Continuing on the note of another thread, how can one see, or determine what is luster on a toned coin. Generally, I expect to see a diffraction lighting pattern on the coin, but evidently, that is not a dependable means of determining luster. And older coins are described to have luster despite 200 years of toning.
Easy, here is a toned coin that has tons of luster. Well, when you look at a coin you can only see the luster in those particular places where the angle of the light is just right. In other words, you cannot physically see the luster on the entire coin at the same time. That is why when examining a coin you must twist and turn it in the light in order to see if there are any breaks in the luster. And with a picture, just like with your eyes, you can only see the luster in specific places on the coin. You cannot see the luster on the entire coin. It's physically impossible because luster is a function of angles and reflected and refracted light. Now, you mention older coins, ancients even. And want to know if an ancient coin have luster, the answer is yes. Because every coin that was ever struck had luster when it was struck. But an ancient with luster is going to be a coin that is few and far between. But there are some that do exist. I'll post some pics of coins that are roughly 100 years old to almost 700 years old that have luster. All of those coins have luster. The last was minted in 1364. The next to last was minted in 1400.
I want that top coin, that is just drop dead gorgeous!! What is it and do you have a shot of the opposite side since I am not sure which side that is...
I like to have a coin in hand to evaluate luster and breaks in luster. Photos can easily be deceiving. I turn the coin around, and look at the surfaces at angles to see the reflection changes. I have seen straight on photos showing a dull, lusterless coin when in reality a coin had nice luster. Btw, yes of course ancients can have luster. My avatar has pretty nice luster in hand.
It's a modern day re-strike (Proof) of the 1780 Maria Theresea thaler. That is the reverse, the obverse was pretty ordinary with little toning. When it was purchased I bought 7 of them for a friend, all similar. I kept that one. If I remember correctly paid about $80 (total) for all 7 of them. And no, I no longer own it.
The thing for me with toned coins and luster is: When someone tries to capture colors more vividly by throwing more direct light on a coin, it will certainly take away from the luster. So because of that, it is not always easy for me to see if a toned coin has luster. I look for the breaks in lighting around the surface of the coin. However that is not always a sure thing. I try and find a happy medium when I image toned coins with luster. Here are a few examples of how the light position really can show off or hinder luster. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And an extreme example: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Find your happy place. It took me a while to really find the balance between color and luster. These fit the bill:
In the opposite vain I can place a coin in my bathroom in the afternoon and see the discoloration on any wear points as if l'm looking at X-ray. It just has be at the right time and the right amount of dusk but not dark.
