I'm OK with natural. Frankly not particularly attractive or desirable though. Some might say it is close to environmentally damaged. MHO
Maybe environmental. I'm not sure I agree with the grade. Better photos could help. If it is environmental then it is likely a details coin.
Looks natural to me. I suspect the coin looks better in better lighting and is not as dark as it appears.
NT and awful. I really don't understand how a coin with toning that advanced could grade MS63. Personally, that is a problem coin to me, environmental damage.
I've got a 1921 that looks a lot like that. It came from my father in law. He kept it in his sock drawer for about 50 years.
Just as I suspected. It’s fine. The toning is natural, and the bad light in the first set of photos made it look too dark.
Definitely natural toning as I said earlier. These photos show off the coin better but still not good enough for me in this series.
Dip it. But you have to know what you’re doing. Most of the good ones are dipped, though, anyway, and grade every day. Just as an aside, it’s funny how dipping is accepted, these days, when the fact is, that’s as artificial as can be. But hasten toning, and you’re a crook! Didn’t used to be that way years ago when you had to have brains to collect coins. There were those who could spot a dipped coin in a shop a mile away, and those were bargained down for it. Today, it’s exactly the opposite. We rationalize a “proper” dip as improvement, even though it’s as much unnatural manipulation as can be, while for toning, manipulate that, and you’re run out on a rail. Something don’t seem right about that; somehow...