Artificially Toned Coins - Opinions?

A number of years ago, I purchased a "toned" Walker from this seller. At that time, the seller's listings did not include the "artificially toned" disclaimer (now shown at the very bottom of each of his listings).

I'm curious about everyone's opinion on the practice of artificial toning. Although I understand the appeal of (naturally) toned coins to many serious collectors, my personal opinion is that pieces of history should not be "cooked." I am also of the opinion that this seller's "disclaimer" should be more prominent within his listings.

Anyone else have an opinion?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1922-P-Peac...11?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item20d98776c7

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This has been discussed at length often. Put "artificial toning" in the Search Box for Titles Only and you will get 30 hits. And more is in the archives.

If you like a coin, buy it. Realize that someone else might perceive it differently. Just for example, I have a Roman denarius of Trajan, but it was the celestial globe on the reverse that I wanted. Someone else might not care about astronomy.

And, to re-animate the long-dead poor old horse... All toning is toning. Chemistry is chemistry. A guy carries his lucky silver dollar to work each day in a steel mill. Another woman keeps hers in a little leather pouch. A man has an olde Englishe Coine Cabinette of Woode.

You can tell. Once I was clerking for a dealer at an ANA convention and someone came to the table with miscellaneous US silver coins from a dead ancestor. "They smoked," I said.

Be aware, of course, that some "coin doctors" artificially tone coins to cover up problems, like hairline scratches from cleaning. It can make a low MS or even an MS/AU slider look more attractive and disguise the true grade.

 

Artificially Toned coins are problem coins just like coins that are cleaned, whizzed, polished etc. And just like the vast majority of problem coins, most AT coins are pretty easy to identify as such as long as you have the requisite knowledge. Rather than expecting sellers to protect you with disclaimers in their descriptions, subscribe to caveat emptor, learn about how to detect problem coins on your own by engaging in coin forums such as this one, and never worry about being taken advantage of ever again.

 

I agree. The problem I have is that I don't think this seller is making it obvious what is being purchased. Why not put the "Artificial Toning" in the description line rather than burying it within the listing?

As for "all toning is toning". . . I disagree.

 

Are you kidding me??
This seller is doing nothing wrong. He CLEARLY states it is artificial toning, in his description. He shouldn't have to put it in the title, where that real estate is valuable for search rankings.

• First off, a buyer should read the descriptions. That's what they are there for.
• Secondly, no one should be buying toned coins if they can't tell by those images that it's AT.

The bigger problem is the large amount of other AT sellers who do not mention it at all.

 

The only people he is fooling are the "illiterate" and the "lazy."

 

The coin absolutely telegraphs AT by its appearance, and the seller states that it is AT in his narrative. Caveat Emptor seems to apply in that situation.

 

Not kidding you at all.

 

Exactly!!

 

While that seller may technically mention that the coins are AT, I think he could be way more forthcoming. His listing descriptions are so long that I doubt most buyers (who I'm assuming are primarily beginning collectors/newbies) even read the footnote and realize they're buying artificially toned coins. But what I'm more pissed about is the fact that he's defacing hundreds of old coins.

 

You guys keep lusting after these striking toners and there will always be a spin doctor out there. As long as toners command a premium there will be those who look to deceive. Perilous game we all play. Toning is toning is toning. Artificial or otherwise. So happy I don't buy into the deception.....real or otherwise.

 

He takes common date AU silver coins worth melt and tones them up and sells them. I don't like that he does this either but IMO, he makes it pretty clear that he is selling AT coins. Additionally, he is not really defacing old coins. If you don't like the toning, dip the sucker and you will be back to square one, an old coin with intrinsic value and little to no numismatic value.

If you ask me, the real problem with this seller is that his photography, while good, is juiced beyond belief. I have a strong feeling that the coins in hand will look absolutely nothing like the photograph. However, I have never been able to bring myself to buy one of his pieces of crap to find out. My guess is that he has to set his color saturation level at 50+ to achieve those colors in his photos. Here is an example of what I am talking about. This AT quarter was purchased by a fellow CT member a few years ago. He sent it to me to photograph it and this is the result.



Now if I take that photo, crop it, cut it, paste it on a white background, and increase the color saturation to 50, you get this:



He has a 14 day return policy, maybe I will spend the $5 in S&H to find out.

 

He's got a couple of negative feedbacks for that, so I wouldn't be surprised if most of his coins have much duller, more muted colors in person. I just don't understand why people find that sort of coloration attractive in the first place.

 

Indeed.....

 

This is how my issue with this seller started. . .

It wasn't until he was called on the toning that he started to bury the disclaimer. As a matter of fact, I called him on it when I received my coin (pre-disclaimer) and he denied any sort of artificial toning. It took some negative feedback from other buyers before the disclaimer appeared.

I chalked it up as a lesson learned.

 

Keep in mind the example I used involved a Gem BU Washington Quarter, not an XF/AU Morgan or Peace Dollar.

I think his photos are attractive, but I suspect his coins are hideous.

 

"Technically mention"? No, it is clearly stated for anyone who bothers to spend the ten seconds or so necessary to read his description. If you don't like it, that's fine and you do not have to buy from this person, but let's be reasonable here. Other than the juicing/saturation issues mentioned by Lehigh, his listings are pretty straight forward, and IMO, much less deceiving than (as an example) one who sells problem/damaged coins as problem free or fluffs junk to be something it’s not.

There are some things newbies may be given a pass on, but failing to read a few short sentences is not one of them.

Don't be... it is most junk, or near junk, so even if he did more than AT, there is no great or real loss.

 

Well, I don't know that I can't agree completely to this one. There are some coins that do tone naturally, and some storage situations (e.g. Albums in humid climates) that do promote toning over the years by natural intervention, and not the hands of some nefarious individual. However, it is easy for one to intervene, especially with raw coins and the low level inexpensive MS and AU coin market. If one is going to invest in toners (and it is an investment, as toners usually demand at least some kind of premium), there are certain ground rules to be followed. I ONLY buy from people I trust, and only buy slabbed merchandise. This doesn't assure that the coin is NT--it assures some level of market acceptability (this concept of market acceptability has been described on this site umpteen times, so I won't reiterate it--read the threads folks, if you choose to do so). What my friend Mr. Green is saying is true, if one goes by the "fly by night" E-bay sellers, who do possibly juice coins, and as Paul said, use enhanced lighting via Photoshop or Photoshop Elements (cheaper program), or Lightroom. So, it really is "Caveat Emptor" as I said previously--do not enter the toner market if you don't know the ground rules, and the rubrics for market acceptability.