Is this an example of Artificial toning to cover a cleaning?

1934 S Peace $, Nice key date with lots of meat left on the bone, however seems like the observe has an old cleaning but the reverse has some toning, but very typical coloration of artificial toning.
Is this an example of AT to cover a cleaning? Or am I just wanting to see things here?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/404248680613?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Probably.

 

Agree.

 

I see a few hairlines that are going in the same direction, and the reverse is screaming AT. It's also out of focus, which probably was not a mistake.

 

It looks as though the toning was applied with a brush.

 

Artifical toning and bad photography used to cover cleaning.

 

Definitely AT, and definitely cleaned. Ghastly looking coin.

 

In my opinion, yes.

 

Cleaned at low au. It’s hideous

 

Sold for $218. Some people will buy anything.

 

That thing doesn't look right at all. Nothing i can point to specifically at the moment because I'm really tired, but it's giving me an uncanny valley kind of feeling. I'm learning towards counterfeit.

 

If you look at the sellers sold items he had a Morgan dollar listed as a 1885 0 that he sold but the photo is a 95 O that looks highly suspect to me.

 

The relief just doesn't look right to me. I bet that 34s came from the same place as the 64d in the sellers sold items.

 

Nice looking Peace dollar, too bad they ruined it.