Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Morgandude11, post: 24648145, member: 37839&quot;]I agree with Dennis on this.&nbsp; TPGS do have trouble with the toning/ luster balance.&nbsp; Sometimes, the luster gets masked by the thicker aspects of the toning.&nbsp; In this case, I think the glamour shots of the coin exaggerate the dullness of luster.&nbsp; The quick snapshots of the slab show a brighter coin, and in hand, it is a bright coin, with nice toning especially on the reverse.&nbsp; If toning is too thick, TPGS will definitely grade a coin lower— I have seen many technical gem coins graded as 63-64, when they were obviously gem coins, based on strike, and surface preservation.&nbsp; Album toning like this can be very difficult to grade, as it is hard to envision the coin’s surfaces as if they were brighter.&nbsp; However, since virtually all of the Morgans were dipped, the myth of naturally bright coins sort of spoil us.&nbsp; A 100+ year old coin will tone, and often not attractively.&nbsp; The 50-60 year old Franklins have a different kind of toning, and we’re often not dipped, though some of the more brilliant ones were not naturally screamingly bright.[/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