Unafraid newbie posting

[ModernCoinTraitor]

As stated, I am about as new as they come. I just started my first batch of uncleaned coins. They've been soaking for about a week with a light nylon brushing here and there. I've read as many posts as possible on cleaning and my expectations for this first batch are a bit low as they are starting to show their many faults. In fact, I'm starting to think I have nothing but broken culls, but I don't know enough to throw them out and start over.

Okay, some have a chance, but the details are very poor. (I was hoping that at least one of this bunch would have good details.) And, most posts lean towards the miraculous recovery of some coin to a beautiful state.

So, I'm asking for a sticky post that talks about determining when it just isn't worth the effort.

I'm only asking about the bad ones   :

1. A coin with edges that appear to be two distinct layers. When the upper layer is touched, it crumbles away. Maybe this was a silvered coin at one time. How do you get the dirt off this fragile coin that already has the undercoin showing in a lot of places? (There are actually a few of these in the lot.)

2. When brushing with a toothpick to remove dirt and a speck of black crumbles away, was that my coins lettering? Does the patina basically crumble away like the dirt you are trying to remove? (Is it that fragile?)

3. A couple of coins soaking in distilled water has developed a large "whitish" bloom (I'm assuming BD), should I remove it from the lot of soaking coins? I thought distilled water would help put BD to rest. Or, is it simply blooming initially because it is being rehydrated?

4. I have a large black coin that has transitioned to a large copper looking coin after soaking for a week in distilled water. That cannot be correct, I had high hopes for this one. Looking at it closely, I'm thinking the patina is already gone. But, that would mean it was previously cleaned to this point. Makes me question the whole lot!

5. A coin that is slightly bent (curved, not cupped), broken edges and almost smooth (I'm not really seeing crust on it) doesn't appear to have any details. And, I'm not thinking there is anything to clean. Is that a slug?

6. The silver coins cleaned the easiest, but the smaller had zero details. The larger only has the faintest traces of some blobs.


Just a note to others starting out:
Do not buy a set of unseen coins. These were sold by weight from a hoard (not eBay.) I expected a "rough" set of coins, but I also new two things:

I'm new at this and I'd rather learn on "rough" coins than ruin some really nice coins.
I bought a backup lot of better coins that are also soaking. But, I'd like to resolve some of the issues with the rough set before I touch the backup lot.

Here's my starting coins:

[areich]

Larger pictures are necessary. Also, please post just a few coins at once, at the most. Otherwise these threads get very confusing. Why don't you post larger pictures of the 6 coins you're asking about? People need to be able to see the surfaces to give useful advise.

I hope I'm not scaring you with this.

[ModernCoinTraitor]

No problem. I was just trying to convey the general state of the lot of coins with the one picture. I'll get back some individual coin pictures later after work.

[ModernCoinTraitor]

The first coin to present (#1) is a case of weak patina or silvering?
Basically after a week of soaking in DW, I touched near the edge with a toothpick and the crust fell away revealing what I assume is core metal. Looking on edge, I can see a distinct layer, but I don't really think it is silvered. Maybe it's just a bad case of BD and the patina and coin are actually separated.

[ModernCoinTraitor]

Coin # 3 is a weird "coin". The emblem on the obverse is raised by at least a quarter inch. I suspect the whitish green areas are BD. Should I remove this from the DW soak with other coins?

[ModernCoinTraitor]

Another patina question... which layer do I shoot to save?

(Coin #2)
In the circled area I can see letters emerging, but I suspect that's base metal.

[ModernCoinTraitor]

The patina fell off in DW?
Coin #4

I did not keep a before photo, so I took a photo a coin that looked similar from the same lot.

[ModernCoinTraitor]

I'd ask about coin #5 that has been a smooth coin for a week, but today, I can see slight details. They do not show up in a blown up photo.

[Andrew McCabe]

Here's my starting coins:

Great group photo. Really. You've photographed a tray of 60 coins in one go and most have come out more or less clear, even peripheral coins that usually are distorted. Good choice of background, a non reflective grey cloth, and lighting. The naturally non-reflective tones of the uncleaned coins may have helped, no shiny patinas or metals to worry about.

[SC]

It looks like an ok initial lot.  Yes some coins will crumble away to nothing.  Some appear to have been pre-stripped and then blackened.  But you definitely have some interesting coins there and some in nice condition.  Some are perhaps already clean enough.

I see Byzantine, Islamic and Roman Provincial as well as Roman.

They are not from a hoard - which is a term used for a group of coins buried and found together.  They are instead from a huge pile of uncleaned coins put together by a "Holy Land" dealer from the work of many finders/detectorists.

Shawn

[ModernCoinTraitor]

Thanks otlichnik for the feedback. I have read a phenomenal amount of posts on this forum and was not fooled into thinking this "hoard" was anything more than the pile of rejects from this dealer. I was hoping for a little better condition, but as stated, being new to cleaning, I'd rather have a "rough" group to learn with. (And, they were definately cheaper buying them by weight instead of per coin. Of course, I got what I paid for, but the learning curve is being held really steep as I learn about these problems.)

Most important item I've learned so far:
I did not expect the patina to be so fragile. That was a real eye-opener and a few clues on how to deal with the more crumbly types would be greatly appreciated... even if the advice is to throw them out, or hit them hard to see if any details are in the base metal. That is probably where I was going with the intial post on a sticky that points out what "bad" coins look like when they are being cleaned. (Not just my mistakes at cleaning them.)

Second most important item I've learned so far:
Cleaning coins under a microscope is deceiving. Frequently under the scope I cannot see any details in the coin other than the dirt and a "rough" surface. This makes the coin appear to be junk. But, when I set the coin under normal light using my built in optics, I can see the little people holding things on these tiny coins and then I am amazed at my efforts because there was nothing there an hour ago.

Several of these coins have reached a point that I don't think I should do anything with them other than try to attribute them. That will be a task in itself! Again, new terriroty! (And a lot more reading.)

The ones that still need work, well.. I was hoping for some tips on the above photos to kind of dial me in. Especially where the dirt is extremely thin, the stamp is weak or worn and the patina is fragile. I guess just soak them a lot longer and see if dirt falls off on it's own? This is what happened to some of the really smooth coins that I initially thought were simply slugs of metal. All of a sudden I can just make out some details.

The really bad ones I will likely try different harder techniques just to see what skills can be developed. I don't expect to save any patina on these.


Regarding the group photo, thank you Andrew for the comments. Again, a lot of post reading in the Photography section and taking a lot of photos before hand of other coins made this one pretty easy. Now if I could only get my wife to appreciate the effort! Comments about more consideration for photographing those coins than taking my first photos of my newborn were totally out of line.  But, that was 35 years ago. If I had another newborn, I now have the experience to take much better photos!

[crawforde]

Nice diverse group, you should have plenty of learning experiences there.
And I will second Andrew's comment about the group photo.  It is surprisingly difficult to get such a large group in focus.  I am terrible at that.
When working under the scope, it is good to do it in short spurts, take it out, put it back etc.  changing your point of view often helps to keep you oriented and see the big picture.
Some patina is soft as talcum powder and will fall apart as soon as you brush it, other types are harder than the coin, you just have to approach each coin individually.
Quit cleaning as soon as you think you can ID the coin.  Then you can go back and do more if needed or you think it will improve the coin.  But especially at the beginning less is best. Continued soaking is fine and may even help.
 
Most importanly be patient, flexible and HAVE FUN!  Then the results are always fine, whether it is a blank slug, or a detailed beauty.

Eric

[ModernCoinTraitor]

After a few days of pouring over these 70+ coins one at a time (you're just catching the tail end), something about what otichnik stated sunk in... these were pre-cleaned, harshly, and "possibly" darkened to look dirty. I base this on the coins have/had almost no dirt on them and my water only showed traces of dirt. (Probably just the patina that fell off a couple.)

Any work with these coins invariably shows base metal, so I'll give them a break and try to attribute a few. About half of the coins are riddled with pits or are wiped smooth. Some show very faint details, but at my level that's not much to go on. (I wouldn't even give these a "Fair-3" grade in modern coins.) So, I'm sorting... "maybe", "bad", "ugly", and "down right wrong". The last group has become my slug pile and makes up about half of the coins. The "bad" pile has some details, but not enough for me to fathom and the "ugly" pile is barely better than slugs showing some faint details but full of pits. I've oven dried all but the "maybe" group (to my wife's shock that I would cook coins) so I can put them aside for awhile. I'll re-examine the "maybe" group tomorrow (they went back in the tank), but these have distinguishable images, some text and/or a mint mark. Out of 70+ coins, there are only six "maybe" coins.

Maybe I should have just ordered six higher priced, better quality, unattributed coins. Cleaning is fun, but I like better than slot machine odds of finding an average coin. (No I'm not looking for gold or silver.) I hear Joe's Never Ending Cleaning contest usually supplies a couple of good looking coins, but I'll have to read more on that one. In the meantime, these six coins will take me on a grand adventure. Off to my first attribution.

[ModernCoinTraitor]

And, here is my first attempt. (Of course I randomly chose one of the coins out of the tub, but I'm pretty sure it was probably the best in the whole lot:

(I don't have a scale yet, but it's supposed to be 2.45g)

Constantius Gallus, Caesar : 28 Sept 351 - Winter 354AD

Dia: 18.85 mm, Weight: 2.45g, RIC VIII 354
Obverse: CONSTANTIVS IVN NOB C, bust right, bare-headed, draped and cuirassed
Reverse: FEL TEMP RE-PARATIO, Soldier with spear in left hand attacking fallen horseman (wearing a pointed cap), ASIS in ex.

I think I cleaned the front too much and didn't touch up the back enough. But, it looked okay, so I stopped.

[crawforde]

Nice coin!
And a pretty one.  Hopefully there are a few more like that in there.

[SC]

I don't have my RIC with me but the attribution appears to be correct.

The coin is great.  Well cleaned and if this is part of your first efforts you should be very proud.

Shawn

[areich]

Very well done! You can see how on the reverse, on the high spots, the metal is shining through. If you brushed more, you could remove some of the sand but would also remove more of the patina from those high spots. Some careful mechanical cleaning might be useful, sometimes a toothpick works and is reasonably safe. But it's always better to clean too little instead of too much.

[ModernCoinTraitor]

Thanks all!

I went back and tried two things on the back:
1. A bamboo skewer sharpened in the local electric pencil sharpener, which earned another awkwardly glaring moment with the wife. But, this is an awesome tool!
2. A fine needle. Very dangerous tool. Slightest mistake reveals a hairline scratch. At least under the microscope.

I was actually able to remove the sand, grain by grain, from the coin revealing a lot more detail in the two soldiers and a couple of the letters. Unfortunately, with the comments posted, I started seeing the high point scrubbing damage I had inflicted early on using the brass brush. It could have been the nylon brush, but I suspect the prior. I probably should have separated the coins much earlier so I would have limited my initial approaches to the coins instead of using the same techniques for the lot.

As crawforde stated:

you just have to approach each coin individually

Well, good opportunity to see what a little sunlight will do with this coin.

I still really like this coin and will likely keep it for quite some time. Off to the next one!

[areich]

That explains it. A brass brush should only rarely be used. Good advise you quoted, that's one of the big mistakes. Treat coins individually or similar coins in small groups. This way you can really see wheat the treatments did (this goes for any kind of soak especially) and learn from that. Can you post a new picture?

[ModernCoinTraitor]

After treatment with pointy stick and a needle: (only the reverse)

A little better lighting to see the high spot brushing.

[areich]

It really improved. The coin, not the picture.   

[ModernCoinTraitor]

Question on the attribution:

The ones in the shop that bear this mint mark all show a question mark for the initial letter. RIC VII for this type indicate ASIS. But, that first letter is highly questionable. It is disproportionate in size to the other letters and looks more like a Greek capital gamma - . Additionally, I missed the D N in the obverse text, the spear is in the soldier's right hand (not left), and that's likely a shield on his left arm somewhat raised up, which conflicts with some of the supposed attribution where it should be on the ground. But, then there appears to also be a shield on the ground at his left foot. So, I'll probably look through the book again.

Am I seeing things after looking through the microscope for so long, or is that two shields present?

This is considered one of the two most "violent" series of coins. Apparently, it is fairly common, (whew) so I didn't destroy a masterpiece.

[areich]

It looks like Gamma SIS and I think that's a valid mint mark for Siscia. I think the officinae go from A to E at least.

See here for some interesting sites, one answering your question about the shields:

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=fel%20temp%20reparatio

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/ftr.html

http://www.bonannocoins.com/fel_temp.html

If you had destroyed it, it would be just as bad if it was a common coin but you didn't. This is a good job, the high spots will tone and won't be as noticeable.

[Jay GT4]

Great job!  I've all but given up on uncleaned coins.  It's not like it used to be...

[ModernCoinTraitor]

WOW!
Thanks for the references!

So, the shield on the ground actually belongs to the horseman.
And, the  represents the officinae that minted the coin. (Not really sure what that means other than there were A, B,  , and  officinae at Siscia. (RIC shows four officinae at the time, but uses ASIS as the mint mark with an asterisk for each of the officinae. I'm not sure what that means, but I'll figure it out.)

This horseman is more appropriately labeled the "clutching horseman".


Just for the record, here is the coin in it's initial state: (I didn't make a photo of the obverse.)