PREV ARTICLE
NEXT ARTICLE
FULL ISSUE
PREV FULL ISSUE
V8 2005 INDEX
E-SYLUM ARCHIVE
The E-Sylum: Volume 8, Number 7, February 13, 2005, Article 20 SOME PROSE AND CONS ON PLASTERS Recently, I was part of an email exchange with Joe Levine and Dick Johnson regarding the merits of collecting original artists' plaster or wax models and galvanos for coins and medals. I own exactly one plaster, created by U.S. Mint Sculptor-Engraver John Mercanti for the 2004 Pittsburgh ANA Convention medal. Eventually I'll get it framed and hang it in my office. Dick pointed out several negatives on the collecting of plaster and wax models, and Joe and I offered some counterpoints. Below is a reworking of our discussion. Comments, anyone? Dick Johnson writes: "It is NOT recommended for individuals to form collections of plaster and wax models of coins and medals for the following four reasons: 1) They are impermanent. They easily break, chip, scratch, dent and are very easily damaged. It is not recommended, particularly for a new collector. They must be handled and stored in a professional manner, which most collectors do not have this knowledge or capability. 2) They do not hold their value. There is no aftermarket. You cannot easily sell them when you wish to dispose of them. See comments below. 3) They are purchased for the wrong reason. Burning in the mind of everyone who buys models (and dies) is often the thought -- "Since this is the original I am going to reproduce this." Some even think of having a die made from a plaster model to strike specimens they can sell (a la Robert Bashlow restriking the Confederate cent from both dies). Most reputable medal makers will not accept this business. If you find a shady firm that will, you are courting disaster. While not counterfeiting, it is certainly a disreputable practice of restriking, shunned by seasoned collectors. 4) Plasters are so easily replicated. You never know if you have an original or a replica. It takes about 40 minutes and 40 cents worth of plaster to reproduce a plaster model. You can then sell either the positive or the negative. On the other hand making a galvano from a plaster takes some skill, an electrogalvanic tank, copper anodes and three day's time. The galvano is metal and permanent! Even I – with four thumbs – could replicate a plaster. I can't make a galvano. Maybe my concern is WHO is buying plasters. For seasoned collectors, as I stated, should have ONE as an example of how a coin or medal is made. I do not see collectors with large collections of plasters. Such a collection would have so many problems! The most notable example: Michigan numismatist Joseph Lepczyk accepted a consignment of plaster models from the studio of James Earle Fraser and listed these in one of his numismatic auction sales, complete with pictures. These included some of the Fraser Buffalo nickel models. (Did he wonder why this came to him instead of being consigned to one of the big name auction houses?) A Coin World article at the time heightened the interest for these unusual items. A dentist in Texas bought most of these plaster models. He paid dearly for them. When the dentist went to sell them he could not find a buyer, even at a substantial loss. To get out from under a bad situation he wanted to donate them for a tax writeoff. He could not find any appraiser who would give him anywhere near the appraisal of what he paid. Note: The metal galvanos made from some of these plaster models is a completely different story. Walter Breen even mentioned the Buffalo nickel galvanos in his Complete Encyclopedia of United States and Colonial Coins and created the term "electrotrial" for these pieces. These galvanos are unique, tell a delightful story of Fraser's testing the design, and command realistic substantial prices. (It was the founder of Medallic Art Company, Henri Weil, who made these for Fraser -- even silver plating copper galvanos to look like nickel -- and were mentioned in the manuscript history of MAco by brother Felix Weil.) However, it has been my recommendation that a seasoned collector should have ONE plaster model or galvano and ONE die in his collection just to be familiar with the technology of how a coin or medal is made. But I would not recommend a large number of plasters – as a collection -- for the average collector. " Countering some of these points, Joe Levine replied: "I can't say that I wholly agree with Dick's condemnation of collecting plasters. Just because they are easily broken is hardly a good reason not to collect them - Liverpool pitchers are easily broken too!" I agree -- it is part of the risk one takes as a collector. My library can and does suffer damage from too much light, handling, etc. from time to time, but this is par for the course. On the valuation point, Joe Levine writes: "Nothing holds its value if it is initially purchased at a very high price! If the guy had bought the Fraser materials on the cheap back then and offered them for sale now, he would probably have shown a nice profit." Dick is right that the market is exceedingly slim for these items, and that finding buyers is always tough. But I also agree with Joe's point. Over time, rare items will come to have their day in the sun. Time was when many of the items which comprise my numismatic library were unwanted and unappreciated by the mass of collectors of either coins or literature. But now, things that I bought for $25 or less now bring $200 or more. And anyone who bought say, a rare plated Chapman catalogue for $9,000 many years ago would still be waiting to make money off the purchase. The material in each case remains very desirable, but paying top dollar at market peaks is never a good way to invest.. As for the ease of replication, I have no plans or desire to strike duplicate medals using my plaster, and doubt many collectors would either, but it does remain a possibility. It is a difficult task, though, and that also limits the likelihood of this happening. As for reproducing the plasters themselves, this is far easier than reproducing a galvano or die. In fact, my plaster is one of THREE made. Joe Levine writes: "Who is to say what motivates someone to purchase a plaster? I have sold a number of them for various Official Inaugural Medals and I don't think even one of my customers had in mind creating a galvano or a die from them. I agree with Dick about the ease of replication -- however, if the pedigree can be ascertained with some degree of certainty, I don't have a problem with authenticity. It's like the lock of Kennedy's hair that is accompanied by a letter from his barber authenticating it. A letter from the artist's son would be the same." Wayne Homren, Editor The Numismatic Bibliomania Society is a non-profit organization promoting numismatic literature. See our web site at coinbooks.org. To submit items for publication in The E-Sylum, write to the Editor at this address: whomren@coinlibrary.com To subscribe go to: https://my.binhost.com/lists/listinfo/esylum | |
PREV ARTICLE
NEXT ARTICLE
FULL ISSUE
PREV FULL ISSUE
V8 2005 INDEX
E-SYLUM ARCHIVE