Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 1821010, member: 112&quot;]Yes, existing toning does slow down future/additional toning, but it does not stop it. On that we agree. But toning, other than the typical gun metal grey toning, and envelope toning, is rarely uniform. On the contrary, toning almost always starts at the edges of a coin and works its way inward towards the center of the coin. Thus the outer areas of a coin are subjected to much more severe toning than the center of the coin is. And once those outer areas of the coin reach the terminal stage then the coin will have suffered irreparable harm and damage.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Yes that is true. At least it is true as long as that dark toning has not reached the terminal stage. But pretty much any coin that has been dipped 4 or 5 times will have no luster left at all. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I disagree strongly. The only way that could be true would be if the coin were stored in exactly the same environment and in exactly the same manner as it was previously stored. And while it is not impossible for that to happen, the probability that it will happen is almost nil.</p><p><br /></p><p>Toning is dependent upon hundreds of variables, change the variables and you change everything about the toning. You not only change the way it looks, you also change the speed at which it happens.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Yes.</p><p><br /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><br /></p><p>No, the exact opposite is true. A freshly minted coin with full luster will tone much faster and much more readily than a dipped coin will - when subjected to the same conditions. This has been proved time and time again. </p><p><br /></p><p>Why ? Because it is the luster itself that is the most susceptible to toning. So if you reduce the amount of luster by dipping the coin, you reduce the coin&#039;s susceptibility to toning.</p><p><br /></p><p>The reason that some people think that what you are saying is true is because they are not dealing with or making comparisons with freshly minted coins. Instead they are dealing with and making comparisons between coins that were minted some time ago and that already have a degree of toning on them,&nbsp; (all coins begin toning the instant they leave the dies), to freshly dipped coins. As you mentioned above, it is that existing toning that slows down the rate of any additional toning.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Not all coins are dipped and then dipped again, but I will agree with you that some are. There is no doubt at all that many coins have been ruined by over-dipping. But by the same token there were and are just as many, and probably more, coins that were ruined by allowing toning to progress unchecked until it reached the terminal stage. What I espouse is saving the coins that need saving, but only those coins.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The fact of the matter is that over-dipping and allowing unchecked toning are both equally as bad as the other. Both have destroyed more than their fair share of coins. The object, the goal, is to save coins from both forms of damage.</p><p><br /></p><p>You can save a coin that does not already have it from terminal stage toning with proper storage. You can&#039;t save it forever but you CAN save it for a very long time. But once a coin has toning that has nearly reached its terminal stage, proper storage can no longer save it. However, dipping the coin can.</p><p><br /></p><p>And in those cases, dipping is most definitely a good thing <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/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