one for standard grade, and one for natural toning? Surely people are paying more for toned U.S. Series coinage. Shouldn't there be a standard since we are currently going off of completed listings? Say for instance there were a picture based toned grading scale for series. The grade could be VF-30 (T/6)? Maybe a grading scale is stretching it too far. How about a toning reference?
I guess it would be possible to create a scale like that. It would be difficult to make it work though, because grading is subjective already. And toning, and preferences about toning is even more subjective, IMO.
Ron Sirna proposed a system like this a few years back. Ron was the creator of the TCCS (Toned Coins Collector Society). You can read more about his toning scale in this thread. Rainbow Toning's Effect on Price The link to the TCCS doesn't work because the forum got a virus a few years ago and was permanently shut down. As for the idea, I think it could be somewhat useful in the MS grades. To my knowledge, only David Lawrence Rare coins uses a system similar to this at present. To me, more important than a toning grading scale is that the Price Guides exclude prices realized by toned coins as they artificially inflate the prices for the date/mm.
It would be interesting to see a price guide which segregated "blast white prices realized" from "monster toned prices realized" as a side-by-side comparison of same date/mm. The drawback to this would be who decides the criteria that constitutes "monster toning". It probably wouldn't fly. Chris
I think using a designator for eye appeal such as a * is fine. The issue with toning is that even though some really like it, some do not. I had a conversation with a coin dealer last year about toning, and he told me that he can easily AT a coin so that it looks like NT. TC
What you're asking about Jason really isn't a workable idea because there is too much of a chocolate/vanilla factor involved. As already stated several times what one person likes another doesn't. Say you used a toning scale something like DLRC is using with 5 being high and 0 being low. What one person thinks is a 5 another can easily think is a 1 or a 2. And trusting somebody else's opinion on the toning grade/rating is the same as letting somebody else tell you what your favorite color is for the shirts you wear. It's just too much of a personal choice. Honestly, grading already has all of this built into it. The two most important factors there are in grading are luster and eye appeal. Toning falls under eye appeal. And since toning is also greatly dependent on luster, then I'd say that grading pretty well covers toning with the system we already have.
I think toning basically falls into the old problem with any price guide, that being every coin is unique. Even though they may be identical grades, two coins can ALWAYS sell for different prices based upon appeal and personal tastes. We actually do have the toning issue in ancients. Hard glossy green patina has been desired and paid a premium for for at least 200 years that I have read about. I never understood it until I happened to get an excellent example of it. It really is quite beautiful and striking, with the lettering highlighted by the toning. Anyway, my coin would sell for $100 normally, but with the toning would sell for $200 or more easily. This is the problem with price guides, in that these prices are averaged into prices. If you bought a coin for "book" that is lower than average appeal you probably overpaid, but if you buy for "book" with superlative appeal you got a screaming deal. Its just one of the nuances you gradually learn with experience. But, because its really unquantifiable and especially US toning a very personal choice, I do not think any categorization will ever work for it. Chris
Also every toning is unique and more unique than coins being unique. Toning is like a snowflake, there are non alike. Although coins become unique over time, but the ones coming out of the mint are almost all identical theoretically speaking of course. You can take two ASE both graded at MS70 and they are essentially alike. You can't say the same about toning.
Interesting thing about rainbow toning is that I see it alot on our US coins, but I can't recall it being on other country's coins in the same degree. I'm sure it does exist, but you would think that it would be more common in Europe with all the older coins there.
Perhaps more people just spend their money instead of hoard it away in some dark cold closet like we Americans like to do apparently. Also, this likely might indicate most toning in coins being sold are AT, not NT.
Like others have already said. There are too many variances in opinions on what is considered nice or ugly when it comes to toning. And some don't like toning, also a price guide whether printed or online will never be able to price toned coins accordingly. One coin might sell higher simply because there is a certain color on it that somebody likes.
Oh it exists, there's quite a bit of it if you take the time to look, but you are right there's no where near as much of it there as there is here. And there is also a reason it is not as common in Europe as it is here in the US. That's because even still today a large percentage of Europeans still harshly clean their coins. While that practice started dwindling away 50 years ago in the US.
Good idea. There should be more to the grading of a coin than what one grading service gives numerically, and I have seen spectacular toning on coins that are technically average or even VF/XF. I'd like to see a passport system where a coin certified at one service would carry over previous grades if the owner so desired. So you could have a coin with an NGC/PCGS/ANACS grade which would clue in the buyer to the universality of the excellence of a given coin.
And what do you do with all those coins that have been graded 3 times by PCGS and given 3 different grades ranging from 64 to 67 ? When the same company can't be consistent how in the world could we ever expect 3 different companies to be consistent when they all use different grading standards ?