Techniques for artificially toning a coin

i would never argue that "some people" want it, or that there is a market for AT coins. MY PERSONAL OPINION is that it is blasphemous.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

So if I put coins in an album that is conducive to toning and wait 20-30 years, is that artificial toning?
If I improperly store my coins and they toned on their own, is that natural toning?

For those of you who do buy toned coins, what are you buying? Is it the pattern + time = premium? I mean, if someone recreated a pattern that took him a half hour, and you just paid double retail for an almost identical coin that toned over twenty years, are you being cheated the time? I guess I don't get it. If someone finds out a way to speed up the process, and it can look just like a coin that toned "naturally" over twenty years, weren't you buying the look of the coin anyhow?

 

I agree...I think ATing a coin or altering a coin in anyway is not to be done. I really like Doug's point above.

Did you put those coins in that album so they would tone? If so, then yes. The difference between NT and AT is intent...that is it. But in reality, it doesn't really matter as far as the market is concerned. LeHigh is correct when he says that the TPGs don't distinguish between NT and AT...they distinguish between questionable and market acceptable toning, because there is no way to know the intent for sure.

 

I guess that is kind of my point. People who are paying a premium for "naturally" toned coins are creating a market for artificially toned coins whether they want to admit it or not because at the end of the day, there is no definitive way to tell the difference.

 

You are correct...even the grading companies admit that.

 

And what about the guys who dip coins?

 

Not to butt in...but I think that's a little different. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here...but it seems to me that ATing a coin is never "really" considered a good thing. Neither are tooling, harshly cleaning, ect. But, there are "acceptable" was to clean a coin. Properly dipping is one of those. I must admit, it's a weird set of rules we have created.

I guess properly dipped coins are market acceptable...just like some toning.

 

Looks better to me. Why would I care if you like the appearance of my coin?

 

I am not saying that dipping is analogous to the other methods of coin doctoring, only that the intent is the same: to improve the appearance of the coin. And I am well aware that dipping has been widely accepted by the numismatic community and practiced by the TPGs.

That said, the number of coins saved by proper dipping is dwarfed by the number of coins destroyed by improper dipping and rinsing. Personally, I can't stand the look of a 19th century mint state coin with a secondary toning after a dipping.

The difference between dipping and the other doctoring methods is that the other methods use deception to achieve their results whereas dipping does not. But that alone does not make dipping a benevolent act.

 

Well that is your opinion. I just don't think that dipping is as benign as everyone else seems to think that it is. IMO, I think dipping should be used as a last resort as a conservation method to save coins with toning that borders on environmental damage. It should not be used to brighten coins that have light pearl or grey patinas that are perfectly stable. And I submit that most coins that have been dipped didn't need to be dipped; it was simply done to enhance the appearance of the coin so they could make more money. And in the long run, the appearance enhancement provided by a dip is not permanent. It is certainly not as bad as the other coin doctoring techniques, but I still think it is bad, most of the time.

 

Just for amusement, not that I'd suggest that, heard of people trying to tone coins by boiling them inside an egg. Now the problem is how do you get a large dollar inside an egg?

 

I agree with what you are saying Paul...in fact, if I were in charge I'd rather see dipping done away with completely. Even in that means environmental damage occurs. Toning to the point of damaging a coin is the natural death of a coin...coins that have been properly stored shouldn't get to that stage IMHO (at least non-ancient coins). I think in a perfect world, we would consider the current state of a coin...even if it is toned to a damaging level...natural. But, that's just my personal view. I don't think anyone else agrees with me.

The problem is, our personal opinions don't match the market accepted view about dipping. Do I think a blast white DMPL Morgan is cool...heck yes I do. But, I'd rather see it in it's natural 120 year old self.

I have accepted properly dipped coins as a fact in his hobby and my collection includes examples. While I personally wish that dipping didn't happen...I accepted long ago that it does.

In anything, the market as a whole determines what is acceptable and what is not. For whatever reason, coin collectors (as a general rule) have decided that properly dipping a coin is nearly always acceptable. Now, that doesn't mean that everyone must agree and collect accordingly...but most people do. Most other forms of altering a coin has been determined unacceptable by the majority of collectors. Clearly, not everyone agrees. But, that's OK.

 

How do you get any coin inside an egg?

 

I agree that Paul has a very good point here. Dipping does alter the surface of the coin, as the acid does not just work on the silver sulfides and other tone producing agents, it also work on the un-toned silver, eating down the ridges that produce luster. In fact, chemically it would work better on the silver where the toning was removed.

What if nanobot molecules could selectively remove the sulfide or oxide portion on a copper /copper alloy cent, without affecting the color of the underlying copper, would it be accepted as dipping is on silver? And I do think it is possible in the next decade

 

big eggs. cost extra.
BLASPHEMY!!!!

 

great article on how dipping a coin is a completely different ball game than all other coin altering practices

https://www.coinweek.com/featured-n...cellent-coin-collections-part-2-dipped-coins/

 

I am not sure what article you read, but the one you linked reinforces my point of view almost word for word. If we changed the name from dipping to "artificial brightening" people would revolt against dipped coins.