NT or AT?

Question. You can't take the coins out of this type of packaging without destroying said packaging.
Is it possible to do the dirty deed through the packaging?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I just pulled some out of a 2007 set pretty easily.

 

AT but I like the powder blue colored ones.

 

I agree with the others; the color looks artificial to me.

 

Update, I just got the sets in today and now I'm even more confused. The toning is not nearly as pronounced and bright as the images and looks fairly natural (to me anyway). I'm not really convinced that it is natural, but I may throw one or two of the coins in my next PCGS submission just to see what happens. Maybe I'll get lucky, or maybe I'll just waste a few more bucks on these. We shall see.

 

Honestly I think it comes down to whether the coins are MA (market acceptable) or not. WingedLiberty has a stunning set of modern proofs and many of his coins exhibit similar toning as yours. It boggles my mind how coins produced less than 10 years ago can tone so rapidly with such vibrant colors...but in any case PCGS accepts them (or at least, some of them). I think for this specific type of colofully toned coinage, it comes down to small subtleties -- ex: how smooth the color progression is, how well the colors mix or clash together, any abnormal hazing spots, etc. -- that will dictate whether or not they will straight grade. For example, it's doubtful that the John Q. Adams proof will straight grade, though a couple others such as the Andrew Jackson proof (I really like that "cornflower blue," as WingedLiberty put it, the best!) have a good chance of making an actual PF6X grade.

Of course, as long as you're satisfied with your purchase, I don't think it matters. In any case, those are a great group of coins for a great price!