Featured The Slabbed (NGC/PCGS) AT-QT (Artificial/Questionable Toning) Thread

NT Baby!!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

NT

 

+1

 

add me to the NT list.

 

Summary of results:
-----------------------

Coin 1 - Clad Dime (pg.1) - 2 (NT/MA) vs 6 (AT/QC)
Coin 2 - Franklin (pg. 1) - 3 (NT/MA) vs 7 (AT/QC)
Coin 3 - CBH (pg. 4) - 5 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 4 - Silv PR Ike (pg. 5) - 3 (NT/MA) vs 6 (AT/QC)
Coin 5 - Peace Dollar (pg. 7) - 6 (NT/MA) vs 4 (AT/QC)
Coin 6 - Ohio Silv PR 25c (pg. 8) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 11 (AT/QC)
Coin 7 - 1964 MS 25c (pg. 9) - 11 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 8 - 1974 Clad PR 25c (pg. 11) - 4 (NT/MA) vs 5 (AT/QC)
Coin 9 - 85-O Morgan (pg. 12) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 1 (AT/QC) *no points*
Coin 10 - 1890 IHC (pg. 13) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 3 (AT/QC)
Coin 11 - 1893 Col. Commem (pg. 14) - 10 (NT/MA) vs 2 (AT/QC)
Coin 12 - Silver 3c (pg. 15) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 13 - SBA (pg. 16) - 5 (NT/MA) vs 2 (AT/QC)
Coin 14 - Large Cent (pg. 16) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 15 - Franklin (pg. 17) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 14 (AT/QC)
Coin 16 - 1964 10c (pg. 18) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 10 (AT/QC)
Coin 17 - 1966 1c SMS 67*(pg. 19) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 18 - Silve 25c (pg. 19) - 10 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 19 - Peace Dollar (pg. 20) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 10 (AT/QC)
Coin 20 - 1945 1c (pg. 21) - 14 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
Coin 21 - 1964 50c (pg. 22) - 6 (NT/MA) vs 5 (AT/QC)
Coin 22 - Peace $1 (pg. 23) - 6 (NT/MA) vs 3 (AT/QC)
Coin 23 - Franklin (pg. 24) - 0 (NT/MA) vs 4 (AT/QC)
Coin 24 - Jefferson 5c (pg. 24) - 1 (NT/MA) vs 5 (AT/QC)
Coin 25 - Peace $1 (pg. 25) - 8 (NT/MA) vs 2 (AT/QC)
Coin 26 - 1947 10c (pg. 26) - 10 (NT/MA) vs 4 (AT/QC)
Coin 27 - 1940 Walker (pg. 27) - 7 (NT/MA) vs 6 (AT/QC)
Coin 28 - 1970-S Cent (pg. 28) - 11 (NT/MA) vs 0 (AT/QC)
-----------------------

NT/MA: 18 total
AT/QC: 10 total

-----------------------
Points:

ddddd - 7
Lehigh96 - 2
TheFinn - 1

 

@BlackberryPie go ahead and post your commemorative.

 

Is it possible to show us a better lit picture of the obverse? The reverse is clearly, no-question NT, but I'm not sure what I'm seeing on the obverse.

 

I agree with Physics. Based on the picture it is hard to tell whether it is an AT coin that turned in the holder or if it just terminally toned. If the latter, I would almost call it environmentally damaged.

 

Agreed with physics and eyeappeal....the coin may have continued toning in the holder (or even been gassed). It might also be terminal toning as there are some commems in slabs with very dark color.

 

I don't have other photos of it. I was thinking dipped then toned in holder.

 

I'm guessing toned in the original cardboard "tab" holder but stored under hot/humid conditions (Roanoke Island?)

 

Either way, I vote not market acceptable.

QC

 

I would say it is natural but stained - from falling in a Blackberry Pie!

 

Why would someone artificially tone a coin to be brown & gunmetal blue. These commemoratives developed tab toning from their government packaging and I see nothing that is inconsistent with that to make it a problem coin.

I’m solidly in the NT/MA camp.

 

Are you suggesting that AT cannot be hideous? It looks funky for a tab toner.

 

The point of AT is to create exceptional eye appeal that will drive a premium price. This is performed by a coin doctor who would certainly possess the ability to dip a coin that failed in his primary objective. If you want me to believe this coin was improperly stored, okay, but to believe this was the result of a deliberate attempt to tone the coin, I’m not buying it.

 

I am with the QC camp. Something tells me it was helped along,
Too bad we don't have another photo of the obv.

 

Not always. AT is also used to conceal flaws. That was the point of all AT until rainbow toning caught on in the late 90s and early 2000s.

 

Agreed, but that is usually on coins that circulate. This is a commem that has spent too long in government packaging. Thinking this coin is AT is overthinking it IMO.