Is This AT???

Seriously, can you articulate why it matters to you?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Regarding the OP, I think it is QT and very pretty.

Here are a few toned coins from my collection:

A blazing-cool toned USA Lincoln cent:

My favorite toned silver 500 Lire of Italy:

An A-toned neat lion from Iran:


& I'll throw-in a toned Ike dollar:


Happy New Year everyone.

 

.
I should probably know this but I don't, OP & QT ?

 

OP = original post/poster
QT = questionable toning

 

Thanks you. Just curious, as a collector of toned coins why do you feel that the OP is questionable?

 

I didn't really offer an opinion on weather I considered the coin naturally toned, artificially toned, or having questionable toning. For $35 I would have bought it to stick in my Dansco. I don't think this one looks bad from the picture. If it was submitted to a grading company I have no clue what determination they would make on the toning. If the graders think it's questionable they won't grade it. I think if you look back through this thread you'll see examples of coins that maybe shouldn't have made it but did. If you do a bit of searching on the forums you'll find plenty of heated debates about toning. It would look nice in my Dansco. Buying coins to get graded is not my thing - if I want a graded coin then I would buy one already slabbed.

 

My bad, thought you mentioned that you believed it was QT in your original post #42.

 

It's cool. @Collect89 mentioned QT.

 

This is what I don't get. If you like the toning what does it matter what arbitrary term somebody hangs on it? Nobody can define these terms in any way that's of any use to anybody, so why do they even matter?

 

Eddie, are you stirring this pot again? You bad boy, you.

 

I think. Therefore, I am. Corollary. One does not think. Therefore, one is not.

 

Just curious, why do you feel the coin in question is questionable toning?

 

For any noobs who may be wondering why I poked @eddiespin about this - there are numerous "fetishes" intermingling when we get worrying about AT on bullion pieces. 1) bullion pieces were never meant to be collectibles in the first place, so griping about any condition status is already a little weird. 2) toning is fairly well understood by a few, fully understood by virtually no one, and understood almost not at all by most. Even Q. David Bowers has written that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of artificially toned coins in PCGS and NGC plastic with gaudy grades, so go by their say-so at your own peril. 3) at the metaphorical end of the day, all toning is caused by the same chemical reactions so who stinking cares? Answer: those who need an artificial DISTINCTION to make them feel superior about their collection.

Hey, obviously SOME people like pieces artificially colored by enamel or printing inks, too!

 

Collect89 said: ↑
Regarding the OP, I think it is QT and very pretty.
Click to expand...

Not wanting to get drawn into any debate, I offered my free opinion that it is QT. IMHO the coin may lie somewhere between NT and AT. The toning may have been somewhat accelerated & designed by an individual's deliberate scheme to tone the coin. (Ya think?) Alternately, it may have been arbitrarily placed in the perfect album toning environment without any deliberate human toning intent or intervention (Ya think?).

Here is a 2-bit coin from my collection:
FWIW the NGC opinion on the 1958 2-bits was NT and MS67.

 

To me, the most interesting thing about the '58 is the fairly crisp strike. There are a lot of mushy crappy '58's. Even this one is soft on the bust, but the legends are better'n most. 58's of all denominations are pretty meh.

 

Thanks for the coin complement.

You are quite right about many 1958s being mushy-meh. Sadly, I've not taken many photos because toned coins are not so easy to depict in one photograph. Here is another 1958 which is much more mushy-meh than the quarter posted above. A couple Walking Liberty halves are tossed-in which include some nice album toning.

Here is an old toned coin from 1787 Great Britain that has not yet turned to black:

 

Define "AT" in any intelligible way that permits one to identify it, Kurt. You can't do it, the TPGs can't do it, and neither can Q. David Bowers do it. Yet, it's the death-knell, to the TPGs, and to the suckers who collect their plastic. They imagine a coin's toning is "AT" (and, PCGS, even with its "coin sniffer," is so mixed up, it has "QT," now, and has us taking that arbitrary term seriously), and that's a NO-GRADE COIN. Wow. Fear. It sells...

 

In truth, this is why I've always found it difficult to appreciate Franklins. They seem unattractive except when well-struck (much like Peace Dollars), and are quite difficult to grade as a result. This is, of course, my own limitation, especially when confronted with examples like your 1958.

I laughed loud at that. So true; the differentiation simply disintegrates when the AT is done right.

 

My favorite phrase when dealing with toned coins, I learned on CoinTalk, but I don't remember who said it - maybe Eddie, in fact. "Marketing acceptable." I almost peed myself when I read that the first time. So deadly, so accurate.

 

Thank you very much for your insight!