That is one beautifully awesome peace $ but the pic doesn't do it justice if it is a true 66
I agree. It is a very difficult coin to image. You really need to see the coin in-hand to relate to what those of us who have seen it are talking about. The luster is not booming on the obverse while the reverse has a satiny rolling luster that gives the color "pop". The patination is thicker in the central obverse area which kind of makes it look darker in the image.
Years ago before the grading services started using the cameo designaitons, they woulld add points for cameo coins. They failed to note that a non-cameo coin could have higher Proof grade. Then they came up with cameo and ultra comeo.
Maybe someone will develop a code name for toning color, but it will be tough. There are a lot of variations in toning.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<<< When you grade something MS-66, you get a lot more critical. I’m looking at this as if it were a white coin. Toning should not raise the grade. >>>
Incorrect, and a naive remark. Toning can absolutely raise the grade of a coin (and often does). Attractive or unattractive toning is all part of the eye appeal equation which factors in strongly on the grade, especially on higher grade MS coins.
Many novice graders will often times look at a piece with either superb color or dazzling lustre or eye appeal and pick out tiny little flaws which can usually easily be overlooked at a given grade on the coin as a whole, even a very high grade.
To illustrate my above point, look at the finest known PCGS graded 1923-S Peace dollar graded MS67 (a monster coin). I've held that coin and that piece has truly exceptional color and eye appeal, and a way above average strike for the date, but also has a few stray insignificant marks under the toning.
I've been grading coins for long time (35+ years, which does not count the first 10 years I was collector as a YN), I'll match my expertise with you any time you like.
Here's a quote you will like a lot less that is paraphased from a dealer I knew years ago.
"It has $3,000 toning on a $100 coin."
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<< When you grade something MS-66, you get a lot more critical. I’m looking at this as if it were a white coin. Toning should not raise the grade. >>
Incorrect, and a naive remark. Toning can absolutely raise the grade of a coin (and often does).
Dragon, the fact that toning often DOES "raise the grade" doesn't mean that it SHOULD raise the grade. People people have differing legitimate views on that subject. Bill used the word "should", whereas you used the word "does". You might very well both be right.
IMO, the toning on a coin (either positive or negative) plays a huge factor into the coins overall eye appeal just as superb original flashy lustre or a great strike can. Although always subjective, a coins overall "look" is a very important aspect of the grade to many experienced people.
It's been my experience that a fabulous eye appealing overall looking coin will always win out over an 'absolute mark free' unremarkable looking one of the same grade. I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade.
As far as the remark: "It has $3,000 toning on a $100 coin." that really makes no sense to me, just as saying something like: "that's an MS68 coin except for the poor lustre"
<< <i>That is one beautifully awesome peace $ but the pic doesn't do it justice if it is a true 66
I agree. It is a very difficult coin to image. You really need to see the coin in-hand to relate to what those of us who have seen it are talking about. The luster is not booming on the obverse while the reverse has a satiny rolling luster that gives the color "pop". The patination is thicker in the central obverse area which kind of makes it look darker in the image. >>
Nice coin.
But the patina is NOT technically 'thicker' in the central obverse. It's thinner actually than on the rest of the coin, but absorbs the other colors that our eye's are more sensitive to (like the light near the yellow regions) and reflects the darker blue that our eye's see when looking at the coin.
It's not more thickly toned but just more 'darkly' toned
If the toning film actually got "thicker", that region would actually 'brighten' up and be more visable and reflective like the other yellow or red regions of the coin. Ironic but true.
<< <i>I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade. >>
I agree that is one frequently seen mistake. But, I also believe that it is an equally big mistake to overlook poor technical quality and focus too much on great color, or eye-appeal. That probably occurs just as often and can be dangerous for buyers.
<< <i>As far as the remark: "It has $3,000 toning on a $100 coin." that really makes no sense to me, just as saying something like: "that's an MS68 coin except for the poor lustre" >>
I happen to love the look of the coin in this thread, but haven't examined it in person, so I wont comment on its technical quality. However, with respect to other coins - I've seen plenty of $100 coins with $3000 color. Take for example the MS65 common date Morgan Dollars that have fantastic color and sell for $2000 to $5000. They fit the (pun intended) bill perfectly, regarding what Bill said.
I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade.
I agree! Conversely, a mistake often made by the same newbies is to elevate a relatively mark free specimen with inadequate mint bloom to gem.
Me, too, especially when I do not know my behind from second base. I will say that I would have taken Stman's commentary very seriously. I once mistakenly purchased an AT'ed Peace dollar, and he was able to spot it and give the NGC serial number from the picture I posted.
This could get real embarrassing.
Yes, a lot of respected folks went down the tubes on this one. Alas, it is only a coin, no lives were lost, and everyone learned a valuable lesson (I think).
I suspect that there are several of us who have seen the work of TONECOIN2004/GOTOTONING in person who immediately thought this coin was AT.
I also was lucky enough to receive an email response from GOTOTONING last year to my toning queries. I got the impression that he is a student on the West Coast and he sells toned coins to supplement his income. Frankly, GOTOTONING struck me as a pretty nice guy who just happens to like coin dabbling.
From what I can see, the ebay seller of the raw coin hasn't done anything fraudulent (although he has ruined common coins, from a numismatic standpoint). It seems that he would be in the same catagory as a coin colorizer or even a hobo nickel carver.
Now, if someone takes his "work" and sells it as something it is not, that may be a different matter.
Yes, a huge part of this thread has been intentionally erased to cover up and protect.... well, whatever.
Note that there is a 6 hour time lapse from when TDN commented on the coin and when Bear posted the next comment. Also note how the tone of the thread changed from Bear's comment going forward.
<< <i>Wednesday February 15, 2006 4:14 PM
I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade.
I agree! Conversely, a mistake often made by the same newbies is to elevate a relatively mark free specimen with inadequate mint bloom to gem.
-------------------------
Trade Dollar Website
Gobrecht, Seated, Trade Dollar Q&A
Reply Quote Top Bottom Edit
Bear Wise Old Bear
Posts: 32268 Joined: Dec 2001 Wednesday February 15, 2006 10:34 PM
Boy, am I glad I didnt comment.
This could get real embarrassing.
------------------------- There once was a place called Camelot
Didn't this coin get picked up at a show from a dealer that bought it from a walk in. The walk in had the envelope story. Someone walks it to NGC with the envelope story. They buy the story, slab it high with a *. This thread gets posted, a forum member says they saw this on e-bay from a known AT guy. NGC settles with Brandon or whoever to get it out of the slab all with in a week or two?
Didn't this coin get picked up at a show from a dealer that bought it from a walk in. The walk in had the envelope story. Someone walks it to NGC with the envelope story. They buy the story, slab it high with a *. This thread gets posted, a forum member says they saw this on e-bay from a known AT guy. NGC settles with Brandon or whoever to get it out of the slab all with in a week or two? >>
Yeah, that's the essence. But someone here (Russ? I don't recall) linked the images from the ebay sale, when the coin wasn't toned like above. It passes through at least one other set of hands before Anaconda bought it, IIRC. Anaconda stated thaht they'd give us the full story, but they never revealed who the dealer was who Ated the coin, not gave a reason for not revealing the name-at least that I saw. And I looked.
edited to say-I'm wrong. I forgot the deatails in this thread ARC did tell us that they don't know the name of the dealer. It was Ken Park, the dealer who sold the coin to ARC, who claimed not to recall the name of "the small bay area dealer" who sold him this peace dollar in a 2x2, at the same show where Mr Park submitted the coin to NGC and recieved a 66*. Relevant detains are on page 7 (as I have my settings) dated 8/31/06, morning posts timed starting at 7:30am.
Nah, I wouldn't remember who sold me that coin raw, which has such a commonplace appearance, such a commonplace story and which recieved a 66* at the same coin show where I bought it.
<< <i>Yes, a huge part of this thread has been intentionally erased to cover up and protect.... well, whatever.
Note that there is a 6 hour time lapse from when TDN commented on the coin and when Bear posted the next comment. Also note how the tone of the thread changed from Bear's comment going forward.
<< <i>Wednesday February 15, 2006 4:14 PM
I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade.
I agree! Conversely, a mistake often made by the same newbies is to elevate a relatively mark free specimen with inadequate mint bloom to gem.
-------------------------
Trade Dollar Website
Gobrecht, Seated, Trade Dollar Q&A
Reply Quote Top Bottom Edit
Bear Wise Old Bear
Posts: 32268 Joined: Dec 2001 Wednesday February 15, 2006 10:34 PM
Boy, am I glad I didnt comment.
This could get real embarrassing.
------------------------- There once was a place called Camelot
>>
>>
Interesting. Why would PCGS edit a thread about an NGC goof?
<< <i>Beautiful coin that could be a platform for discussion.
Braddick, you are a master of understatement >>
I remember when I saw it during the transaction in question in Long Beach. Whoever (I think greattoning) did the coin did an awesome job. Other than the abnormality of a Peace dollar being toned up that way, the coin was truly beautiful - I suppose that NGC agreed
Comments
take the leap of faith, that I had some idea
what I was talking about. Since I dont...I wont.
Camelot
I agree. It is a very difficult coin to image. You really need to see the coin in-hand to relate to what those of us who have seen it are talking about. The luster is not booming on the obverse while the reverse has a satiny rolling luster that gives the color "pop". The patination is thicker in the central obverse area which kind of makes it look darker in the image.
<< <i>Holy shlt! >>
Pious poop! Toning happens.
Maybe someone will develop a code name for toning color, but it will be tough. There are a lot of variations in toning.
Great point! There already kinda is an unofficial grading system for color.
A, B, and C.
Incorrect, and a naive remark. Toning can absolutely raise the grade of a coin (and often does). Attractive or unattractive toning is all part of the eye appeal equation which factors in strongly on the grade, especially on higher grade MS coins.
Many novice graders will often times look at a piece with either superb color or dazzling lustre or eye appeal and pick out tiny little flaws which can usually easily be overlooked at a given grade on the coin as a whole, even a very high grade.
I've been grading coins for long time (35+ years, which does not count the first 10 years I was collector as a YN), I'll match my expertise with you any time you like.
Here's a quote you will like a lot less that is paraphased from a dealer I knew years ago.
"It has $3,000 toning on a $100 coin."
(adrian)
Incorrect, and a naive remark. Toning can absolutely raise the grade of a coin (and often does).
Dragon, the fact that toning often DOES "raise the grade" doesn't mean that it SHOULD raise the grade. People people have differing legitimate views on that subject. Bill used the word "should", whereas you used the word "does". You might very well both be right.
IMO, the toning on a coin (either positive or negative) plays a huge factor into the coins overall eye appeal just as superb original flashy lustre or a great strike can. Although always subjective, a coins overall "look" is a very important aspect of the grade to many experienced people.
It's been my experience that a fabulous eye appealing overall looking coin will always win out over an 'absolute mark free' unremarkable looking one of the same grade. I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade.
As far as the remark: "It has $3,000 toning on a $100 coin." that really makes no sense to me, just as saying something like: "that's an MS68 coin except for the poor lustre"
<< <i>That is one beautifully awesome peace $ but the pic doesn't do it justice if it is a true 66
I agree. It is a very difficult coin to image. You really need to see the coin in-hand to relate to what those of us who have seen it are talking about. The luster is not booming on the obverse while the reverse has a satiny rolling luster that gives the color "pop". The patination is thicker in the central obverse area which kind of makes it look darker in the image. >>
Nice coin.
But the patina is NOT technically 'thicker' in the central obverse. It's thinner actually than on the rest of the coin, but absorbs the other colors that our eye's are more sensitive to (like the light near the yellow regions) and reflects the darker blue that our eye's see when looking at the coin.
It's not more thickly toned but just more 'darkly' toned
If the toning film actually got "thicker", that region would actually 'brighten' up and be more visable and reflective like the other yellow or red regions of the coin. Ironic but true.
Just wanted to correct this misperception.
Rob
<< <i>I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade. >>
I agree that is one frequently seen mistake. But, I also believe that it is an equally big mistake to overlook poor technical quality and focus too much on great color, or eye-appeal. That probably occurs just as often and can be dangerous for buyers.
<< <i>As far as the remark: "It has $3,000 toning on a $100 coin." that really makes no sense to me, just as saying something like: "that's an MS68 coin except for the poor lustre" >>
I happen to love the look of the coin in this thread, but haven't examined it in person, so I wont comment on its technical quality. However, with respect to other coins - I've seen plenty of $100 coins with $3000 color. Take for example the MS65 common date Morgan Dollars that have fantastic color and sell for $2000 to $5000. They fit the (pun intended) bill perfectly, regarding what Bill said.
I agree! Conversely, a mistake often made by the same newbies is to elevate a relatively mark free specimen with inadequate mint bloom to gem.
This could get real embarrassing.
Camelot
Me, too, especially when I do not know my behind from second base. I will say that I would have taken Stman's commentary very seriously. I once mistakenly purchased an AT'ed Peace dollar, and he was able to spot it and give the NGC serial number from the picture I posted.
This could get real embarrassing.
Yes, a lot of respected folks went down the tubes on this one. Alas, it is only a coin, no lives were lost, and everyone learned a valuable lesson (I think).
JamesSFM - POST OF THE MONTH!
Wondercoin
<< <i>Boy, am I glad I didnt comment.
This could get real embarrassing. >>
Hey do you have any morgan dollars with that jelly donut color?
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>Or... was this the original thread that started it all? Boy, on this forum, if you miss a day, you miss a lot. >>
Not really and you'll actually be a lot more productive by missing what you think you'll miss but actually won't!
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
...................
I also was lucky enough to receive an email response from GOTOTONING last year to my toning queries. I got the impression that he is a student on the West Coast and he sells toned coins to supplement his income. Frankly, GOTOTONING struck me as a pretty nice guy who just happens to like coin dabbling.
Now, if someone takes his "work" and sells it as something it is not, that may be a different matter.
Braddick, you are a master of understatement
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>Dear Mr. Feld,
Please quit pissing in their Cheerios.
Sincerely, >>
I miss thiggy
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
-Paull
Note that there is a 6 hour time lapse from when TDN commented on the coin and when Bear posted the next comment. Also note how the tone of the thread changed from Bear's comment going forward.
<< <i>Wednesday February 15, 2006 4:14 PM
I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade.
I agree! Conversely, a mistake often made by the same newbies is to elevate a relatively mark free specimen with inadequate mint bloom to gem.
-------------------------
Trade Dollar Website
Gobrecht, Seated, Trade Dollar Q&A
Reply Quote Top Bottom Edit
Bear
Wise Old Bear
Posts: 32268
Joined: Dec 2001
Wednesday February 15, 2006 10:34 PM
Boy, am I glad I didnt comment.
This could get real embarrassing.
-------------------------
There once was a place called
Camelot
>>
PCGS, ANACS, & NGC Certified Coins on My Website.
<< <i>Where is the freakin coin. Did it go poof!! Can see it, must be on a different page. >>
Here you go.
<< <i>
<< <i>Where is the freakin coin. Did it go poof!! Can see it, must be on a different page. >>
Here you go.
That's quite a toner...
Didn't this coin get picked up at a show from a dealer that bought it from a walk in. The walk in had the envelope story. Someone walks it to NGC with the envelope story. They buy the story, slab it high with a *. This thread gets posted, a forum member says they saw this on e-bay from a known AT guy. NGC settles with Brandon or whoever to get it out of the slab all with in a week or two?
<< <i>If that is the coin I think I remember now.
Didn't this coin get picked up at a show from a dealer that bought it from a walk in. The walk in had the envelope story. Someone walks it to NGC with the envelope story. They buy the story, slab it high with a *. This thread gets posted, a forum member says they saw this on e-bay from a known AT guy. NGC settles with Brandon or whoever to get it out of the slab all with in a week or two? >>
Yeah, that's the essence. But someone here (Russ? I don't recall) linked the images from the ebay sale, when the coin wasn't toned like above. It passes through at least one other set of hands before Anaconda bought it, IIRC. Anaconda stated thaht they'd give us the full story, but they never revealed who the dealer was who Ated the coin, not gave a reason for not revealing the name-at least that I saw. And I looked.
edited to say-I'm wrong. I forgot the deatails in this thread ARC did tell us that they don't know the name of the dealer. It was Ken Park, the dealer who sold the coin to ARC, who claimed not to recall the name of "the small bay area dealer" who sold him this peace dollar in a 2x2, at the same show where Mr Park submitted the coin to NGC and recieved a 66*. Relevant detains are on page 7 (as I have my settings) dated 8/31/06, morning posts timed starting at 7:30am.
Nah, I wouldn't remember who sold me that coin raw, which has such a commonplace appearance, such a commonplace story and which recieved a 66* at the same coin show where I bought it.
My apology to ARC.
Don
<< <i>Yes, a huge part of this thread has been intentionally erased to cover up and protect.... well, whatever.
Note that there is a 6 hour time lapse from when TDN commented on the coin and when Bear posted the next comment. Also note how the tone of the thread changed from Bear's comment going forward.
<< <i>Wednesday February 15, 2006 4:14 PM
I also believe the one biggest mistake made by newbie graders is ignoring the overall look and appeal of a given coin and just focusing on the tiny little imperfections and marks when assigning a grade.
I agree! Conversely, a mistake often made by the same newbies is to elevate a relatively mark free specimen with inadequate mint bloom to gem.
-------------------------
Trade Dollar Website
Gobrecht, Seated, Trade Dollar Q&A
Reply Quote Top Bottom Edit
Bear
Wise Old Bear
Posts: 32268
Joined: Dec 2001
Wednesday February 15, 2006 10:34 PM
Boy, am I glad I didnt comment.
This could get real embarrassing.
-------------------------
There once was a place called
Camelot
>>
>>
Interesting. Why would PCGS edit a thread about an NGC goof?
<< <i>Beautiful coin that could be a platform for discussion.
Braddick, you are a master of understatement
I remember when I saw it during the transaction in question in Long Beach. Whoever (I think greattoning) did the coin did an awesome job. Other than the abnormality of a Peace dollar being toned up that way, the coin was truly beautiful - I suppose that NGC agreed
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>I saw it in person at LB also [post slabbing] - however, I thought it was anything but beautiful. >>
The difference between beer and champagne tastes
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>The difference between beer and champagne tastes
I was thinking more like the difference between having a beer and having a beer too many.
<< <i>
<< <i>I saw it in person at LB also [post slabbing] - however, I thought it was anything but beautiful. >>
The difference between beer and champagne tastes
Either that or the difference between real blue toning and crayola blue toning.
<< <i>100 >>
You were squatting on that, weren't you?