded MS-61 will have a mint luster that may be diminished or noticeably impaired, and the surface may have clusters of large and small contact marks throughout. Hairlines could be very noticeable. Scuff marks may show as unattractive patches on large areas or major features. Small rim nicks and striking or planchet defects may show, and the quality may be noticeably poor. Eye appeal is somewhat unattractive. Copper pieces will be generally dull, dark, and possibly spotted.

 

Contact Marks: May have a few heavy (or numerous light) marks in prime focal and/or secondary areas.

Hairlines: May have a noticeable patch or continuous hairlining over surfaces.

Luster: May be impaired.

Eye Appeal: Unattractive.

Also Known As: Mint State 61, MS61, Uncirculated, UNC, BU, Brilliant Uncirculated, Beautiful Uncirculated

http://coins.about.com/od/ANA-Coin-Grading-Definitions/tp/ANA-Grading-Standards-for-Uncirculated-Mint-State-Coins.htm

[PocketArt]

I picked up the 1881-0 Morgan yesterday, along with a small batch of other coins I set aside from a local dealer. When I first saw the 1881-0, my first impression of the coin led me to believe it was lightly cleaned, and net graded. However; after scrutinizing the surfaces of the coin much further, I believe NGC got the grade right, and my initial assessment of coin was wrong.

 

What threw me off was the peripheral rim toning on the coin; along with a faint golden hue on the rest of the obverse. My eyes were drawn to the toning, and I focused more on that than the actual surfaces of the coin. In hand; the toning on the obverse subdues most of the marks in the field, and on the devices.

 

The pictures below pretty much detail my impression of the coin from initial assessment in pic 1, and what I realized in error after viewing the coin in better light with pic 2, and 3. Also, is a link to the coin on look up for images by NGC. The marks are much more pronounced on obverse, and reverse per NGC link. The mark in front of Liberty's eye is a die crack.

 

In summary- do not to let toning distract you from scrutinizing the surface quality of coin, take your time, and make sure you have good lighting. It's far to easy to jump to conclusions, which may lead to wrong decisions that could be costly. I'm pleased with purchase; but, it could have been a different coin which may have led to a costly mistake!

 

https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/4446756-001/

 

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

During my cataloging of various 1881-O dollars, I've often noted that it is, in my opinion, an underrated date. Attractive examples are significantly more difficult to locate than price guides seem to indicate. At MS-62, yours seems really nice, based on all the images provided.