What's going on here?

This 1859 XF-40 Canada large cent appears to have mint luster remaining. Mint luster remaining in XF grades is a little strange, plus it doesn't reflect like mint luster would.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Often times, XF coins have mint luster remaining...especially in the low areas (as this coin does). There isn't that much difference sometimes between XF and AU.

 

XF coins can definitely have some traces of mint luster, just less so than AU coins.

 

I agree with the above. I have a pretty good example of this in the form of a Colombian exposition half dollar that exhibits mint luster clinging around the rim and devices. If you would like, I will try to find the pictures of it for you.

 

Yes as stated above it is actually very common for some coins in EF to still have mint luster because if you think about it an EF coin is a pretty high great it basically means the coin was circulated enough to remove the luster but all details are still strong on EF coins. This being said the low points on many coins will be spared of the minimum wear that the rest of the coin got thus leaving spots of luster still on the coin.
On another note what actually bother me about this coin is the verdigis above the E and the N it actually looks like pretty large spot of it their !!

 

Nice looking cent.

 

I would say the only way there original luster, the coin would of had to grade red, not red-brown, or brown, no luster left on those other two colors

 

That's the first time I've ever heard this. The process that turns red copper brown shouldn't have any effect on the surface topography (flow lines) that cause luster -- the oxide coating is at a much smaller scale than the flow lines. The surface won't be as reflective, but the luster should still be there.

https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading-guide/Grading-Lincoln-Cents.aspx

 

Based on my experience, this is not correct. Plus, even if it were...the lustery areas on the coin are deep in the fields around the devices where red is still clearly visible.

 

Like I said, the luster is not "lustrous". It does not reflect like luster does. It's very dull in reflectiveness.

 

agreed

 

luster, and toning, are too different things, like apples and oranges

 

I think a great example of this is Morgan vs. Peace Dollars. Very different luster on those coins and with it comes very different toning.

 

A good example would be a brand new cent, slabbed, compared to one that isn't, slabbed

 

Not quite. I was commenting on Doug's statement that different kinds of coins have different luster...which results in different toning. You're example doesn't make that point.

 

read the whole thread, were talking about "colored" coins

 

I have read the whole thread...in fact, I made the first reply. I understand that you are claiming that RB and BN coins cannot have luster. I also know that this statement is incorrect. As Doug said...different types of coins have different luster which in tern results in different toning. This isn't like a slabbed new cent and a brown cent...they are the same type coin one just has less toning than the other. The brown cent is heavily toned while the new cent is not.

My example was how different types of coins with different inherent luster have very different toning.

 

how are two brand new cents different, one just slabbed thats all, there is no orginal luster left on that coin, only toning from the luster breaking down, how could you even tell what is orginal luster, after toning has began