Monster Toned Proof Franklin Half-Opinions Please

Wisconsin

I have had this old franklin proof half sitting around for awhile and was wondering what you think. I believe it to be original toning. What is your opinion on the toning and what it might grade???

Russ

Looks like a failed attempt to duplicate album toning.

Russ, NCNE

Wisconsin

Failed attempt, must mean it is at???

Russ

<< <i>Failed attempt, must mean it is at??? >>



Yes. The blue color is way off. The reverse actually looks pretty close to legit, but the obverse looks helped.

Russ, NCNE

AZCoinDevil

LincolnCentMan

Sorry dude, looks AT to me.

David

BobaFett72

did you burn that thing with an acetylene torch?

oldcameoproofsguy

I agree, it looks like a BB to me too.

tsacch

doesnt look to bad to me, but then again, what do I know? the spots of missing color kinda concerned me.

Whizzard

I'd say AT too, but its hard to appreciate color from your pics.

majorbigtime

<< <i>Looks like a failed attempt to duplicate album toning.

Russ, NCNE >>




O'mgosh, I agree w/Russ on this monster!

ABC123

Beautiful AT = BB

jmj3esq

Looks like a cooked AT to me, too.

Windycity

Looks like what PCGS calls environmental damage. Many proofs from 1960-1963 show dirty, heavy "toning" and a few are attractive. PCGS will BB everytime. Here's a similar example which I cut from an original proof set.... gorgeous coin, boby bagged!

BobaFett72

now, thats a pretty coin

greghansen

The first coin I don't find remotely attractive, and I would call it AT all day long. The second coin just two posts up from this is very attractive and I would like it in an album of colored Frankies.

rainbowroosie

An excellent AT -- would fool many...