cleaning?

why is cleaning so taboo?

other than giving it a fake "newness"?

On Mon, 01 May 2006 22:18:21 -0500, Mark Reed
wrote:

why is cleaning so taboo?

other than giving it a fake "newness"?

A fake newness seems like an obvious negative.
Aside from that, when you clean a coin you are actually removing the
surface of the coin ... maybe only a few atom's diameter but still
removing metal, you are. This is true even for a chemical dip.

Plus, cleaned coins are ugly. Take for example, an nice circulated
Walker. The dark oxidation highlights the features and looks
perfectyly normal on a circulated coin. Remove it, and you highlight
the wear that exists, as well as making the coin look .... ummm,
CLEANED. It doesn't look "new" ... it looks naked. Raped.

On 1-May-2006, Vector wrote:

Aside from that, when you clean a coin you are actually removing the
surface of the coin ... maybe only a few atom's diameter but still
removing metal, you are. This is true even for a chemical dip.

Vextor's absolutely correct and the reason you don't want to remove that
tiny bit of the surface is because a newly minted coin's surface is not
really flat. It consists of tiny ridges, so small you can't see them, but
they reflect light. That's how you get the "cartwheel" luster you see on
uncirculated coins. Once these ridges are removed, the coin will never
reflect the lgiht in the same way. The coin may be shiny, but it will never
look just right again.

Cliff Lawless
http://www.CollectorsCoinNews.com

On Mon, 01 May 2006 22:47:59 -0500, Vector wrote:

On Mon, 01 May 2006 22:18:21 -0500, Mark Reed
wrote:

why is cleaning so taboo?

other than giving it a fake "newness"?

A fake newness seems like an obvious negative.
Aside from that, when you clean a coin you are actually removing the
surface of the coin ... maybe only a few atom's diameter but still
removing metal, you are.

Good, job, Master Yoda!


Reclining Buddha

The Original Couch Potato!