Artifical toning, forum members, and PCGS slabs.

Fair enough, but I would find it very difficult for the coin doctors to keep up with mother nature.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It's always been a buyer beware arena when buying coins especially since the addition of the internet. With that said if you look on ebay or any other auction or coin selling site available. One thing you can do if you like a coin and you can't tell if it's been AT or not. Is look at the sellers other items for sale, surely if they have plenty of more coins that have questionable toning then most likely they have the artificial toning game all figured out.

Usually it doesn't do any good to ask them if a certain coin has been artificially toned b/c some will just say that they don't know. I think there's at least a couple who don't have any shame in taking advantage of the market b/c they don't see it that way and once again it goes back to supply and demand.

Personally I don't appreciate the artificial toning option that some sellers are using. And then it comes back around to the sellers who have names like "fretboardtoning" (fake example) just to get my point across.

The whole idea of AT and pumping up the premiums will be at the forefront of controversy for sometime ahead. We are stuck with it at least until the trend changes. Since I don't like it, I avoid it. It looks like it's a free country and you can mess up coins and make more money doing it. I fear that this is another example of "only in America".

I love this country but I dislike some of the ppl and silly trends that go on here. God Bless America, home of the free and the brave and thankful that I can share my opinion freely.

 

What do you guys think of this one?




This is a 1885-P in a NGC slab. It got a MS-64* NT? AT?

Do we believe that somebody could AT a coin like this? What would cause a coin to tone like this? How many coins do we think exist that look like this?
I own it. It has a similar pattern to another one I got, that was a 1887-P. But the 1887 is much darker, while this one doesn't look much different in hand than this picture. It's much brighter. If the mint bags were the same, stored in the same place within two years of each other, why the difference?? I appreciate anyone's honest opinion.

 

I think this coin is all the way NT. It is a classic crescent bag toned Morgan Dollar that shows correct repeating color progressions. The colors are quintessential bag toned colors and the I love the coin.

If the coin doctors are able to reproduce repeating color progressions of varying widths, we are in big trouble. As to why this coin is different in appearance to your other Morgan, I refer you one of Leadfoot's earlier posts in this thread. BTW, that photographic style looks familiar (and a tad over saturated). My guess is you purchased the coin from Greattoning.

I value the coin at about 3-5X wholesale price depending upon the appearance of the obverse.

 

Mike , I'm still confused , it loos like the date and stars are toned , unless you mean the little dot like areas under the date , the stars right to the left of the date look untoned underneath , is that pull back toning . And if yes is the coin NT or AT . Thanks ,
rzage

 

Yes, but what if you could know it was original? If someone invented a computer device and you could place a toned coin on it much like a digital scale, and then it would give you an AT, NT or nada for no toning. Then boom! You could make some money, maybe even alot of money because the grading companies may be interested as well. :secret:

Just thinking out loud again. Feel free to start working on this idea as I'm sure I'm not the first to think of it.

 

Doug , you're right on the last count , I have a nice Barber dime that was clean when I bought it , I put it in one of those twentieth century cardboard display frames and it toned niceley with pastel colors though a bit dark in less than three months .
rzage

 

Yes, the little dot like areas are what Mike is talking about. Pull back toning has also been called the shadow effect. And if I am not mistaken, it was at one time considered an indicator of AT. Ironic now that it is one of the key indicators of NT since it is almost impossible to replicate by AT'ing a coin.

The coin is NT based on every indicator. BTW, this is one of my favorites. I just wish it was an MS66.

 

Deeeep! If you don't know it is fake, and possibly never WILL know...and those you thought were real that you like turn out to be fake, do you not like the look of it anymore? If I get a fake coin of a coin type I like and I dont know its fake, I don't stop liking how it looks simply because I find its fake, if I didn't like it I wouldn't have bought it. The fact its fake now lessens it greatly to my mind if not my eyes. It doesn't conform to one of the biggest requirements I have, its not authentic. If I find later it isn't...then yes...I would feel I was robbed of that piece of history.

I assume in this case, the draw is not only the look of the coin, and not just that this effect is on an authentic coin, but also that this tone was not intentionally done by man, without someone speeding up the process.

IMO, mother nature probably cant churn them out near as fast as we could.

 

I just thought I would throw this one up for your consideration. If was done artificially why would somebody do this then put it back in circulation. If it's natural then mother nature can work pretty fast.

 

If I go to TCCS and say I have collected toned coins for a long time and say something, they will laugh until I agree with them or maybe the "TCCSAdmin" might put a (stamp) on me and banned me for speaking my knowledge.

This is IMHO KissI like it here where people agree, disagree in a more respectful way and not get banned for simply disagree with other members.

 

When a coin has been in circulation, there are all sorts of chemicals to which it can be exposed such as laundry detergent and dryer heat, both of which can cause "AT" or "LT"( laundry toning) with one shot through inside a jeans pocket. Just because a coin is "AT" ~ what ever that means~ doesn't mean it was done purposely~ which probably makes it NT~what ever that means.

~probably cleaned also



Jim

 

Here's some info.

http://rg.ancients.info/guide/toning.html

 

Now that's funny , LOL
rzage:thumb:

 

The difference I see is that exposure to gases (other than in an album, etc.) is not an activity, storage or preservation method intended for coin collectors to utilize as part of their collecting.

And I don't think it's intent that should or does distinguishes AT from NT. Toning caused by placing coins in a coin album, is NT, regardless of intent, while toning caused by leaving coins on top of a heater is AT, regardless of intent. Coin albums were meant to hold and preserve coins, while heaters weren't.

I realize that there is no definition of AT and NT that will ever be (even close to) universally accepted. And that there will always be a large gray area between AT and NT. But I do believe that major consideration should be given to whether the coins are stored in products meant for coin coins/collectors and whether they are exposed to environmental conditions meant for coins/coin storage/coin preservation.

Edited to add:

Below are definitions (which I think make for a good starting point) offered by poster "Sunnywood" on the PCGS and NGC forums. He is an extremely knowledgeable and advanced collector of toned coins and I think he has a background in chemistry, as well.

"Natural toning is a process that results in the formation of oxides, sulfides, or other compounds on the surfaces of a coin during the ordinary course of events, including

ordinary​

and traditional storage methods. Natural toning results from reactivity between the surfaces of the coin and naturally occurring gaseous molecular compounds in the ambient atmosphere where the coin is stored, and/or contact and reactivity with materials such as envelopes, tissue paper, cabinet felt, coin albums, paper, cardboard, etc."

" Artificial toning is the inducement of

patination​

by means other than natural toning. In particular, any toning facilitated by the deliberate introduction of additional chemicals or materials not ordinarily associated with coin storage, or higher

saturations​

of naturally occurring compounds, or exposure to elevated temperatures, must be considered artificial toning. Basically, we are talking about the use of heat and/or chemicals (including gases) to induce toning formation, or to accelerate toning formation."

 

Mark,

Just to play devil's advocate for a minute. What if an uniformed casual collector from Florida stores his Dansco of MS Franklins in the attic in order to free up space in his house. A year later he retrieves the coins and finds them fantastically toned. They were stored correctly in an album, there was no intent, and the elevated temperatures were part of the ambient atmosphere, not applied heat. Are the coins AT or NT?

Paul

 

Paul, that is one of a good number of legitimate gray-area cases, but I'd have to vote for NT.