Definitely looks cleaner, the haze still marks where the discoloring was but it is much easier on the eyes. How does this type of professional cleaning/conservation affect the value/desireability of the coin?
Not counting the ugly patches, I prefer the toning on the before shots. It has a nice frosty effect. The cleaned pics look cleaned to me and I'm not a fan of blast white either.
I don't know if it's the lighting angle or what but I don't see any scratches before the cleaning. I myself like the spotted coin better in this case.
That doesn't look like toning to me. Looks to be some surface contaminants. It appears to be very thick and literally laying on the surface.
First, I think much of the change in toning and marks are from a different lighting angle and/or exposure setting. Second, the now hazy areas are where there used to be "gunk." The gunk has been removed BUT damage to the coin's sufaces had already occurred. I see this as an excellent example of the difference between cleaning and conserving. This coin has been conserved. The foreign gunk has been removed BUT changes in the coin's metal caused by the gunk remain. A cleaned coin would have had the hazy areas removed too (or at least attempted.)
