These are the 2 nickels out of my 1968 Unc. Mint Set. The toneing on them is soo neat looking i didn't wanna mess with them . They went str8 into 2x2s and are gonna stay just the way they are. What do ya'll think?
I really can't see anything there other than off-kilter color balance on the entire photos -- compare the background on the first and third with that on the second and fourth. The closer you can get to straight-on lighting (light directly behind the camera), in my experience, the better toning will show up in your photos.
Well, I opened this thread last night and decided not to comment... To put it bluntly, those coins don't appear to be toned. There some light gold coloration on one of the coins which would not garner a premium, and the other one looks completely untoned. However, toned coins are notoriously difficult to photograph, and perhaps there's something not visible in the photos. Tell me, what do you see in-hand?
Just the coloring. I thought they were neat. they aren't bright silver like normal nickels, they have a bit more of a shiney gun metal look...im not talking about "premiums" just the look of the coins. Im still experamenting with pics.
I know what your talking about, the word patina would better describe it in my opinion. The gold patina does make for a very attractive nickel.
My advice to you is never to look at a rainbow toned MS67 early Jefferson Nickel. If you think the coins in this thread look really cool, seeing an MS67 will quickly turn you into a Jefferson Nickel junkie. How about some eye candy just to tempt you.
Agreed patina is better way to describe it. But I also bet these coins are popping with luster. You get some of the 66's(and I bet Pauls 67) in hand and that luster just pops out at you. Beauties to me.
