For your enjoyment: A couple of cooked Morgans

I received a large lot of Morgans to sell today from a friend and fellow board member. Included were a few raw Morgans. Unfortunately, two of them, the ones I am posting here, are artificially toned. Can you see why they are AT?



0
Comments
1. The 1881-S looks AT due to all the splotching of the colors.
2. The 1885 looks AT because the colors -- especially on the reverse -- don't seem to transition gracefully. It looks like someone lit a match to the reverse.
Check out a Vanguard Roth IRA.
Herb
#2 looks like it has been campfire cooked. A match made that blue streak on the back. IMO.
<< <i>I received a large lot of Morgans to sell today from a friend and fellow board member. Included were a few raw Morgans. Unfortunately, two of them, the ones I am posting here, are artificially toned. Can you see why they are AT? >>
Eric: To clarify your question for this thread, are you asking us:
1) What was the motivation for someone to articficially tone them (i.e. to cover up problems)?
2) What are the diagnostics to determine that they have been artificially toned? (i.e sharp color transitions rather than gradual)
3) What procedure was used to "cook" them?
4) Or, all of the above?
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
Natural toning is part of the coin, rather than something ON the coin. The toning here sits on the surface, separate from the coin, obscuring the lustre, especially on the 81-S.
Taken by itself, the obverse of the 1885 almost looks as if it could be natural, but for the spots and unnatural breaks. The dark spot at 3:00 on the obverse looks burned. The lustre comes through the toning, but not as it does on the portion of the obverse that is not toned.
e-mail me here
WINNER:
POTD 8-30-05 (awarded by dthigpen)
POTD 9-8-05 (awarded by gsaguy)
GSAGUY Slam 12-10-04