ember Profile: innov8tion (1478Feedback score is 1,000 to 4,999) about me
Feedback Score: 1478 Positive Feedback: 99.5% Members who left a positive: 1485 Members who left a negative: 8 All positive feedback received: 1682 1712 feedback received by innov8tion (0 mutually withdrawn)
Comment From Date / Time Item # Neutral feedback rating Disappointed..its a throw away pipet as used by colour matchers in printing Buyer kadoo4u ( 269Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jan-25-05 08:38 5549269563 Reply by innov8tion: Know nothing about printers equipment , if similar this is just coincidental Jan-25-05 13:36 Neutral feedback rating This product is totally not what I thought it would be, although great ebayer!!! Buyer frannilini ( 3 ) no longer a registered user Jan-17-05 07:45 5549269563 Reply by innov8tion: ????????????? I wrote a whole page of discription + instructions + picture !! Jan-17-05 13:42 Neutral feedback rating fast delivery but item not as described. disappointed Buyer bluekim17 ( 36Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jan-16-05 05:48 5547890430 Reply by innov8tion: ????????????? I wrote a whole page of discription + instructions + picture !! Jan-17-05 13:46 Neutral feedback rating Came quickly and was fine, but was poorly packaged and damaged in transit. Buyer autumnkym ( 89Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jan-13-05 16:18 5548006071 Reply by innov8tion: Newbies .... Please LET THE SELLER KNOW of damage before leaving bad feedback Jan-14-05 03:45 Neutral feedback rating No problems with transac. item poor quality and looks homemade. not worth £5 Buyer blankedidentity ( 124Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jan-13-04 03:06 2973559013 Reply by innov8tion: Injection moulded components made in a real factory not my kitchen !! Jan-15-04 03:56 Negative feedback rating transaction not honoured Buyer delmoreh ( 228Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-21-03 06:56 2841289713 Reply by innov8tion: Again a July 'send invoice' didnt get through - virus? 1st contact neg again!! Sep-22-03 03:13 Neutral feedback rating It hurt! Good reply from seller tho got refund. It did sound too good.. :-( Buyer ij_doubledutch ( 109Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-21-03 02:12 2841289713 Negative feedback rating Never recieved it! Buyer aiden50 ( 49Feedback score is 10 to 49) Sep-14-03 10:47 2332206916 Reply by innov8tion: This NEG is his first contact , I am still waiting for payment to be sent !!!!! Sep-15-03 04:18 Negative feedback rating NO CONTACT Buyer buiddy ( 233Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-11-03 04:25 2332206916 Reply by innov8tion: A July 'send invoice' didnt get through ,this neg is his first contact !!!!! Sep-14-03 03:26 Neutral feedback rating I like it but wife won't use it now after she said it "burnt" her- a real shame Buyer ben_dick2000 ( 112Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-03-03 03:18 2937815008 Neutral feedback rating Service was good and quick but she didn't like it, seemed to burn Buyer fosters19 ( 151Feedback score is 100 to 499) Aug-22-03 12:15 2841289713 Neutral feedback rating I still dont have the £3.00 bottle of oil. Wednesday 13th August Buyer sid007monkey ( 83Feedback score is 50 to 99) no longer a registered user Aug-13-03 06:42 2937813295 Reply by innov8tion: On holiday so didnt know about non delivery ,sorted now I am back Aug-18-03 10:48 Neutral feedback rating Must be me!! Couldn't get it to work, but had a great laugh trying. Try it !! Buyer jasper2447 ( 159Feedback score is 100 to 499) Aug-01-03 13:17 2934566407 Neutral feedback rating seems to work,but not as well as hoped Buyer gazza22 ( 3 ) Jul-30-03 07:47 2940392412 Negative feedback rating Not heard from this person. No product or email. doubt I will use again. Buyer tab7062 ( 83Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jul-20-03 03:48 2937811496 Reply by innov8tion: No trace of his email (server ?) ,so didnt know PO have messed up again !! Jul-20-03 05:40 Neutral feedback rating ok Buyer hawkins57 ( 172Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jul-11-03 14:59 2180275662 Neutral feedback rating worked on me ok but the wife ran round the house for 20 mins then fell asleep Buyer mr-bishhi ( 183Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jul-08-03 01:43 2935944412 Reply by innov8tion: Im sure she did want to be caught really !! & was the sleep pretend? :-) Jul-09-03 01:10 Neutral feedback rating Fast delivery, but not as good as described (it feels more like chilli oil) Buyer sd505050 ( 21Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jun-25-03 12:25 2935949377 Negative feedback rating DO NOT BUY FROM THIS PERSON. TOOK MY MONEY AND RAN. I NEVER RECIEVED GOODS. Buyer bwiiian ( 71Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jun-17-03 13:13 2175484911 Reply by innov8tion: had a 'lost in post' ,gave me a redundant emailadress so couldnt makecontact Jun-18-03 14:37 Follow-up by bwiiian: PLEASE IGNORE MY 1ST REMARK. GENUINE MISTAKE. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED EBAYER+++++++++ Jun-20-03 02:50 Negative feedback rating sent promptly, but rubbish Buyer bradporker ( 32Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jun-16-03 14:48 2175065331 Reply by innov8tion: Purchased May 17 complained to ebay today hasnt bothering to contact me first Jun-17-03 03:08 Neutral feedback rating Its like putting Deep Heat on your privates !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Buyer timothy_lister ( 318Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jun-14-03 13:18 2834212450 Neutral feedback rating Didn't work for us - used as directed, sent very promptly though Buyer ezman2k2 ( 15Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jun-14-03 04:14 2931897461 Negative feedback rating Product was painful rather than sexualy arousing Buyer dmp1818 ( 62Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jun-10-03 03:15 2931897461 Reply by innov8tion: Everyone else has read and followed the instructions ok - theres allways one eh! Jun-10-03 05:33 Neutral feedback rating It might be great for some? Great service, recived in good time. Buyer dan020775 ( 74Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jun-06-03 16:44 2176280218 Reply by innov8tion: Offered full cash refund but refused as doesnt want to return the oil to me ? Jun-09-03 00:31
If it makes coins look like the one shown, then it presents a real threat to paying a premium for natural toned coins.
.....................and here we go with the ol' U.S. Coin Forum double standard again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this is bad, but it's perfectly acceptable for us to put coins in Kraft envelopes that we know contain sulfer, it's perfectly acceptable to buy old Wayte Raymond boards with the hope that they still contain sulfer that will leach onto coins and tone them, it's perfectly acceptable to set a coin exposed to an atmosphere which contains sulfer dioxide and we know will cause tone, it's perfectly acceptable to do any number of things which have been given the U.S. Coin Forum stamp of approval to tone coins........................but this is different?????
why??? please explain to me why this is different than the above mentioned methods of artificially toning coins. but first, please review your intent before you give me any double-talk.
Keets - in my eyes it's only different in the sense that you're chemically expediting the reaction. Couns which are put in Kraft envelopes or Wayte Raymond holders are NOT guaranteed to tone beautifull, if at all - the process will take as long as it needs to in order to get the desired results - if those can be obtained at all. I don't see this as being any different than leaving a silver coin on a table and seeing what happens. In my mind, all you're doing is putting the coin in the conditions that will potentially make it suseptible for toning. The process will still be a natural process and there are no guarantees as to the result. When you take a coin and subject it to specific processes which are designed to give the coin a certain look in an expedited way, then first of all, you have to be damn good to have it come out naturally looking, and even then I would consider the coin altered and would not involve myself with it. In this case, the "potion" this guy is hawking is absolutely deplorable. Can I fault someone for taking a white set of quarters or what have you and stick it in a Wayte Raymond holder to see what happens? I see this as totally different.
Well, if anyone does buy and try, please let us see the results, or better yet, a before and after. For some reason, I wonder if the coin shown actually resulted from this box treatment. Might be NT for all we know. Don't doubt that what he is selling does do something to a silver coin, but who knows if it really works like that?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
As far as a crescent is concerned, wouldn't you just have to lay another same size coin over it, exposing a crescent-shaped portion? Of course, the top one would be totally toned on top, but theoretically would also have a crescent on the bottom. I'm thinking this through too much.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
JMHO..........................the underlying intent in all the various methods is what's at the heart of the wrongness concerning all these "what i consider" attempts at Artificial Toning. we justify our actions by saying that placing a coin in a Wayte Raymond board is a natural form of toning simply because we are absent any control of color pattern and rate of toning, while at the same time we acknowledge that the chemicals in the board are destructive and the boards themselves or anything containing the destructive chemicals are discouraged. perhaps Wayte Raymond boards may have been a form of Natural Toning 50 years ago, but not today---------simply because the hobby has changed and progress has been made in how we think about the toning issue.
out of the other side of our mouths we rationalize that though the intent is the same-----to tone the coin-----when we control the rate of toning and the chemical involved, it's Artificial Toning. wrong is wrong.
<< <i>There's no way that such a devise could tone a coin with a crescent or true rainbow. >>
Gat, I am willing to guarantee that there is a way to do this, and I bet you could do this using things just found around the house. If you don't believe me I can go try it and post results and pics. If I do try it I'll do what they did on ATcoins.com to try and tone it. Just say the word and I will try to get a crescent on a coin
Please download this app to help fight cancer at 0 cost. At no extra cost to you purchases from Amazon and other participating retailers will benefit research!
<< <i>If you don't believe me I can go try it and post results and pics. If I do try it I'll do what they did on ATcoins.com to try and tone it. Just say the word and I will try to get a crescent on a coin >>
Yes, with the famous egg and onion mixture please duplicate a crescent on a Morgan. NOW, I'm sure a crescent can be "Made." Next duplicate one that has defined bands of the right colors and in the right progression that all look like they blend naturally. Looking forward to your experiment!!
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
<< <i>JMHO..........................the underlying intent in all the various methods is what's at the heart of the wrongness concerning all these "what i consider" attempts at Artificial Toning. we justify our actions by saying that placing a coin in a Wayte Raymond board is a natural form of toning simply because we are absent any control of color pattern and rate of toning, while at the same time we acknowledge that the chemicals in the board are destructive and the boards themselves or anything containing the destructive chemicals are discouraged. perhaps Wayte Raymond boards may have been a form of Natural Toning 50 years ago, but not today---------simply because the hobby has changed and progress has been made in how we think about the toning issue. >>
OK Keets - I'll buy your statement - but say for example that I have a raw set of Roosevelt dimes that I want to put in an album - and lo and behold, it's a Whitman folder, and then 10 years later I have some beautifully toned coins? Where do we draw the line between what happens naturally and what's intentionally done to make toning happen? I agree with you that intent to deceive is it should be reprehensible, but some of this stuff is going to happen regardless!
I personnally believe that the vast majority of toned coins out there are purposely made.Some get slabbed and some don't.That's why I won't pay a premium for a toned coin.
but say for example that I have a raw set of Roosevelt dimes that I want to put in an album - and lo and behold, it's a Whitman folder, and then 10 years later I have some beautifully toned coins? Where do we draw the line between what happens naturally and what's intentionally done to make toning happen?
with the state of the hobby today, i don't think it's possible to do anything without being at least cognizant of AT/NT toning issues and what causes toning. as a comparison to your above example, i have three sets in folders; a toned Ike Dollar set, a white BU Silver Eagle set and a set of toned Jefferson Nickels. i chose Intercept Shield folders to stabilize the coins or at least to prevent any further contaminants to affect the surface quality.
putting coins into that Whitman folder as you described: would they be hidden away until June 8th, 2015?? doubtful as you add coins to the folder and/or look at the collection from time to time, what goes through your mind as you notice a change in the coins??
toning on coins is a strange beast. it seems natural and acceptable the older a coin gets, but when a coin is fresh or when it's brilliant---regardless of age---it seems natural and acceptable to strive to keep it that way. i assume that in days past toning was accepted because little was really known by the average collector about the cause and the prevention. in todays light of superior knowledge we manipulate the cause and ignore the prevention and call it NT!!!!!!!! surprisingly, when someone develops a method to hasten the tone or manipulate the pattern, we howl AT. it's all a bit hypocritical and confusing to me.
do some searching of threads for any that mention Wayte Raymond boards or other folders----known to contain sulfer or other chemicals which attacks coins----and you'll find nothing but encouragement and OOOHS/AAAAHS at the results. i'm not saying that's wrong, just wondering why we think one is OK and another not OK when they are essentially the same thing
i'll say it again-----with the state of the hobby today, i don't think it's possible to do anything without being at least cognizant of AT/NT toning issues and what causes toning. putting a coin into an environment with contaminants hoping to cause tone can't be wrong and right at the same time. it's one or the other.
Han toning that occurs over 10 years be called natural toning while toning that occurs over 10 months be called artificial toning? How about 10 weeks? or 10 days?
Is there a time break between natural and artificial toning?
Wow, tough issue. Strong arguments on either side. However, I think altering coins in anyway is wrong. We are only custodians. Toning is all the craze right now, but future generations of collectors may not appreciate the handiwork of the present generation, regardless of how it is achieved.
<< <i>i'll say it again-----with the state of the hobby today, i don't think it's possible to do anything without being at least cognizant of AT/NT toning issues and what causes toning. putting a coin into an environment with contaminants hoping to cause tone can't be wrong and right at the same time. it's one or the other. >>
You're absolutely right Al - you can't get away from the idea that some coins will tone nicely in some ideal conditions. I don't know how you get away from it. On the whole though, in my mind, the right coin, ie: MS64 or better - with booming luster, which has developed a nice blue/red/green/gold/purple patina, that looks right, can't be beat.
I wonder though, if the the bigger stink over toned coins is over the ridiculous prices that COLLECTORS are willing to pay for them, even if they have no clue what it is that they're getting into. Recently Erik (K6AZ) posted a very nice 1886 Morgan in NGC 64*, which was sold on Teletrade for over $1,400. Now I ask - is this, in anyone's mind, justified? I for one would not touch that coin - for anything over $250. But some people are willing. That to me is a personal choice, whether they know something that we don't or they don't know something that we know, only time will tell.
For me, toned coins can be a sight to behold. But there is absolutely no substitute for getting a thorough education on the subject, if you're going to get into them. Sometimes, I see folks post toned coins that are just toned, nothing out of the ordinary, with the excitement of a child at Christmas time. I don't see what the big deal is, but if they're happy, so be it - hopefully with threads like this we'll be able to open some eyes for those who want to have their eyes opened.
to see some really beautiful toned coins at some astonishing prices, take at peek at Anaconda's listing page!!!!!
at last years ANA i was walking with Woodie when he greeted a guy he knew. we both showed him a couple coins we'd bought and his first words were "Why's everybody buying color??" he didn't criticize the coins or the choice, he sort of wondered out loud about the current phenomenon that seems to be all the rage-----color. what strikes me as odd about what's currently happening is that it seems to be the desire of many collectors to replicate chance and ignorance. the toned coins we're all star-struck by are coins which toned mainly because of ignorance; long term storage in chemically reactive bags and paper rolls, delivery by the Mint in chemically reactive packaging, display in chemically reactive albums/holders. now that we've learned what ultimately damaged more coins than created gems, logic should dictate that we'd be trying to preserve coins in true Mint State. instead, many collectors try to achieve an accident/mistake by intentionally placing coins in chemically reactive environments.
the Mint seems to have taken the approach of better packaging, some manufacturers of display products have tried to make inert holders and TPG's utilize protective capsules all in an effort to stabilize and protect coins for the long term. what's wrong with the collectors who try to AT in the ways we've mentioned??
to me, the market grading approach that services take is partly to blame. a sharply struck coin with nice luster and a minimum of marks may grade MS65 with brilliant surfaces. the identical coin with a splash of nice color that appeals to the grader is now MS66!!! please, please, no more attempts to help the coins and no more market grading.
FC57Coins
Posts: 9,140 ✭
Comments
NoEbayAuctionsForNow
keoj
TorinoCobra71
ember Profile: innov8tion (1478Feedback score is 1,000 to 4,999) about me
Feedback Score: 1478
Positive Feedback: 99.5%
Members who left a positive: 1485
Members who left a negative: 8
All positive feedback received: 1682
1712 feedback received by innov8tion (0 mutually withdrawn)
Comment From Date / Time Item #
Neutral feedback rating Disappointed..its a throw away pipet as used by colour matchers in printing
Buyer kadoo4u ( 269Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jan-25-05 08:38 5549269563
Reply by innov8tion: Know nothing about printers equipment , if similar this is just coincidental Jan-25-05 13:36
Neutral feedback rating This product is totally not what I thought it would be, although great ebayer!!!
Buyer frannilini ( 3 )
no longer a registered user Jan-17-05 07:45 5549269563
Reply by innov8tion: ????????????? I wrote a whole page of discription + instructions + picture !! Jan-17-05 13:42
Neutral feedback rating fast delivery but item not as described. disappointed
Buyer bluekim17 ( 36Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jan-16-05 05:48 5547890430
Reply by innov8tion: ????????????? I wrote a whole page of discription + instructions + picture !! Jan-17-05 13:46
Neutral feedback rating Came quickly and was fine, but was poorly packaged and damaged in transit.
Buyer autumnkym ( 89Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jan-13-05 16:18 5548006071
Reply by innov8tion: Newbies .... Please LET THE SELLER KNOW of damage before leaving bad feedback Jan-14-05 03:45
Neutral feedback rating No problems with transac. item poor quality and looks homemade. not worth £5
Buyer blankedidentity ( 124Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jan-13-04 03:06 2973559013
Reply by innov8tion: Injection moulded components made in a real factory not my kitchen !! Jan-15-04 03:56
Negative feedback rating transaction not honoured
Buyer delmoreh ( 228Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-21-03 06:56 2841289713
Reply by innov8tion: Again a July 'send invoice' didnt get through - virus? 1st contact neg again!! Sep-22-03 03:13
Neutral feedback rating It hurt! Good reply from seller tho got refund. It did sound too good.. :-(
Buyer ij_doubledutch ( 109Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-21-03 02:12 2841289713
Negative feedback rating Never recieved it!
Buyer aiden50 ( 49Feedback score is 10 to 49) Sep-14-03 10:47 2332206916
Reply by innov8tion: This NEG is his first contact , I am still waiting for payment to be sent !!!!! Sep-15-03 04:18
Negative feedback rating NO CONTACT
Buyer buiddy ( 233Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-11-03 04:25 2332206916
Reply by innov8tion: A July 'send invoice' didnt get through ,this neg is his first contact !!!!! Sep-14-03 03:26
Neutral feedback rating I like it but wife won't use it now after she said it "burnt" her- a real shame
Buyer ben_dick2000 ( 112Feedback score is 100 to 499) Sep-03-03 03:18 2937815008
Neutral feedback rating Service was good and quick but she didn't like it, seemed to burn
Buyer fosters19 ( 151Feedback score is 100 to 499) Aug-22-03 12:15 2841289713
Neutral feedback rating I still dont have the £3.00 bottle of oil. Wednesday 13th August
Buyer sid007monkey ( 83Feedback score is 50 to 99)
no longer a registered user Aug-13-03 06:42 2937813295
Reply by innov8tion: On holiday so didnt know about non delivery ,sorted now I am back Aug-18-03 10:48
Neutral feedback rating Must be me!! Couldn't get it to work, but had a great laugh trying. Try it !!
Buyer jasper2447 ( 159Feedback score is 100 to 499) Aug-01-03 13:17 2934566407
Neutral feedback rating seems to work,but not as well as hoped
Buyer gazza22 ( 3 ) Jul-30-03 07:47 2940392412
Negative feedback rating Not heard from this person. No product or email. doubt I will use again.
Buyer tab7062 ( 83Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jul-20-03 03:48 2937811496
Reply by innov8tion: No trace of his email (server ?) ,so didnt know PO have messed up again !! Jul-20-03 05:40
Neutral feedback rating ok
Buyer hawkins57 ( 172Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jul-11-03 14:59 2180275662
Neutral feedback rating worked on me ok but the wife ran round the house for 20 mins then fell asleep
Buyer mr-bishhi ( 183Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jul-08-03 01:43 2935944412
Reply by innov8tion: Im sure she did want to be caught really !! & was the sleep pretend? :-) Jul-09-03 01:10
Neutral feedback rating Fast delivery, but not as good as described (it feels more like chilli oil)
Buyer sd505050 ( 21Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jun-25-03 12:25 2935949377
Negative feedback rating DO NOT BUY FROM THIS PERSON. TOOK MY MONEY AND RAN. I NEVER RECIEVED GOODS.
Buyer bwiiian ( 71Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jun-17-03 13:13 2175484911
Reply by innov8tion: had a 'lost in post' ,gave me a redundant emailadress so couldnt makecontact Jun-18-03 14:37
Follow-up by bwiiian: PLEASE IGNORE MY 1ST REMARK. GENUINE MISTAKE. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED EBAYER+++++++++ Jun-20-03 02:50
Negative feedback rating sent promptly, but rubbish
Buyer bradporker ( 32Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jun-16-03 14:48 2175065331
Reply by innov8tion: Purchased May 17 complained to ebay today hasnt bothering to contact me first Jun-17-03 03:08
Neutral feedback rating Its like putting Deep Heat on your privates !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Buyer timothy_lister ( 318Feedback score is 100 to 499) Jun-14-03 13:18 2834212450
Neutral feedback rating Didn't work for us - used as directed, sent very promptly though
Buyer ezman2k2 ( 15Feedback score is 10 to 49) Jun-14-03 04:14 2931897461
Negative feedback rating Product was painful rather than sexualy arousing
Buyer dmp1818 ( 62Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jun-10-03 03:15 2931897461
Reply by innov8tion: Everyone else has read and followed the instructions ok - theres allways one eh! Jun-10-03 05:33
Neutral feedback rating It might be great for some? Great service, recived in good time.
Buyer dan020775 ( 74Feedback score is 50 to 99) Jun-06-03 16:44 2176280218
Reply by innov8tion: Offered full cash refund but refused as doesnt want to return the oil to me ? Jun-09-03 00:31
I for one would not pick out this coin to be artificially toned.
The blue/red/purple color combo is easy to do.
Click on the ATCoins.com link and then look for Experiments and you'll see how easy it really is.
TPN
.....................and here we go with the ol' U.S. Coin Forum double standard again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this is bad, but it's perfectly acceptable for us to put coins in Kraft envelopes that we know contain sulfer, it's perfectly acceptable to buy old Wayte Raymond boards with the hope that they still contain sulfer that will leach onto coins and tone them, it's perfectly acceptable to set a coin exposed to an atmosphere which contains sulfer dioxide and we know will cause tone, it's perfectly acceptable to do any number of things which have been given the U.S. Coin Forum stamp of approval to tone coins........................but this is different?????
why??? please explain to me why this is different than the above mentioned methods of artificially toning coins. but first, please review your intent before you give me any double-talk.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
Frank
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
JMHO..........................the underlying intent in all the various methods is what's at the heart of the wrongness concerning all these "what i consider" attempts at Artificial Toning. we justify our actions by saying that placing a coin in a Wayte Raymond board is a natural form of toning simply because we are absent any control of color pattern and rate of toning, while at the same time we acknowledge that the chemicals in the board are destructive and the boards themselves or anything containing the destructive chemicals are discouraged. perhaps Wayte Raymond boards may have been a form of Natural Toning 50 years ago, but not today---------simply because the hobby has changed and progress has been made in how we think about the toning issue.
out of the other side of our mouths we rationalize that though the intent is the same-----to tone the coin-----when we control the rate of toning and the chemical involved, it's Artificial Toning. wrong is wrong.
<< <i>There's no way that such a devise could tone a coin with a crescent or true rainbow. >>
Gat, I am willing to guarantee that there is a way to do this, and I bet you could do this using things just found around the house. If you don't believe me I can go try it and post results and pics. If I do try it I'll do what they did on ATcoins.com to try and tone it. Just say the word and I will try to get a crescent on a coin
http://my.affinity.is/cancer-research?referral_code=MjI4Nzgz
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>If you don't believe me I can go try it and post results and pics. If I do try it I'll do what they did on ATcoins.com to try and tone it. Just say the word and I will try to get a crescent on a coin >>
Yes, with the famous egg and onion mixture please duplicate a crescent on a Morgan. NOW, I'm sure a crescent can be "Made."
Next duplicate one that has defined bands of the right colors and in the right progression that all look like they blend naturally.
Looking forward to your experiment!!
<< <i>JMHO..........................the underlying intent in all the various methods is what's at the heart of the wrongness concerning all these "what i consider" attempts at Artificial Toning. we justify our actions by saying that placing a coin in a Wayte Raymond board is a natural form of toning simply because we are absent any control of color pattern and rate of toning, while at the same time we acknowledge that the chemicals in the board are destructive and the boards themselves or anything containing the destructive chemicals are discouraged. perhaps Wayte Raymond boards may have been a form of Natural Toning 50 years ago, but not today---------simply because the hobby has changed and progress has been made in how we think about the toning issue. >>
OK Keets - I'll buy your statement - but say for example that I have a raw set of Roosevelt dimes that I want to put in an album - and lo and behold, it's a Whitman folder, and then 10 years later I have some beautifully toned coins? Where do we draw the line between what happens naturally and what's intentionally done to make toning happen? I agree with you that intent to deceive is it should be reprehensible, but some of this stuff is going to happen regardless!
If it were naturally toned, for certain, would you want to own this coin?
If it were artificially toned, for certain, would you want to own this coin?
with the state of the hobby today, i don't think it's possible to do anything without being at least cognizant of AT/NT toning issues and what causes toning. as a comparison to your above example, i have three sets in folders; a toned Ike Dollar set, a white BU Silver Eagle set and a set of toned Jefferson Nickels. i chose Intercept Shield folders to stabilize the coins or at least to prevent any further contaminants to affect the surface quality.
putting coins into that Whitman folder as you described:
would they be hidden away until June 8th, 2015?? doubtful
as you add coins to the folder and/or look at the collection from time to time, what goes through your mind as you notice a change in the coins??
toning on coins is a strange beast. it seems natural and acceptable the older a coin gets, but when a coin is fresh or when it's brilliant---regardless of age---it seems natural and acceptable to strive to keep it that way. i assume that in days past toning was accepted because little was really known by the average collector about the cause and the prevention. in todays light of superior knowledge we manipulate the cause and ignore the prevention and call it NT!!!!!!!! surprisingly, when someone develops a method to hasten the tone or manipulate the pattern, we howl AT. it's all a bit hypocritical and confusing to me.
do some searching of threads for any that mention Wayte Raymond boards or other folders----known to contain sulfer or other chemicals which attacks coins----and you'll find nothing but encouragement and OOOHS/AAAAHS at the results. i'm not saying that's wrong, just wondering why we think one is OK and another not OK when they are essentially the same thing
i'll say it again-----with the state of the hobby today, i don't think it's possible to do anything without being at least cognizant of AT/NT toning issues and what causes toning. putting a coin into an environment with contaminants hoping to cause tone can't be wrong and right at the same time. it's one or the other.
Han toning that occurs over 10 years be called natural toning while toning that occurs over 10 months be called artificial toning? How about 10 weeks? or 10 days?
Is there a time break between natural and artificial toning?
Wow, tough issue. Strong arguments on either side. However, I think altering coins in anyway is wrong. We are only custodians. Toning is all the craze right now, but future generations of collectors may not appreciate the handiwork of the present generation, regardless of how it is achieved.
<< <i>i'll say it again-----with the state of the hobby today, i don't think it's possible to do anything without being at least cognizant of AT/NT toning issues and what causes toning. putting a coin into an environment with contaminants hoping to cause tone can't be wrong and right at the same time. it's one or the other. >>
You're absolutely right Al - you can't get away from the idea that some coins will tone nicely in some ideal conditions. I don't know how you get away from it. On the whole though, in my mind, the right coin, ie: MS64 or better - with booming luster, which has developed a nice blue/red/green/gold/purple patina, that looks right, can't be beat.
I wonder though, if the the bigger stink over toned coins is over the ridiculous prices that COLLECTORS are willing to pay for them, even if they have no clue what it is that they're getting into. Recently Erik (K6AZ) posted a very nice 1886 Morgan in NGC 64*, which was sold on Teletrade for over $1,400. Now I ask - is this, in anyone's mind, justified? I for one would not touch that coin - for anything over $250. But some people are willing. That to me is a personal choice, whether they know something that we don't or they don't know something that we know, only time will tell.
For me, toned coins can be a sight to behold. But there is absolutely no substitute for getting a thorough education on the subject, if you're going to get into them. Sometimes, I see folks post toned coins that are just toned, nothing out of the ordinary, with the excitement of a child at Christmas time. I don't see what the big deal is, but if they're happy, so be it - hopefully with threads like this we'll be able to open some eyes for those who want to have their eyes opened.
Bytheway - good to have you posting again
at last years ANA i was walking with Woodie when he greeted a guy he knew. we both showed him a couple coins we'd bought and his first words were "Why's everybody buying color??" he didn't criticize the coins or the choice, he sort of wondered out loud about the current phenomenon that seems to be all the rage-----color. what strikes me as odd about what's currently happening is that it seems to be the desire of many collectors to replicate chance and ignorance. the toned coins we're all star-struck by are coins which toned mainly because of ignorance; long term storage in chemically reactive bags and paper rolls, delivery by the Mint in chemically reactive packaging, display in chemically reactive albums/holders. now that we've learned what ultimately damaged more coins than created gems, logic should dictate that we'd be trying to preserve coins in true Mint State. instead, many collectors try to achieve an accident/mistake by intentionally placing coins in chemically reactive environments.
the Mint seems to have taken the approach of better packaging, some manufacturers of display products have tried to make inert holders and TPG's utilize protective capsules all in an effort to stabilize and protect coins for the long term. what's wrong with the collectors who try to AT in the ways we've mentioned??
to me, the market grading approach that services take is partly to blame. a sharply struck coin with nice luster and a minimum of marks may grade MS65 with brilliant surfaces. the identical coin with a splash of nice color that appeals to the grader is now MS66!!! please, please, no more attempts to help the coins and no more market grading.
K S
Link