Featured The Slabbed (NGC/PCGS) AT-QT (Artificial/Questionable Toning) Thread

Why would you say that?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Summary of results:
-----------------------

Coin 1 - Clad Dime (pg.1) - 2 (NT/MA) vs 6 (AT/QC)
Coin 2 - Franklin (pg. 1) - 3 (NT/MA) vs 7 (AT/QC)
Coin 3 - CBH (pg. 4) - 5 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 4 - Silv PR Ike (pg. 5) - 3 (NT/MA) vs 6 (AT/QC)
Coin 5 - Peace Dollar (pg. 7) - 6 (NT/MA) vs 4 (AT/QC)
Coin 6 - Ohio Silv PR 25c (pg. 8) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 11 (AT/QC)
Coin 7 - 1964 MS 25c (pg. 9) - 11 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 8 - 1974 Clad PR 25c (pg. 11) - 4 (NT/MA) vs 5 (AT/QC)
Coin 9 - 85-O Morgan (pg. 12) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 1 (AT/QC) *no points*
Coin 10 - 1890 IHC (pg. 13) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 3 (AT/QC)
Coin 11 - 1893 Col. Commem (pg. 14) - 10 (NT/MA) vs 2 (AT/QC)
Coin 12 - Silver 3c (pg. 15) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 13 - SBA (pg. 16) - 5 (NT/MA) vs 2 (AT/QC)
Coin 14 - Large Cent (pg. 16) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 15 - Franklin (pg. 17) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 14 (AT/QC)
Coin 16 - 1964 10c (pg. 18) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 10 (AT/QC)
Coin 17 - 1966 1c SMS 67*(pg. 19) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 18 - Silve 25c (pg. 19) - 10 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 19 - Peace Dollar (pg. 20) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 10 (AT/QC)
Coin 20 - 1945 1c (pg. 21) - 14 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 21 - 1964 50c (pg. 22) - 6 (NT/MA) vs 5 (AT/QC)
Coin 22 - Peace $1 (pg. 23) - 6 (NT/MA) vs 3 (AT/QC)
Coin 23 - Franklin (pg. 24) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 4 (AT/QC)
Coin 24 - Jefferson 5c (pg. 24) - 1 (NT/MA) vs 5 (AT/QC)
Coin 25 - Peace $1 (pg. 25) - 8 (NT/MA) vs 2 (AT/QC)
Coin 26 - 1947 10c (pg. 26) - 10 (NT/MA) vs 4 (AT/QC)
-----------------------

NT/MA: 16 total
AT/QC: 10 total

-----------------------
Points:

ddddd - 7
Lehigh96 - 2
TheFinn - 1

 

I'd call NT on the '40-S Half.

 

I'm NT/MA on the Walker but would be open to change my mind if someone could convince me. This coin swims right on the boundary of what is acceptable and it wouldn't take much to push it into the QC category IMO.

 

I recall seeing that one at auction. It’s another hard call. I’m suspect of the double sided toning. Maybe it was in a PCI holder at some time? I’ll lean towards:
QC

 

im okay with it. MA

 

I am QC also, something about the perimeter color that is throwing me off.

 

Is album toning a poor assumption on my part for the Walker?

 

I'm on the fence. Maybe I'll be back.

 

This is one of those border line QC and I'm at 49% QC and 51% NT.

So my vote is NT with reservations.

 

It’s a possibility in my opinion. That is one common cause of double sided toning.

 

The problem with album toning doesn't usually make the pastel tones I see on this coin.

I think the best explanation for this one is a PCI holder, for the double sided rings.

But this one is odd enough that I'd probably question it, myself.

 

I'm wondering, out loud, if this had brighter or more saturated colors at one time but now the toning is going terminal?

 

Beaut - I like it a lot. Hate to do it, but just too unusual....I vote QT.

I kind of agree with physics-fan, the only Walker I have owned that had some rainbow on it just didn't look like that... not much to go off, I know.

 

As Jason said, looks a lot like old PCI holder toning. But there are so many strange pink-violet tones that I have to call it QC.

 

A tie so far...

 

I'm seeing 4-5 so far...remember you own vote doesn't count unless it's a tie.

Edit: unless we aren't count physics in the questionable category?

 

NT

 

Ill settle this- its been in one of those aftermarket holders people were vindicating halves with earlier, in the thread the ones that were all pink/bright pink - i like the darker magenta on this one..
Haha NT final tie breaker