Trying to determine if this is doctored\fake toning...

If I'm asking, it usually means it is, just can't get myself to believe my own opinion some times...

What's hampering me is that, despite the tons of hits this coin has on both obverse and reverse, underneath all that there does seem to be at least an XF coin as far as the devices, fields and legends go (seller says AU). Still has a strong LIBERTY, the feathers do show flatness on the tips and stems, only moderate flatness evident in the hair behind the eye and ear. Legends are all very strong on both sides...seems to be a good strike. The reverse seems to have received the better strike of the press...the wreath, bow and arrows seems to have great lasting detail. The shield on top is too out of focus for me to tell if the detail is there, but going off the rest of the reverse I would assume the detail is there.

I can't see or detect any evidence of whizzing...seems with whizzing, you can typically see many short (in length), hairline to a bit stronger, scratches in the fields. I've also observed that the detail of all the devices are sacrificed a bit when a coin gets whizzed (every things looks less strong or mushy), if not worn completely, which leads to the visible contrast of a high luster vs. more wear than should be there for the amount luster. Would appreciate any guidance on this bit as I' trying to gain a better eye for detecting these things. I don't see any of that here...I would expect a well cared for XF IHC to have this luster...

So whats that leave...the toning...is it real? If this coin is in this great of condition, someone has either really messed up trying to tone it, or could be the remnants of some sort of past cleaning. I could see where the coin may have been in a flip where one side of it was more open (or less tightly sealed ), thus allowing for more oxidization on one side, for the toning to be as un-even as it is on one side vs. the other...

The coin also seems to have maybe a very off center strike, leading to the whole left rim of the obverse having almost a third rim, not really sure what this condition is called...

Would appreciate any advice...this is not a coin I'm particularly interested in, except to learn...been looking at *TONS* of coins on eaby to try to get an eye for catching this stuff.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1863-INDIAN...80?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item3a977f17ec

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Totally AT. Looks like someone took a blowtorch to it.

 

Id pass

 

@LostDutchman - there's the answer...hadn't thought about a blowtorch...the pattern seems completely in line with what you would see....

And to both you guys who replied, am I off in the other observations? Minus the AT is this coin a decent coin...if what your looking for is a middle of the road type for your type set. Again, I'm just trying to tune my eye for these right now...

 

You really need to learn coins sir. I am not saying this disparagingly. I am saying you need to look at thousands and thousands of coins, learn what a high end IHC should look like.

Look at this coin. Wear, some major dings, and the coin is 150 years old. This coin would, in the normal course of events, be brown. There is just no physical way it would not be brown, unless it was buried in which case it could be green. Pretty toning can ONLY happen on a coin with original surfaces. Being worn is your first clue this coin has AT. Second, its copper so almost never develops such toning anyway, and if it is a 1 in a million coin it would probably be a proof. Third, this coin has damage, (and I am betting hairlines), so its nearly valueless anyway, which is a perfect candidate for crappy fake toning artists.

Want a fun "homework" assignment? Go to HA.com and sign up, (its free). Then simply peruse through pics of similar coins in XF up. Look at hundreds or thousands of these coins. There literally is nothing better, (well in person is better), to learn how to judge and grade a coin than seeing a LOT of them. After a while, your eye will immediately see something out of place, even if your mind cannot describe it. Best thing I can suggest.

 

How about this one?

 

Most likely NT. You can never "prove" it, of course. I say this because of a few reasons:

1. I have pulled hundreds of 1960-1964's out of sets looking identical to this.
2. Its a 1962, so most of these were put away in the national craze to fill old sulphur containing books. They toned like this.
3. Toning progression is correct, it has classic album toning pattern.

I am betting the reverse is either white or just toned around the edges, correct?

 

I saw that the toning progression matches NT, but, it just looks so vivid all over. Haven't seen many like this one.

 

Total trash

 

I would say AT on that one Toronto

 

The photography has a bit to do with it. A nice $50 coin for the toning fanatic, $75 by NGC standards and CAC makes the opening bid $250. What can I say.

http://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/index.aspx?CertNumber=2531421-019

http://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/219149/1962-Washington-Quarter-NGC-MS-66-226-152-133-CAC-Toned

 

Fooled me

 

Interesting coin Toronto. I think the NGC pick is indicative of what it looks like in hand. It also seems that no one looking at GC this weekend thought it was worth the sellers min. bid of $250. I'm not a Washie collector, but I think it's attractive.

 

I would have to disagree with you on the 1962 quarter sir. I literally have many just like this in junk silver tubes sitting in my SDB right now, coins I myself pulled out of old blue whitman folders. If this quarter is AT, then they were sure as heck AT a ton of early 1960's quarters and putting them in old folders in the 80's and 90's, (before toning was worth a premium). Myself, I think this quarter is too dark, having progressed too far. I always thought they were prettier when just the edges were dark purple and the overall coin was lighter.

Edit: Sorry, I was writing this when the auction links were posted. Are they kididng me, asking $250 for a common toned 1962? Good gosh, maybe I should dig out old common quarters just like this out of my junk silver boxes, huh?

 

Too much rainbow for my taste. I like my coins more natural looking or in fatigues.

 

I like the first one. Second one is not my style.

 

Couldn't agree more, that's why I here asking questions

@medoraman - huge thanks for the info. You hit on something I think I needed to connect, and that was even an AU coin will not have original surfaces and that genuine\natural toning can only happen on original mint surfaces...those two point's I had not connected yet...that completely narrow's the field for toned coins for sure, and helps to clarify for me, at least with IHCs what I should see for original surfaces. I'm not a huge toned lover, and again I was only using the coin I linked to as an example to learn from.

Thanks to all who replied so far, I'll keep watching for more great insight.

 

The Indian cent, if you look past the artificial toning, looks to have been harshly cleaned.

 

I agree, and its one of the oldest tricks in the book. Years ago AT was not done to make a premium coin, it was done to hide a problem coin. This is the reason why toned coins were viewed with suspicion, and many times traded for less money than white coins. Its also why coins were dipped, to remove the toning and show the coin was problem free. I have always loved toned coins, and bought a lot of toned 19th century coins back when they were the same price as white coins. However, the last 10+ years of such premiums for toned coins completely confounds me.