What do you guys think of these toned wheaties? I am on the fence on whether this toning was done intentionally. They don't scream AT to me, but I have a bias opinion since Ibought them. -g
Yeah, I am not sure. I usually pride myself on the ability to distinguish AT from NT, on silver and clad coins. I have 0 experience in copper toning. I will say, if these are AT, I still like them lol. They were cheap anyway. I need Rigo to chime in! Rigooooo, come out and play!
TPG's are very suspicious of colorful copper. PCGS just BB'd a pretty 1915 I sent in. I sent it right back, raw again, and it came back 65BN. It should grade 66 but I'm not going to play the game again. What are your plans? Thinking grading? Or just curious about our opinions? I don't really think it's worth grading unless they were MS66 or better, and they're not. If they were mine I'd convince myself they are NT and save them raw. They're quite pretty in spite of some unfortunate scratches. Lance.
No plans on grading at all. I just like toners. I also agree about the scratches. I really don't know why I buy them lol. Anyway, I paid $9 for all 3. So what can i say?
Put red cents in old manila envelopes, and they will look like that in a few months is you live in a somewhat humid climate. Nothing unusual looking to me about those cents. Back in the mid 70's I created one about identical accidentally. I bought a 55s red for my early collection. I left it in the envelope the man put it in over the summer, and in the fall I opened it and it was toned. I almost cried because back then toning was ruining a coin, and I had just ruined the first BU red coin I had ever bought.
Thanks for the feedback medoraman. That leans towards what I was thinking. These were not done with a chemical, but by a more natural process, intentional or not.
Yes, but it doesn't answer AT versus NT since intention is unknowable. I wish the hobby could simply define AT as chemically induced, (and therefor knowable), toning. What I agree your situation is not chemical, so to me why does it matter? It still has the slippery slope as to why pay a premium for a reproducible reaction, but I am not trying to start that flame war. Buy what you like and be happy. Chris
I did this with a handful of MS, blazing luster, Jefferson nickels from the 50's and 60's original bank rolls. I put them in the old manila envelopes, and then inside a tupperware container. I put the container outside on every nice day this summer. I will be posting pictures of them on this forum. Many different levels of toning occured. Some, very drastic.
The heat did it. Putting them in the tupperware closed on the hot day sped the reaction up. Its very hard to control the reaction in heat, and you most likely got some decent toning, but others can be wild. Keep that tupperware lid open and it will be slower, but more managable and give you time to keep them from going too far. Also a dry environment will give it a little different color than a natural reaction. I look forward to seeing them. Ok, that is it for me on this conversation. I don't want to be accused of "saying too much". Chris
Here is a quick pic I took a few weeks ago with my crappy phone camera. I will take al lthe glamour shots soon. Maybe this weekend. Anyway, the toning is MUCH more vivid in hand.
Sure it was a chemical, even if the chemical was in the air or paper. Whether intentional or not would be the question. I can not determine that of course. I have seen this type of toning in original bank bags, and know it can occur without help beside putting them in a bag and letting them sit for years, but I suspect they would not pass TPG most of the time. IMO. But they are pretty. Jim
I agree with Jim. The toning on the Lincolns is market acceptable and consistent with what I've seen on many other similar coins. NICE TONERS!
