I agree. "Cooked" unnaturally toned coins aren't going to command any kind of premium. And, right now, tonners are all the rage. There was a time when this wasn't the case though. Folks wanted their coins blast white or clean and clear copper. Personally, I won't pay the premium for tonners, but I have been known to pay a little more (to a point) for one that I can steal.
What really causes natural toning? Moistier? Carbon? Heat and Cold? My 49D looks as though it was cleaned and then corroded and the toned.
I would Question your '49-D and '50-S as to the originality of the color , so I myself wouldn't pay a premium . Now if you get them in a PCGS or NGC slab then they are at least market acceptable and some might pay a premium . I do kinda like the '49-D though .
I have 14 Memorial Proofs that are like this front and back. Could these have been faked? Or, do they look real?
All kinds of things. The largest contributors are air and chemicals in whatever holder it is in. I question the first two you posted, but I really like the 55-d. I some green up near the top.
Modern proofs like this do tone. All tone differently. I think the majority of the time, the fields tone first. So I cannot be sure about that one. My first guess would be "questionable". The tpgs are very tough on any modern proof with toning. With the exception of this particular year (1970):
I hate tarnish/toning. So I use either a brillo pad or baking soda/toothbrush to get that nasty stuff off my coins. Worked for me in the 1950's, and still works today.
You know, I actually never checked. I bought four of them from lottsofmotts. I think ill look! Here is another comparison: artificial Natural
You need to do a real good research on here. There are many threads and posts regarding the cause of toning in general. You will even see members doing the "doctors" work and people getting banned for arguing their disagreements towards that. You'll also find posts on how to tell (in one way or another) . And blah, blah, blah!
