Definition for Artifical Toning?

moosesr

Where do you draw the line on what is artifical and what is natural toning? I have seen several posts from people who were trying to get nice toning on their coins by putting them in different storage enviroments, such as in warm moist areas and more recently Supercoin has a auction on a Silver Ike dollar that was nicely toned from being stored wrapped in toilet paper and secured with rubber bands. Are these techniques considered natural or artifical toning?

cointagious

baking and chemically accellerated toning is AT and is relatively easy to detect. others types may pass muster. or may not. depends on how good the coin comes thru it all.

RLinn

Artificial toning.....ummmmm....is that anything like reverse curating?

Dog97

If you can't tell it's fake then it's original. Of course you can get PCGS, ANACS, or NGC to confirm it if you need proof.

CoinDr

it's like the tree falling in the forest. If you're not there to hear it, there was no sound.

pmh1nic

Artificial toning is consider objectionable based on intent. Someone intentional subjects a coin to an environment or process in order to alter it's appearance. For a long time it was difficult or impossible to intentionally duplicate in a short period of time the type of attractive toning that might occurred over a 30, 40 or 50+ period. In may cases attempts at duplicating this type of toning in a controlled manner left traces on the coin that it had been intentional altered. These alterations were attempt for the most part to enhance the appearance of the coin for profit reasons. Among some collectors the presence of natural toning on 100+ year old coins is one indicator that the coin has not been tampered with and is a sign of originality, meaning that aside from the natural toning that occurred as a result of exposure to the natural enviroment that existed at the time the coin was minted and during it's passage through time the coin has not been chemically cleaned (dipped).

Now some might argue that there is no harm done in either dipping or ATing a coin. I'd argue that there is harm done to the owners of the coins that have not been dipped or ATed but through historical happenstance have survived to this day in there blast white or attractively toned condition. If someone can churn out rainbow, monster toned coins or create blast white coins at will which the best eyes in the industry can't identify as being doctored what does that do to the value of the coins that by good fortunate (or bad depending on your taste) managed to survive without any tampering in that condition?

Now some would say it's my coin and I can do anything I want with it. True, but does the future buyer have a right to know that the coin has been intentional altered to enhance it's appearance? According to the ANA guidelines any intentional alterations of a coin are to be noted when the coin is sold. I'm sure that doesn't happen with most dipped coins so why should it happen for ATed coins?

Listen, I know I'm talking pie in the sky and the genie is out of the bottle as far as dipping is concerned. I think the genie is peeking his head out of the bottle as far as the acceptance of ATed coins is concerned.