Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 2409441, member: 19165&quot;]There is absolutely no way that would be AU-58, and even 55 is too high (if it were to get a straight grade - which it won&#039;t). Look at the flatness of her hair - a 58 means there is a slight bit of rub on the highest points, with no significant loss of detail. Her hair, the drapery around her bust, and the feathers on the wing have siginficant loss of detail. This coin is an AU, but it is an AU-50. </p><p><br /></p><p>As for the cleaning, PCGS absolutely got it right. It does not appear to be a very harsh cleaning, but look especially at the fields on the reverse. The shininess of the fields, and the way the luster remains in the protected areas, hints at the cleaning. The first obverse pic in your first post also led me to believe the surfaces were unnatural. </p><p><br /></p><p>As for the questionable color, that is a bit trickier, but I think PCGS got it right here as well. The colors are well done - for an AT coin, this is quite convincing. The key here is to look at the second picture in your first post. The colors appear to lay on the surface of the coin. Artificial toning is not integrated into the coin as natural toning is (remember, natural toning comes from a reaction of environmental elements with the actual metal of the coin, to produce a silver sulfide layer that is integral to the coin itself). Artificial toning is often formed by depositing something onto the surface of the coin, to simulate the thin film of silver sulfide of natural toning. When this is done, it appears &quot;hazy&quot;, or looks to be something on the surface - not actually part of the coin. As I interpret your pictures, this is what I see with your coin. Again, the color progression looks correct and it is well done - but I am going to agree with PCGS here.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in