Beware of rainbow toning

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

So is my toned coin worth more than an untoned coin?

 

I would think it is based on the market...if someone is willing to pay more for a toned coin than it is worth more...

 

Is toning damage?

 

If indeed toning is damage outside of the mint then it would make more sense to say that the damaged coin should be worth less than an original coin. Post mint damage should not be worth more than an original specimine without damage. The idea that post mint damage in the toning should be worth more opens up reason that other post mint damage coins could become more valuable. Right?

 

As maybe some of you know I have been using XRF and SEM/EDS analysis for several years now - I do like some of the comments and that rainbow chart - IS KOOL - I still believe this topic is trivial - as I think we are years away from determing methods of AT & NT using surface material analysis and since the average NGC grader it seems looks at a coin for about 60s and does not use a stereo microscope, etc.

However - since we are on page 22 and we are still going in circles I will just throw some tid-bits out there:

1. I have confirmed by SEM/EDS that sufur and chlorine (compounds) are the two most common elements found on a coin surface. As you may know and with my new book on contemporary circulating counterfeits I use these tools simply to determine alloys and PREDICT the age of a counterfeit (i.e., modern forgery vs. period-circulating).
2. From (1) I absolutely confirm W. Weimer's simplistic coin chemistry findings of sulfur and chlorine being the two most common contaminants found on a surface.
3. When I was big in U.S. Colonials I did come across some great rarities that went into my collection. Let me use this one example. This coin was a NJ Maris 10-G ($5,000-7,500). The coin was orange surfaced cleaned from a previous pedigree. It was stripped down (don't ask) and then sulfur ointment was placed in an envelope. The coin sat there for almost a decade in this paper coin envelope. It came back say 50% naturally toned copper - so to speak.
4. Just like in our GNL book on Counterfeit 8 Reales certain trace elements in an alloy do not dicate a 18thC forgery but a modern Chinese forgery or 20thC copy. So future researchers can if they wish explore the surface of a coin surface and look for elements that should not be there say that are remnants of a toning product - however realize that whether someone adds sulfur to a coin's surface or into a flip as I did to try to revive this great rarity that someone harshly cleaned - the compounds of copper and sulfur are probably the same whether from the atmosphere or from a sulfur hair product. However using an SEM or high magnification it may be possible to look at a surface IMO and determine if its natural or if chemical agents were used based on residues, etc.. As someone has indicated I have never seen Material Analysis used for such a study.
5. My new book (Forgotten Coins of the North American Colonies - Revisited) due out in 2017 will go into greater details but not on toning but how to spot Chinese fakes based on their alloy make-up's etc..

Questions - but can you make them SCIENTIFIC? Please ...

John Lorenzo
Numsimatist
United States

 

You are right.
Many people including myself will pay a lot of money for the right "damaged" coin.
Its really tiresome in this hobby hearing people talk about what a coins worth, book value is this, grey sheets price is this. Coins just like everything else are worth what somebody is willing to pay. If you can create a market where bent coins or cleaned carry a premium, have at it. There are people that will pay premiums for counter stamps, chop marks, etc. All are post mint damage. This is a hobby, people will collect what they want to.

 

Right. Let me elaborate. Back in the day when we were condition-grading, excepting a few odd-ball collectors, tarnish was considered "environmental damage." That's why the "doctors" dipped silvers back then, to dip out that environmental damage. Today, with market grading, it's just the reverse. The odd-balls are the ones who consider toning environmental damage. The pendulum swung. Credit market grading for that.

 

But shouldn't there be a standard? I've kept this coin which many say is PMD. I personally have no idea if the mint could have accidentally done this somehow or not but I also can't confirm for certain how it was made... but should this coin if PMD be worth more than a non damaged coin just because I say so?

 

Do you think toned coins are worth more because the seller says so? They are worth more because people are willing to pay more. If you can find someone to pay more for that coin in a honest way, then yes its worth more. If you con someone into paying more for it by saying its a mint error, than NO

 

I'm playing on both sides. I don't necesarilly think the seller or buyer should detrrmine it. Me selling this coin as a mint damaged coin would be no different than a dealer selling a coin as a naturally toned coin. Neither of us can prove or deny it. And yet if someone did buy it then they perhaps could have been had.... and so then they have to try and find a way to make something off the mistake.

 

Doug, it is quite possible that I have incorrectly attributed comments to you that were made by another poster in this 20+ page tome. If that is the case, then I apologize. And if you look at what I wrote, you will see that your copper comments are not what I was responding to; in fact, I even agree that there is quite a bit of manipulation of copper.

 

Bob, I don't think he would question those pieces so much. I think he is targeting many coins from the rattler/NGC no line fatty era that now appear to be red-browns.

 

I dont follow, sorry.

 

Well... it's pretty simple really.... there should be a more outlined pricing for coins otherwise dealers or individuals can fabricate any coin and sell it as something rare and worth more than it truly is.

 

I smell what what you're stepping in

 

Theres simply not enough protection for buyers and this is especially true when it comes to dealers. Dealers will mark up coins or sets tremendously just to make money off of the coins. No wonder they wanted toned damaged coins to be worth money and have found ways to make artificially toned coins. I also dont think it should be unreasonably priced for someone to get their coin authenticated thus making the dealers the only ones who can really profit. Leaving the average collector unsure of if what he has is a gem or a dud.

 

Like government set prices for coins.

 

Its $20 to get a coin graded. You sound like someone that is jealous of others that can pay more for coins.

 

Lol... I didn't know you could hear sound through reading... is that natural or artificial intelligence?