Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
Why don't we use terms like "Intentional Toning"? Why do we argue intent?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="mikenoodle, post: 1625616, member: 307"]You know, when left with enough time to think I can have some pretty silly thoughts and I figured that I might share this one although I hope it can be discussed rather than argued.</p><p><br /></p><p>The terms "Artificially Toned" and "Artificial Toning" might better be replaced with "Intentional Toning" and "Unintentional Toning".</p><p><br /></p><p>My argument is that <b>all</b> toned coins have toned "naturally" since the toning is nothing more than oxidation and oxidation is itself a natural process. Toning that is either lauded and prized by the collecting community, or scorned and treated with disdain at the end of the day is all still just oxidation. </p><p><br /></p><p>The questions to collectors are usually "Is it attractive?" and "Does it look natural?"</p><p><br /></p><p>My point is that I am wondering if we can get past whether or not the process has been aided or accelerated and just prize what looks good and what we like? Can we describe toning as "Intentional" or "Unintentional" rather than try to ascertain how it occurred?</p><p><br /></p><p>Why do we have to constantly determine intent in order to describe our coins as "natural and pristine" when nobody can really tell? Aren't we just fooling ourselves? and possibly frustrating ourselves in the process?</p><p><br /></p><p>What say you?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="mikenoodle, post: 1625616, member: 307"]You know, when left with enough time to think I can have some pretty silly thoughts and I figured that I might share this one although I hope it can be discussed rather than argued. The terms "Artificially Toned" and "Artificial Toning" might better be replaced with "Intentional Toning" and "Unintentional Toning". My argument is that [B]all[/B] toned coins have toned "naturally" since the toning is nothing more than oxidation and oxidation is itself a natural process. Toning that is either lauded and prized by the collecting community, or scorned and treated with disdain at the end of the day is all still just oxidation. The questions to collectors are usually "Is it attractive?" and "Does it look natural?" My point is that I am wondering if we can get past whether or not the process has been aided or accelerated and just prize what looks good and what we like? Can we describe toning as "Intentional" or "Unintentional" rather than try to ascertain how it occurred? Why do we have to constantly determine intent in order to describe our coins as "natural and pristine" when nobody can really tell? Aren't we just fooling ourselves? and possibly frustrating ourselves in the process? What say you?[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
Why don't we use terms like "Intentional Toning"? Why do we argue intent?
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...