So what would cause this sort of toning? And do you like it? Might as well guess the grade while you're at it
Nice coin with plenty of meat on the bone. I'm guessing Au. details as it looks to my eye as cleaned retoned. Not crazy over the color however .... the right price I would buy it .
won't say yet what the grade is, but it is a full grade, not details (whether deserved or not? no comment).
I agree and like what another member here posted. Splotchy toning is not attractive. Cannot see if it has any rubbing so either AU-58 or Unc details: AT or Cleaned. If the coin is straight graded, you got a gift in which case they probably graded it 58.
Could it be leather pouch toning? Or from some other form of storage that was not a bag or album. I'd say the toning is a positive; not a monster toner, but above average. Grade? Let's go AU-53
PCGS AU55! pretty close y"all - I don't own it yet. Have to see it in hand. Price is higher than I would like but in line with book. It would have to be really stellar in hand for me to keep it. Thanks much for the info as usual. Very helpful.
My guess would have been AU58 but the comments about toning are interesting. It seems like getting a clean grade on a toned coin is a crap shoot. My guess is that if it was graded by NGC it would have gotten a details grade. I've had several NGC details graded coins that are very nice. I couldn't afford similar straight graded coins that most would have weaker strike points. I wonder if PCGS would have given them a straight grade.
I agree with Paddy54 sentiments, it looks cleaned/retoned which is why imo it has that weird and semi-unusual color. Idk what the purchase price was but it would either hafta be a bargain or look better in-hand, to secure a place in my collection. I view the color as neutral at best but it IS sort of a unique looking coin so it has that going 4 it
Just for discussion sake - I understand from the experts here that these there are coin doctors that can do AT that is indistinguishable from natural. Given that - and the possibility that this might be an AT coin - wouldn't someone who was able to do that level of AT work do it so that the toning wasn't "blotchy"? Or would they not be able to control that? BTW, the owner says it is spectacular in hand. I will find out soon.
Coin envelopes can cause the same appearance. While like some albums, it would be more due to poor storage than AT.
There's probably 10 of those in the entire seated run. Almost every single seated anything has had something done to it or happen to it in its 130+ years of existence
While I agree that most Seated coins are not original and believe you are just making a point, actually there are several thousand totally original (for any purist with a stereo microscope) seated coins in all grades. Even Uncs, but these are expensive.
Was definitely just making a point, I have no idea what the true number is but I do know it is very small compared to the surviving population. Even a lot of the Uncs have been dipped, which I am fine with.
I would say it spent most of it's life under a peanut butter tin. Half the coin sticking out in the air and I presume that there were pears stored nearby.
FWIW - the coin is much darker in hand, not awful, but not as attractive as the picture. Owner must have used bright lighting to get the color to show as much as he did. I usually find toned coins look better in hand than in pictures - this one, in my opinion, is an exception.
