Naturally or Artificially Toned?

Right back at you.

If by "toning" you mean the process, yes, of course, there's a difference between letting a coin sit in a bag or an album for decades vs. treating it in a lab for a few minutes or hours.

If by "toning" you mean the coin's condition or state, no, there's not necessarily a difference. That seems to be what you were trying to say with "may produce the same changes to a coin's surface" -- but you led with "There is a difference", which says the opposite.

So, care to clarify?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Clarify what? It is not complicated. Try not to overthink my post.

 

The part where it looks like you're contradicting yourself.

If the "toning" on two coins is due to "the same changes to a coin's surface", there's no difference -- because that's all toning is (changes to a coin's surface that produce color). A coin doesn't change color because of psychic trauma; it changes color because of chemical reactions, and/or stuff getting mechanically stuck to its surface.

 

See, easy, you figured it out for yourself - almost - except there are differences!

1. How long did the toning take to occur?
2. What chemicals were involved?

 

I received the roll today and went to a local coin shop and the owners believed it to be natural without the help of any agents. The toning in hand looks a lot less than in the original images. These are two images I took myself after removing one of the ends from the roll. The photographs I took are not altered in any way and are taken from directly above the coin with a little zoom.

 

What difference does it make, as long as the appearance and chemical composition of the surface is the same?

 

I believe that would be considered "market acceptable" under the circumstances.

I'll bet I know who you're talking to, although I don't see what you're responding to.

 

What toning? Your photo of the coin looks very lightly toned and perfectly natural; however, I should be very disappointed with the coin in hand w/o the beautiful colors in the OP photos - artificial or not as some here believe there is no difference.

 

That's too bad and good riddance.

@-jeffB and I are having a mature (at least from Jeff) dialog/disagreement about coins, probably one of the reasons CT was founded.

 

Well, I'll admit that I can't refute that argument.

 

I wish I mentioned this in my original post, but I was gonna say that if this coin is in AU condition, then it's probably natural toning. I've owned a few in that condition with similarly toned scruffy surfaces. Finger Oils, lotion,spittle,crud,dirt and a # of other contaminants combined with sulfur to produce that sort of color imo.

 

@Insider

Sometimes it's better to and let people think you are
Than to and prove it

 

Thankyou- I thought you had run off and left us hanging.

So, what's the verdict on this? Artistic Licensing on the original photographs?

and how did this pcgs plate coin tone so extremely in only 8 years?

 

No on my face.

The blazing, colorful coins in the OP's end roll photos of obviously opened rolls screamed AT!

The coins he had in hand were unimpressive to be charitable. IMO, the Ebay seller's photos border on fraud and I should have returned the coins PRONTO!

 

If it weren't for the line of white on the lower right, I wouldn't believe it's the same coin.

 

It is, quite literally, all in the lighting. Only the brightest of toners don't need special lighting attention to bring out the color.