Why are toned coins so popular?

Look, Lehigh, I have no need to explain my credentials to some runny nosed kid who uses a reference to a "Poker Room" in his profile.

ANA President Walt Ostromecki gave the "Numismatic Point of Light Award" to THREE Pennsylvanians - Kerry Wetterstrom, Thomas Uram, and me. That's it. I have no need to prove myself to you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The name of this thread is "Why are toned coins so popular" You have been active since the start of the thread. If things relating to toning are irrelevant to you, why are you actively participating in a thread about toning.

For the other members of the forum who may be interested:

Type 1 AT refers to artificial toning designed to hide flaws on a problem coin in an attempt to make it appear to be problem free.

Type 2 AT refers to artificial toning designed to increase the eye appeal of the coin so that the toning can drive a premium price.

 

And whose privately owned designation is that? For me, Type 1 is still and always a danger, but Type 2 never will be, because I NEVER pay extra for toning.

Why am I on a thread about toning? Because I think the entire subject and field is awash in, umm, err, Type 2. Or is that "Number 2"?

I ALSO fervently and stridently believe that people who SPECIALIZE in toning are snake oil salesmen and con men.

 

Is Walt Ostromecki aware that you don't know difference between type 1 and type 2 artificial toning? Who created the name of that award, George H.W. Bush?

This is an internet forum, we don't have awards. Your reputation is earned by the threads you create, the knowledge that you share, and the questions that you answer. In your time here, your contribution to the forum is basically been limited to corny jokes and grandstanding.

My reputation on this forum (et al) is well known, so when you want to engage in numismatic debate instead of name calling, you let me know.

 

Lehigh, I don't even want to LIVE in a world where you also do.

For what it's worth, Mr. "Reputation", my ratio of "likes" to posts is far higher than yours is, not that anyone should give a rip.

Just thought you'd like to know.

 

If you are asking for the origin of those designations, I don't know. I know that I learned them from Bob Campbell, former ANA President, who specializes in........

wait for it...............

Rainbow Toning.

 

Yikes, Bob Campbell gave the first and last Numismatic Theater talk (now called Money Talks) that I ever attended that was dedicated specifically to toning. I was curious. I decided then and there (NYC - 1990's) that I didn't want to have anything to do with it.

I do that a lot - attend talks on specialties to see if they interest me. I did it with VAM's and that one didn't get me going either.

 

Ok, Mr. Johnny Come Lately, the system of "likes" was instituted only a few years ago, after the majority of my posts on this forum were made.

 

I tried to get into VAM's, just couldn't do it. Kinda like CRH. Not my gig, but to each their own.

 

Yes, of course, because the Internet is sooooo the heart and soul of the coin hobby, right?

Good for you, you can hide behind anonymity.

 

I do my own type of CRH, which I don't think fits the classic definition. I search solid BU rolls for varieties. That's not "true" CRH, is it?

 

What are you talking about? Nobody is hiding, and pretty much everyone knows my name. You obviously don't care to know me, so I'm not gonna bother to share it with you.

 

I know your first name. I thought of one Money Talk that DID work in kindling a more serious interest - classic commems. My "thing" is not as much the coins per se, but studying the political machinations of how they came to be. Every time I land a new piece, I study the crap out of its story.

 

Not quite sure why I'm sticking my head out the window in the middle of this crossfire, but:

I've been following discussions here about artificial toning since 2011 or so, and this is the first time I've seen "Type 1 AT" and "Type 2 AT" presented as terms of art.

Googling for various combinations of "type 1", "type 2", "toning" and "artificial toning" yields mostly results about Buffalo nickels, 1942 Jeffersons, and diabetes. (That last is never far from the minds of a certain collector demographic.)

Googling for "Type 1 artificial toning" yields two results -- one from yourself, here, in 2010, and one for a Buffalo Nickel auction.

So, I don't see evidence of a lot of discussion (at least none happening or echoed online) from other experts using this terminology. But if you want to keep using this as a litmus test to distinguish toning poseurs and wannabes from, well, you, I guess it's a good choice.

 

Jeff, you've revealed more about Paul's personality than I could ever care to take the time to do. Thanks. Can someone BE a "poseur" in a field that is itself a "poseur"?

 

I'm not trying to criticize personalities. I'm trying to learn, but I'll occasionally cave in and point out a questionable debating technique.

 

Bob Campbell taught a class for the ANA that used those descriptions and I have seen them used on every forum, including this one, despite Googles inability to find them. Kurt alluded to the reason why these designations aren't used much anymore. Type 2 is much more common and most people don't even consider Type 1 anymore.

 

sakata, wrote in the OP: "Let me say up front, I am not trying to belittle toned coins or to put down those who collect them. I am really trying to understand. I just don't get it. What is so attractive about a coin which has been so disfigured?"

I just started reading this thread today. Hopefully, as I get to the end (page 19) your question will be answered. IMO, "disfigured" indicates your mind has already been made up.

Beauty is a personal thing. Not all toned coins are beautiful. Many are considered ugly by everyone. Perhaps, we can drag you "kicking and screaming" into making a distinction (learning something important in numismatics) and appreciating the colorful coins that have been made "especially beautiful" both by nature and in many cases - also man.

 

I am constantly amazed by the thinking in a hobby where "the old guard" can wax hyper-critical of changes in, say, grading standards, as Doug does so eloquently, yet they are PERFECTLY FINE with frequent ebbs and flows in the desirability of toned coins and their color's effect on grades. Toning is nothing but an ephemeral sub-market.

That was driven home to me at the Dallas Spring ANA last year. There was a dealer who had his "normal" cases and a side case of "toners". Real radical stuff. I asked him about them. He APOLOGIZED for even having them! He explained they were on consignment from a customer because a) he thinks they're stupid, b) they're out of fashion again (then), and c) they're not well thought of in Texas.

Just repeating what I heard.

 

I'm not the one acting like a child in this thread Kurt, so you might wanna calm down on criticizing the personality of others. My point was to simply show you that you don't know everything by pointing out something that is basic in the world of toning, despite the fact that it may not be well known outside the toning community.