Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 59066, member: 1892&quot;]Here&#039;s the &quot;after:</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://members.arstechnica.com/x/superdave/1879S_Obvaftera.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> </p><p><img src="http://members.arstechnica.com/x/superdave/1879S_Revaftera.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> </p><p><br /></p><p>The reverse scan does the new luster no justice, of course. I&#039;ve managed to lessen the overall grayness of the obverse, but it&#039;s still there. The darker spots in the obverse scan are, in fact, areas of greater luster, indicating there&#039;s *something* under that coating, but I hesitate to go after it with any process more serious than I&#039;ve already applied.</p><p><br /></p><p>I followed all instructions precisely as given by the manufacturer, none of which involved anything purer than running tap water.</p><p><br /></p><p>This is a damn shame. I scan at 1200dpi, and at that resolution there&#039;s no mark on the entire coin measuring more than six pixels excepting two small lines in the reverse fields which are too shallow to appear on the scan.</p><p><br /></p><p>This coin would be an absolute keeper if I could rediscover the obverse. I have to keep it anyways because I couldn&#039;t Ebay it in good conscience.</p><p><br /></p><p>If we assume OldDan&#039;s theory is correct, is there a way for me to ameliorate the &quot;failed toning?&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>For the record, I&#039;ve got $20 invested in the coin.[/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