Are coins sitting out to tone considered natural or artificial?

True - with the key word being some.

True again, but again only in some cases.

If a coin is artificially toned by applying a liquid, powders, or some other substance to the coin, then that coin can be positively identified as having been artificially toned by those with the knowledge and ability to do so.

But when a coin is toned as a result of being stored in a coin album, paper envelopes, or anything of the like, or simply by being exposed to the air - and that includes coins in any slab or commercial coin holder because none of them are airtight - that cannot be positively identified by any means. And in all of those cases, intent is the only difference.

The true key to the basic question is defining artificial. And therein lies the problem and why a consensus can seemingly never be reached - because too many have different definitions for artificial.

Even the TPG's, with all of their resources, cannot determine if a coin is NT or AT in most cases. Sure, as I mentioned above, there are some cases when they can, but in the majority of cases they cannot. And they readily admit this. And that is why they do not label a coin as AT. The most they can do is guess and call the toning questionable.

 

We have to keep in mind that the same thing happens to naturally toned coins. Natural toning is a progressive process, it doesn't just start, reach a certain point and then stop, it keeps right on occurring and progressing. Eventually the toning will progress to the point that it becomes thicker, heavier, and the coin turns black in color.

Yes, if a liquid or powder substance is applied to the coin in order to make it tone quickly, and that substance is left on the coin, then that toning will keep right occurring at an accelerated rate. And that does happen occasionally, but usually only be those who don't really know what they're doing. Those that do know what they're doing, do exactly what you're talking about and they take steps to neutralize the toning agents and remove them from the coin.

But even with doing that, all they have done is to stop the accelerated process. Once the toning agents have been neutralized and removed from the coin, natural toning takes over and keeps right on occurring - but at a much slower rate.

Natural toning can never be stopped unless the coin is placed in airtight container. That's because the air itself is what causes natural toning. But, natural toning can be greatly slowed down with proper coin storage. And slowed down to the point that readily noticeable changes are unlikely to occur in one's lifetime.

 

I'm not really sure I understand what you mean by that question. If I understand the first part of your post correctly, you're saying that you placed "something" on the dcarr coins you have in order to make them tone. And that the coins have now toned to the point that you are considering removing whatever toning agent (material) you put on them. Is that correct ?

If it is correct, what do you mean by - "is the thought 'forgotten' OK toning ?"

Does the question have anything to do with the first part of your post or is it a completely separate question that has nothing to do with the first part of your post ?

 

You choose to use the word elevation while I simply say that toning progresses (increases) as time passes, and yes, thus changes to a different color. I'm assuming you're saying the same thing I am ?

You're second sentence though I have to disagree with. You seem to be implying, or perhaps simply stating outright, that a coin that is artificially toned by placing a toning agent on the coin, will stop toning once the toning agent is removed from the coin. If that is what you're saying, I completely disagree.

If a coin has a toning agent of one kind or another applied to it, that coin is going to change color. And even if the toning agent is removed from the coin, the coin is still going to continue to tone and change color after the toning agent is removed. But it will do so as the result of natural toning from that point on.

 

OK, fair enough. But what you apparently don't understand though, or misunderstand, is that there is nothing you can do to neutralize or stop that toning from progressing. And there's nothing you can do because you didn't apply any foreign substance (toning agent) to the coins. To neutralize toning you have to remove something from the coin, but in your case there is nothing to remove (neutralize).

Granted, if you take coins out of the paper envelopes, then yes the toning will slow down, but it will not stop. So the toning has not been neutralized - neutralized means stopped, prevented from happening.

But that still leaves us with a question. You are stating that you deliberately put the coins in paper envelopes because you knew doing that would accelerate and cause them to tone more quickly. This in an important distinction because there are those, and plenty of them, who would say that makes what you did artificial toning. By the same token there are also plenty who would say it isn't AT, that it is NT.

And that's the question - is it, or isn't it ?

What most folks find to be acceptable, or "OK toning" as you put it, is that when a collector puts coins in a coin album or a paper envelope, with no beforehand knowledge or intention that doing so will cause the coins to tone. If that is the case, then yes, the toning is acceptable.

But for some folks, when you do that intentionally, it is no longer acceptable.

And that's precisely the point I made in a earlier post in this thread - there is no consensus as to how the term "artificial" is defined. Ask a hundred people, ask a thousand, and you're going to get multiple definitions, which will quite often be completely contrary, contradictory, to the other definitions.