This fits better here than anywhere else on the forum.

What do you want? Were already lite headed from being a mile high.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nobody in the coin world considers "dipping" an altered surface! So stop it!

Nobody in the coin world considers placing a coin in a coin album an attempt to artificially tone a coin. So stop it!

Do you think I was happy that the obverse toned? All that did was reduce the number of people interested in buying the coin. I submitted all of my uncirculated Barber Quarters for grading before I sold them. And yes, of course the toning on that coin is market acceptable, and of course it belongs in a "problem free" holder.



What do you think? Do you think it belongs in a "problem free" holder?

 

That is such a oxy moron, the coin was altered to create this coin you are presenting as acceptable. Maybe that is what the market accepts.
But is that coin really original? Or, has it been altered?

 

Throw accelerated in there! Dansco? Yeah, it turned out pretty. But, it is none other than cleverly disguised AT.

 

Not a bad thing to collect for a few hours. "Dead Soldiers"
lol

 

I do my best when I do my thinking before I do the deed.

 

Says edited who is currently artificially toning a coin and posting a thread about it. All I did was make a mistake when storing my coin in a method accepted by the entire numismatic community.

And that toning isn't pretty, it is distracting and ugly. If I had dip, I would have re-dipped it before sending it in for grading.

This is just another example of you bastardizing numismatic nomenclature in your sophomoric attempt at being edgy.

 

That isn't what I said at all. I was accused of artificially toning a coin and I responded to that allegation indicating both that I did not intend to cause the toning while at the same time admitting that I make a mistake in my storage of the coin. If I had not found my mistake in a short time, but rather left it that way for years, it is entirely possible that the coin could have developed questionable toning in the eyes of the TPGs and my IMPROPER STORAGE would have resulted in a problem coin.

I have never disputed that intent SHOULDN'T be the deciding factor in the AT/NT debate, only that it CAN'T be because the TPGs will never know the storage conditions or history of the coin. So while I can offer testimony to the members of this forum about my intent, the TPGs will never be privy to that information, therefore they can't use it in their determination.

Furthermore, when I noticed my mistake, I took immediate action to correct it. In doing so, I preserved what is considered by 99% of the coin world to be market acceptable toning on that Barber Quarter. By contrast, Pickin & Sinnin found a coin that was toning due to improper storage and had market acceptable toning, and instead of taking action to arrest further toning, he actually took steps to exacerbate the toning. The result was that the new toning that formed is IMO highly questionable and that the coin should be considered AT, not because he intended to artificially tone the coin, but rather he failed to preserve the coin and prevent the questionable toning from forming in the first place.

In the end, I don't care (and neither do the TPGs) about the intent of owner(s), the coin must be judged solely on the quality of the toning. And if the toning is questionable, it matters not if it was imparted intentionally or as the result of improper storage.

I hope that clears up my position on this issue that I have articulated about 1,000x before on this very forum. Now I have some questions for you Doug.

1) Do you think the toning on his coin is market acceptable? Meaning, if he asked whether his coin is AT or NT, what would you say?

2) Would that answer change once you found out he took deliberate steps to tone the coin further?

3) Do you think the toning on the Barber Quarter is market acceptable? Meaning, If I asked you whether it is AT or NT, what would you say?

4) Would that answer change if I told you that I intentionally didn't replace the acetate slide?

 

When have I ever made the assertion that more people collect toned coins than blast white coins?

 

Hindsight is 20/20. Should have, Could have, but Didn't applies quite well here. We have all these conversations about AT VS NT. And the only thing that I am seeing is that you AT'd a coin knowing it was altered, even more susceptible to toning since it was recently dipped. Then threw it in a Dansco that is known for toning coins??
So which is it. Cause accidental is the biggest line of BS I have ever heard from you. You purposely AT'd a coin then put it on the market.
My thing is that what you did sets on the innocent side of what collectors have to wade through to find acceptable coins.

I have no need to ask if the coin has natural toning, I watched it with my own eyes. Part of me wants to further this study on Toned coins. And the other part of me, the majority of me says "just leave it to the birds". peck peck peck, Posture up, repeat.

I put it out in plain view. Only to show folks what can be done with a little help. I don't even encourage it. The only fix for this coin is to
A) leave it the way it is as a reminder to always do my best to store coins correctly.

B) dip it and alter the surfaces.

C) sell it the way it is and make a buck or two on it.

I am going to choose A as it is the right thing to do.
Knowing what I did to this coin, if it passes from my hands it will be raw, and most likely dipped with the attached "altered surfaces" it rightly deserves.

 

I here ya, the secretary's cabinet is filled with more than supplies.
they are only growing patina. All the other coins left raw and for much longer than that never changed.
I have no doubt the insert has something to do with it, Maybe the ink, But I would have to argue with you about the environment, as no other coins have changed.

 

Bleep the naysayers...

It is a scientific experiment using the tools of observation and analysis.

 

I found a clean example. The last example is in much better numismatic shape The black spots you see on the coin are damage.
I have been tempted to put this into the holder that the last was in. Just to see the results. At .9999% pure it should take on the same characteristics correct?

 

Test has been initiated.
A) To check my environment. Mainly to see if it helped the acceleration.
B) To see if the paper insert is what is causing the toning.

I am hoping that this was simply poor storage technics and completely related to the environment the coin was in at the antique store.

Only time will tell I will update the results.

 

I was looking thru some of my coins today, and had forgotten about this experiment.
I had to put it on hold due to remodeling my basement. I added two bedrooms and a bathroom. Due to construction debri I put all my coins and camera away, anyways...

The new coin that was partly out of the flip had to be put away. It fully altered the experiment as the toning went wacky. For the short time it was out of the flip it was on the same path of toning as seen by the line in the same area as the first. As you can see there is much more toning around the perimeter. This is because the coin was fully in the flip, and folded.
I am fully convinced that @Lehigh96 is right. This is from the paper insert, and or possibly the ink that is causing the toning.
Here is the obverse. It went wild with some splotchy toning.

For anyone that is new to this thread, or doesn't want to search through, this is the final progression of the coin that started the experiment. (new photos)
It no doubt has furthered even though it was in a completely different drawer than the inert paper that caused the extreme toning in the first place.

I have decided to further the experiment with the second coin. I slid it further into the flip and will update the thread as it tones. Might even try a different .9999 silver coin to the same environment.

For any newbies this is intentionally toning a coin and is considered AT. Knowing that the coin was susceptible to toning all measures on my part should have been taken to stop it.

Also wanted to say that I have no qualms with @Lehigh96 or @baseball21
At this time we were all in some very heated conversations. No doubt things got personal. I have buried the hatchet.