Toned Franklin Half

Hello,

From a technically point of view a solid MS64 for sure.
But how about the toning?
Do you like it?
Or does it limit the grading by a point?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The grade is limited. It might not grade at all. Once a coin gets this dark, many see it as damage.

 

It's not for everybody. The toning, I mean.

 

"Messed with" doesn't mean anything to me. I'm not a detective. I don't collect coins based on whether I can detect they were "messed with" or not. I could care less what anyone can detect. That, to me, is counterintuitive, to collecting coins. That said, that coin is "flat," and that's all that's of consequence. Anyone with eyesight and just a little basic knowledge can see it. It gets discounted for that, and, sure, it probably doesn't grade for it. Were it mine, I'll add, I'd be "messing" all over with that reverse, wouldn't give it so much as a second thought. FWIW...

 

I'm sorry but that is some seriously ugly toning. Had it been one I found at melt I would give it a dip and be happy with it that way.

 

Very ugly imo

 

Isn't that something? Do you remember when we used to abhor dipped coins? I was shocked to hear how many graded Morgan Dollars, for example, it's estimated, are dipped. In fact, I think I first heard it from you. Ah, how standards and preferences have loosened for the market over time.

 

It's also funny how dirty people really are. I went through a roll of cents last night that were the scourge of the earth. I've seen better coming out of the ground buried for 100 years. I washed, then sprayed my hands with peroxide, washed again. One coin had more growing on it than the cent weighed without the crud.

 

@tommyc03, lol!

 

Thought that too..........

 

Answering your specific question, I do not like the toning.

As far as grading goes, why would you even bother to send it in? It's not worth the money. Given that 1948 is the first year of issue, there are a lot of nice looking (raw and slabbed) 1948 D's out there if someone wanted to buy one.

 

Thanks to all for input.
I never wanted to send this coin to a TPG, I was unsure about the toning.
In hand the coin looks better than on the pictures.
I put together a unc. Franklin set in a whitman album....the shown coin is ok for this purpose

 

Doug, "educated to the fact that it has always has been acceptable?" Seriously, think about that. First off, who dipped these coins? No collectors I knew dipped coins. Dealers dipped these coins. If it was so "acceptable," why didn't it say in the Red Books back then how to dip these coins? The reason is a dipped coin is like a finished and stained antique drawer. Cut the value of it in half. It's a goner. No "educated" antique collector is going to accept that. Only a dope is going to accept it.

We accept dipped coins by default. The dealers ruined these coins, and we have no choice but to accept them. The same is true with the TPGs, they're in the same spot. Either that, or probably 90% of blast white Morgan Dollars don't play in this "market grading" game with collectors.

There's how I see it. With all due respect, I think you're backpedalling into a comfort zone. We weren't comfortable with dipped coins anymore than antique collectors were comfortable with "restored" antiques. We wanted to see the "age" in these coins, if it was there. We had a word for that, it was "original."

At this point, I don't need to hear from the chemistry PhDs that sulfuric acid and thiourea is "safe" for silver coins, anymore than I need to hear from the wood refinishers that fine-grit sandpaper and conditioner is safe for antique wood furniture. That's treated antique wood furniture, and those are treated silver coins. No "educated" collector collects those, except by default.

Finally, supposing 90% of Morgan Dollars were silver polished by dealers back then. We'd be collecting those, today, too, by default, and not because we're educated to the fact that the practice has always been deemed acceptable. Rather, because we're uneducated. Better still, because we have no choice. And, there's "market grading," in a nut...

 

That's interesting what you say on toning. I remember some of us at least viewed it almost as damage. I'll have to take the rest I guess under advisement. I think of it like this. If it were so acceptable to collectors, why wasn't there one dealer who would admit it? I think they used some kind of jewelry cleaner. If dipping were acceptable, why did every dealer lie about it? Why lie if it's acceptable?

 

However antique furniture that has been cleaned carefully for the last 200 years is worth more than similar pieces that Billy Bob found in the barn under the hay stack.

 

You've been watching American Pickers too long. You have to watch the Antiques Road Show more.