Both cost about 80 bucks American. The two photos of the lighter ones are the same coin. And the two darker ones are same as well
If I had to buy one, I'd pick the dirty one over the cleaner one that looks harshly and improperly cleaned.
There is no way, no how that I would buy the lighter coin. The darker piece might have potential, but it looks like it also might have environmental damage. Truly, I would pass on both.
Looks like someone is a plumber.. Blow torch one and wire wool the other ! Ha we've all made the wire wool mistake :S
If the darker one had good surfaces in hand that one only. I bet you a denari the lighter one used to look like, or even much darker, than the darker coin. They just couldn't get it all off.
Well I was going to say the lighter one looked harshly cleaned and the dark one a bit more worn, but I would have to agree with the others on this one. The dark coin has more potential in the long run but I think you could do better for 80
I would go for the dark one ,provided the nice toning does not cover up hairlines from a former cleaning.
Agreed.... although you never know if the toning is fake too, unless you are experienced and knowledgeable (and I am not... that's why I stick to slabbed coins) Both are beautiful coins though.
Its a great point. Its why toned coins used to sell at discounts. Its because coin doctors used to AT a coin to hide its defects. This is why dipping was so common, so a collector could verify there were no surface defects before they bought the coin. Always be VERY careful with toned coins, and learn how to evaluate surfaces. Also always check them out under very strong light for any damage. To me, the toning looks common for that type of coin, but still an excellent point.
I dunno.....the fool in me chooses the 'lighter' coin. Be that as it may, I'm just diggin' on the design.......
The dark coin would be OK for $50 or so, but it's not in great shape and this is a pretty common issue. The light one, as everyone else has pointed out, has been cleaned.