Lucy-help me out! I just don't get it...

1907Quarter

I know it's a clean face but where's the attraction?(I think the toning is neutral at best.)

Franklin Half

robertpr

MS67 Franklins are quite rare. Most are butt ugly like this one and the only reason they grade so high is because the crappy toning covers up surface imperfections. It would probably be worth ten times that figure if it was a blast white ms67. If I owned a grading service this coin would be in a bodybag for environmental damage - if you can't see the surface you can't grade it.

Oh sorry, that was supposed to be done in my best Lucy voice

airplanenut

<< <i>Oh sorry, that was supposed to be done in my best Lucy voice >>

The HepKitty is not in the building!

LucyBop

That sure is a high grade coin that would probably only grade ms66 with PCGs. The problem is that this coin was pulled from an original mint set from 57. On these mint sets the coins were house in cardboard holders so the sulfur from the cardboard reacted with the coins surface and formed an oxide which we call toning. Most high end/grade coins from the 1950s were pulled from these mint sets and have this type of toning, it just seemed to affect the half the most possibly due to its larger size. Even though the toning may not seem attractive the coin is still in a high state of preservation. And I will say this, I was not a big fan of toning till I started to witness some nice examples in person and, I have boughten toned coins off of Ebay and I was thrilled to discover that the coins are better in person then in photos or scans. It is very hard to capture the true colors of a coin in photots or scans...

LucyBop

Whoops, that last post didn't quite sound like the HepKitty.... let me add a Daddy-o and Crazy man Crazy.... There now it sounds right...

stman

<< <i>MS67 Franklins are quite rare. Most are butt ugly like this one and the only reason they grade so high is because the crappy toning covers up surface imperfections. It would probably be worth ten times that figure if it was a blast white ms67. If I owned a grading service this coin would be in a bodybag for environmental damage - if you can't see the surface you can't grade it. >>



If you have enough experience in knowing how to look at toned coins you can grade it. Only the inexperienced would say something like this.

nwcs

And the light that you view toned coins in makes a difference, too. I always use halogen bulbs now at home in a dark corner when I dissect roles for slabbing.

robertpr

<< <i>If you have enough experience in knowing how to look at toned coins you can grade it. Only the inexperienced would say something like this. >>



OK, I challenge you to buy that coin, dip it, and send it back in for grading and NOT get a three point drop in the grade. Now since I know you're not stupid enough to do this, why don't you go back to troll island.

stman

Ok hotshot

robertpr

Sorry I didn't mean to come across so harshly but the fact is that thick heavy toning like this does cover surface imperfections and result in higher grades. Some people call it "rewarding original surfaces" but I call it "inability to see something that would knock the grade down". Heavily toned high grade Franklins outnumber blast white ones by at least ten to one just because of this. Why do you think toning like that usually can't be removed without damaging the coin? Because it actually BECOMES the surface of the coin and therefore it is environmental damage. Sorry to burst your bubble if you like this kind of toning.

FrankinWI

OK and this Franklin is correctly graded as an MS66? I must not have any grading experience because this coin looks butt ugly to me. I'm going to send this in for a grade review. Maybe I can get some money back on this coin.

LucyBop

Sorry Robert, with all due respect Lucy totally disagrees with your position. Most high grade Franklins that are toned out number the white blazers because of the sulfur in the cardboard holders that these coins where found in for many years. When an oxide grows it also consumers alittle bit of the intial layer that it has grown on. To try to dip off an oxide that has been growing over 40 years is a very risky thing to do to a coin. A Deposition (which a grown oxide isnt) is a nice layer that conforms to the topography of the surface it is being applied to, a deposition has a better chance of hiding defects as you put it, not a grown oxide which is a reaction of the coins surface to the sulfur rich enviroment. I passed up on a ms66fbl 58d at Long beach cause it had some huge hits on the bell for this grade, guess what the oxide (toning) didn't hide this. I was at a coin store yesterday in downtown Portland and almost bout a mint set toned 1951s Franklin. I passed cause it wasn't full bell, although a nice ms66 even in non full bell is a nice coin to own, but it had some big hits on the surface and bell which once again, the toning does not hide.

stman

Apology accepted. But being experienced at looking at toned coins, and like Lucy mentioned I'll almost bet this coin in person is not as dark as you might think it is.
What I meant by being experienced is these toned coins you usually can look right under or right through the toning to see surface imperfections.

All too often when one sees a scan of a toned coin and the colors are not all lit up or enhanced, they feel it looks like that in person. Hey, I have no problem if you hate toned coins and the more that get dipped the more desirable mine are. I will say one thing, the ones that look ugly in scans are the ones I like.

And BTW, you for sure didn't burst my bubble.

robertpr

I don't know whether your coin's graded correctly or not. It's just a scan, and a bad one at that, with a slab and a layer of crap between the scan bed and the coin. Looks like you have something smeared on your slab's flip too. Too bad it's not in an NGC holder, then you could send it to NCS and they would tell you without even breaking it out of the holder that if they conserve it that it would have a very high likelihood of falling in grade after being conserved (if they were even confident they could remove the toning safely, which I would guess they could not.)

I hope you didn't pay too much for that thing.

LucyBop

Franklinwi, that coin does not appear to be very attractive but I would need to see it in person to give a true assesment. Again, because of the original holders that these coins came from, they will be toned, to find brilliant examples means you have to pretty much find one that wasn't in a mint set and survived in this high grade of preservation for all these years. An extremely tough task, though it's possible, but alotv rarer then the mint set toned examples...

LucyBop

After 4 margaritas, I think the HepKitty has given soom good answers....Just maybe bad spelling...Its not my fault folks, these cats at the Embassy Suites insist on a free happy hour from 5:30 to 7:30... I was the innocent victim...Honest....

robertpr

<< <i>Most high grade Franklins that are toned out number the white blazers because of the sulfur in the cardboard holders that these coins where found in for many years. >>



Lucy, I agree that the way the coins were packaged was conductive to toning. I disagree with your assumption that it is some kind of coincidence that high grade Franklins almost always without exception look like petrified dinosaur dung while those in grades of 64 or below (and to some extent, 65) do NOT usually look that heavily toned. Yes, LIGHT toning does conform to the surface of the coin but the more built up it becomes, the less it conforms.

LucyBop

Then we agree to disagree Robert baby, Lucy is simply speaking from over 30 years of collecting the Franklin half as well as hitting coin shows and stores across the country and seeing numerous results. I prefer the blast white examples myself and by no means am I trying to defend toned coins but I have had to accept what appears to be a reality to me regaurding the Franklin half and that was the majority of the high end high grade coins were pulled from original mint sets and will display various degrees of toning, anywhere from black road tar butt ugly to extremely attractive rainbow colored gems.... The blast white examples are out there and are found in the 1948 year cause collectors hoarded these and also no mint sets were issued this year, but over all they are harder to find. The Hepkitty hasn't let this fact be known, but I own well over 1000 of these halfs, yet I still have holes to be filled in my registry. I am also in search of these high end gems and I carefully examine them just as I have rare records. This does not make me an expert by no means, just a very experience collector when it comes to this series. PCGs has misgraded several submission I have sent of sure fire brilliant white ms64's but I still love em like I do the Frankies! Now, wheres my margarita?

robertpr

Lucy, you might be blasted but your last post actually made a lot of sense to me. I prefer the blast white ones too but by no means do I think toned coins should be banned. All I'm saying is that the crustynasty coins the grading services are calling gems aren't really, they're just covered up by that mint set toning. You said it yourself: the majority of the high end high grade coins were pulled from original mint sets and will display various degrees of toning All I'm saying is THEY AREN'T REALLY GEMS!

Maybe I need one of them there margaritas!

edited for spelling

LucyBop

<< <i>Yes, LIGHT toning does conform to the surface of the coin but the more built up it becomes, the less it conforms >>



Again, with all do respect, one has to understand the physics of oxide growth. Intialy it will grow fast as it consumes the intial layer and grows outward but then this process really slows down as an oxide is a non-amphorus crystaline structure which does not stack well on each other as a deposition would. In other words, once the oxide (toning) has grown, since it is now trying to grow and consume the underlining layer which is now a grown oxide the rate of growth slows considerably. But enough of that, Its making the HepKitty dizzy, anyone whom reads this post simply look at the Franklins that are out there. One will discover that the ms64s are for the most part brilliant with many dings and nicks, the ms65's are almost half and half, brilliant examples can be found (although rare in the 1955 for some reason) with clean fields and very few if any nicks. The ms66's seems to be heavely to moderately toned with with few if any bagmarks, the very few (as very few have been graded by PCGs in this high of a state of preservation) ms67s that the HepKitty has seen very heavly toned and pulled from Mint sets. And the toning in my opinion does not hide defects, these gems were simply flawless!!!! I have a few that I am going to submitt that are this way....

LucyBop

Too bad me and you coudlnt meet in person and look over Lucy's many mint set toned Franklins, these coins are gems and are indeed in a high state of preservation. And even if we still didn't agree baby, we would still have fun!

robertpr

Good luck on the submission!

I still think they aren't gems. Well they could be, but since you can't see the surface you'd have no way of knowing. I know it's not a coincidence that there aren't many blast white high grade Franklins out there. If the dung, er toning, weren't covering anything up you'd be able to find white (or at least lightly toned) examples in 67 and higher. Not all of the gem high grade coins were left in the packaging to rot and die. But you can believe whatever you'd like. I still respect your opinion but I just think you're totally missing the ball on this one.

LucyBop

Okay baby, I am still basing my beliefs on over 30 years of collecting and searching for high end Franklins... It by no means makes me correct, its just that in my experiences what I have said proves to be true. I have checked out coins stores in New York, Seattle, Portland, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas and California.. Been to many major shows (as well as comic shows in San Diego, the HepKitty is a major player in collecting Archie comics from the 50s)......and I will stand by what I have previously posted...... I do wish that more examples in ms66 or 67 where to be found in blast white, but everywhere I have searched it just is not a reality.... Thats not saying they dont exist, just extremely rare and hard to locate......Here is an interesting tidbit that Lucy has noticed, the high end blast white coins seem to exist on David Halls website ansd also R&I........ They either seem to always find the very best or...................Hmmmmmm. I am very tipsy right about now.....

LucyBop

<< <i>Well they could be, but since you can't see the surface you'd have no way of knowing. I know it's not a coincidence that there aren't many blast white high grade Franklins out there. If the dung, er toning, weren't covering anything up you'd be able to find white (or at least lightly toned) examples in 67 and higher. Not all of the gem high grade coins were left in the packaging to rot and die >>



as Clinton had said, I refer to my previous statement, so does Lucy, I refer to my previous posts reguarding what is actually happening bto a coins surface during oxidation or toning, and I said say natural over the years toning..... Can't believe I am using a Clinton line??????? Although when it comes to sex, Lucy doesn't deny a thing!

Gilbert

Hey Robert,

I know I'm a day late and a dollar short, but, I would like to add that most of the MS65 and above pre-1959 Franklin halves DO have a somewhat unattractive toning, and that is one of the reasons the very nice ones cost through the nose.

Also, I believe the consensus among grading companies and collectors is that a heavy and/or darker toning that impairs one's ability to thoroughly evaluate a coin's surface will LIMIT its grade, not enhance it.

Toning may hide hairlines, but with experience, one can reasonable determine if a coins surface is "damaged" in the true numismatic sense of the word. One can definitely see bagmarks and nicks and striking characteristics through toning.

Should a coin with MS67 characteristics be bodybagged because the surface is dark? Environmental damage does not equate to ugly toning; there must be actual damage other than poor eye appeal.