Is this Artificial Toning?

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEON-IRIDESCENT-MONSTER-1887-MS-COLOR-RAINBOW-MORGAN_W0QQitemZ180348029150QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCoins_US_Individual?hash=item180348029150&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318|301%3A1|293%3A1|294%3A50It looks like it to me. I had a seller on ebay tell me once that a polished coin he was selling could have the polish removed by dipping it in motor oil. I wonder why doesn't he do it himself if its such a great idea. And the same man told me that a good way to tone a coin is to dip it in gas.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It looks like AT.

 

Looks AT'd to me but I'll defer to the experts....where's Paul?

 

It's hard to tell. I get the impression that he altered the photos to bring out the toning... if you look at the obverse it is almost blinding.

Try and ask the seller for unaltered pics... post them here and maybe we can give you a better answer.

 

The E-Bay Law : Neon + Irridescent + Monster = BOGUS

Nope. Polishing isn't a chemical coating - it's mechanical buffing. It permanently ruins the coin's surface.

Good intuition.

He didn't do it himself because it's a BAD idea.

Hustler. Coin Doctor. :headbang:

Run !!!! Save yourself !!!!!

 

Shouldn't that be pulled for stating a grade?

 

quick newbie question.... looking at that I can see that the colors are just way too bright and kinda unnatural, but are there other things you all are seeing there that tip off that its probably artificial?

 

Probably AT, otherwise just a seller who doesn't know how to take pictures that aren't over-exposed.

 

I'm no expert by far, but the way the colors change so fast (instead of transitioning slowly)make me suspicious.

 

Thanks... I've kinda read through the PCGS grading guide and it talks about these kinds of things, but the black and white pictures in there are well, next to useless for trying to figure stuff out with toning.

 

It looks like AT to me. I don't think the color progression looks natural. So, I'd stay away.

 

I think the photos are juiced

 

The color is awful strong...that's a good point.

 

I agree with Magman on the colors being "adjusted". The toning pattern and sequence could fall into NT ( the obverse surely would pass TPGs), the reverse might get it Genuine-questionable colored.



Jim

 

I'd say those pics have been modified in some way, the luster of the coin just doesn't look right for that toning. In fact, all the sellers coins look that way.

Here is a pic from the same seller, look at the difference in the pics and luster.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=170308450318

 

Even if it is natural toning ( I don't believe so ) why bother to waste your time. $135 for a common date uncertified Morgan is a ridiculous no-brainer ... stay away !! ... even for much less of an offer.

 

I concur with just about everyone's opinion on this coin. For starters, the photos are way overexposed and horribly enhanced. Those colors are no where near that intense in real life. Due to the photo enhancement, it is impossible to give an accurate assessment of the originality of the toning. I will say that the obverse toning looks perfectly natural. The reverse toning is an unusual pattern but not one I haven't seen on Morgan Dollars before. The color progression is correct (yellow-magenta-cyan). And the colors don't creep up much over the letters which is a good indicator of NT on a Morgan Dollar. Look at the word UNITED as an example. The right wing of the eagle appears to have blue feathers with magenta found in the recesses between the feathers. This is a tell tale sign of natural toning caused by air transfer and almost impossible to duplicate with any AT method. The problem is that he has a bunch of other 1887 raw Morgans with similar toning patterns. This is very disturbing. I would list this coin as questionably toned since I can't see the actual appearance of the coin. However, I will state that if the coin is AT, it is very well done.

Now that I have given my opinion of the toning, I will proclaim that it is a moot point. Even if the toning is original, it is not attractive enough to even double the price IMO. And that premium would only apply to the coin if it was certified by either NGC or PCGS. A raw MS63/64 1887 Morgan Dollar with questionable toning is no where near worth $135.

When purchasing toned coins, please stick with certified coins only. There is just way too much risk in buying a raw rainbow toned coin.

 

Brilliant evaluation of this coin Lehigh 96!

My initial reaction to the toning was that it could most certainly be NT because of the toning pattern and progression. And I agree with you on the appeal of this toning pattern.

Allen

 

I think this is a great assessment. One thing to point out too, you have said before (and I completely agree)...what makes toned coins so valuable isn't just the color but the luster too. If the toning destroys the luster the coin isn't worth the premium. Only on those special coins where the toning is beautiful and the luster remains do you get the huge markups. Assuming this coins is NT (which I don't know), the photos are so enhanced there is no way access the luster on the coin. It looks very lustrous, but that could very easily be the enhancement.

 

AT and Juiced photos to boot!!