I try to understand toning, but if this MS62 wasn't in the slab, I'd never think it was even an UNC... Comparatively, it just looks really "dirty" and quite frankly very circulated to me. What is going on here? I know the coin is a few grades lower but why does it look SO much different? Also, could someone please tell me which slab is 'newer'? There is different labels on the two and I'm assuming one is a newer version... Thanks so much, the minute I think I'm "getting it" -- I'm not.... ;(
So toning can look like flat out dirt? It literally looks like if I rubbed it with my thumb, my thumb would be dirty....
Sometimes the toning is colorful sometimes its cloudy white. But I mostly see the white cloudy color in OGP coins. The copper pennies however tones really nicely in them.
Not sure if this applies for the franklin halves or not, but for early copper PCGS or NGC MS 62 would almost certainly not be a mint state coin. They consistently overgrade AU coins and put them in MS62 or 63 slabs. As a general rule PCGS MS64 is the lowest grade large cent that actually has no wear.
Actually you are correct - they do it on other coin series also, not just copper. Back to the old cabinet friction type wear and being in a MS holder -weak strikes, etc.
It's not dirt, it is toning. And no, it would not rub off. That grey toning is far and away the most common toning found on all silver, copper nickel, and clad coins. But just because a coin has grey toning and little or no luster showing, that does not mean it is circulated or not MS.
I agree with that part. Actually they will grade coins, any coins, that have light wear as high as MS67.
Sad but true. I have seen MS65's at shows lately that would have been 63's in the past, and would not grade XF if they were an ancient coin.
Luster comes into play with the elusive quality of "eye appeal". The major TPGs market grade coins more based on eye appeal nowadays than they used to. Which isn't to say they don't highly grade some really ugly mutts, because they do, it's just that a coin that has the superficial value of "eye appeal" will generally get a grade higher than it technically merits.
Luster plays a very important roll in coin grading since a fully struck coin that is devoid of luster will always grade much lower than the same fully struck coin with full luster. Oops. I forgot to add that the MS62 is the newer slab due to the presence of the bar code on the obverse.
Of course luster plays a part. But it is not the only part that matters. Nor is any coin that is graded MS62 required to be lustrous. And what you could never tell from a pic is that the luster is still there, under that grey toning. In hand you can often tell that it is, not always, but often. That's one of the things about grading. People always seem to think that if even 1 thing is missing, like luster, then the coin cannot grade MS. Well it can, and it should. For example, a coin can be relatively free of contact marks and hairlines. Normally if that were true the coin would get a med or higher MS grade. But if the coin has poor quality luster then then the lack of that luster is enough to warrant the coin being graded low MS - even though it is a very clean coin in regard to contact marks. And by the same token the coin have absolutely stunning luster, but covered in contact marks and again be graded low MS. All of the grading criteria play a part. Each criteria can be the cause of a high grade, or a low grade. It all depends. And sometimes it is the sum of the parts that cause a high grade, a medium grade, or a low grade.
