Is this toning pretty or ugly?

I vote for ugly. But I don't collect toned coins so I'd like to see what others think.

http://cgi.ebay.com/1889-O-MORGAN-D...88?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item4aa43950e4

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

To each his own. AT.

 

It's ugly. VERY ugly.

Plus it is fake - as in AT (Artificial Toning).

 

ugly

 

BOTH~!~

That coin is Pretty Darn Ugly and AT'd.

 

Id buy it....
for ten bucks lol

 

You would have to pay me 10 bucks to take that.

 

EVERY coin this seller has up for auction is GORGEOUS RAINBOW TONED! Even the Statehood quarters are rainbow toned...ya think a clad quarter can rainbow tone in 10 years time?

Happy (puke) Collecting

 

barf

 

Gotta agree with ya here EAW...this might be the ugliest coin I've ever seen

 

The coin itself is ugly. "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."

 

I want to know which parts are VG and which parts are XF.
And of course the grades in between.

 

nasty looking coin....I wouldn't even pay melt for that....

 

I think it's pretty........ugly!

Chris

 

Hidden Dragon: Consider adding a poll to this thread for members to vote on.

+1

It's pretty-ugly!

 

Ultra hideous! That coin is complete garbage.

 

Looks like a bruise.

 

Someone needs to work on their AT skills

PS: they should dip it and try again!

 

You know, that Morgan Dollar could have been a nice G-4 example for a young collector or low-end grade collector if it wasn't made ugly by that HORRIBLE Artificial Toning job!!! In my opinion, a kind-of nice coin was ruined...

 

pug-ugly

IMHO, it is pug-ugly.

My opinion might be different if it was dated 1893-S or 1895. In that case it might be a good candidate for conservation.