Do you think this Connecticut Commemorative is attractive?

Longacre · August 29, 2006 6:56AM

I can't tell from the pictures. In one way I think it looks attractive, but in another way, I am not so sure. I usually see these blast white, so maybe that is affecting my perception of the coin. How common are these coins with toning? What do you think? Here is the description and the picture:

"Yellow-gold, green and amber toning gravitates to the right half of the obverse and reverse, while the left side has lovely reddish-plum toning"

dizzyfoxx · August 29, 2006 6:58AM

Attractive in the sense of originality-yes Attractive in the sense of nice eye appeal-not so much

Tonedbuff · August 29, 2006 7:00AM

I find the reverse nice for some odd reason. The speckling sort of goes with the tree. The obv though... not a pretty coin design to start with, and splotchy toning does it no good.

mdwoods · August 29, 2006 7:02AM

That's one you would have to see in person.

Mesquite · August 29, 2006 7:02AM

Not at all attractive.

Longacre · August 29, 2006 7:06AM

<< <i>That's one you would have to see in person. >>

True. I could always turn it into a nice rainbow toner if I don't like it.

Connecticoin · August 29, 2006 7:07AM

I don't like it.

I've been trying to find a nice, original, eye appealing Connecticut gem without having to pay a steep premium over greysheet. Have not been sucessful yet, but I have been searching only casually to date. Lots of fugly ones out there.

coinmickey · August 29, 2006 7:10AM

Attractive in the sense of originality-yes Attractive in the sense of nice eye appeal-not so much

The eye appeal is sorely lacking. The CT Commems seem to be quite hard to come by in good condition AND with eye appeal.

123cents · August 29, 2006 7:11AM

Sorry, I don't like it.

notwilight · August 29, 2006 7:13AM

The yellows remind me of fall leaves. Nice choice by the toner...just kidding.

Not into toned coins but you inspired me to go looking for a white one.

thanks,
Jerry

Mark · August 29, 2006 7:16AM

I hate to say it, but I don't like the toning. To me, it looks like several years ago someone seezed on the obverse and the coin is now toning to reflect this. Or perhaps several years ago someone was talking over the coin and unfortunately was simultaneously spitting over the coin...

Mark

airplanenut · August 29, 2006 7:17AM

No idea, there's way too much light washing out that picture...

ColonialCoinUnion · August 29, 2006 7:18AM

No, I don't think its attractive.

BigD5 · August 29, 2006 7:20AM

It's nice and original, whether it's really attractive or not, I'm not so sure.

Connecticut's are tough to find with attractive toning, and when they do show up, they go for BIG numbers.

It's a popular design among Commem collectors and as I mentioned, tough to find with pretty tone.

You won't find an attractively toned example cheap, unless someone makes a mistake.

Vermont's are the same way.

Outhaul · August 29, 2006 7:22AM

Not very attractive, but it certainly is original box toning and quite common for the issue.

pcpro · August 29, 2006 7:24AM

I don't like it

PC

DickyBetz · August 29, 2006 7:24AM

Unnattractive in every sense.

BillJones · August 29, 2006 9:10AM

I don't care for it at all. It's loads of "fly specks," which is the term for black spots on silver. One source of these is saliva which attacked the silver after it has been on the coin for a while. The coin has original surfaces, but I'd rather have a coin that has been properly dipped which still has full luster. I don't find this attractive, but a lot of veteran commemorative collectors do like such coins.

TomB · August 29, 2006 9:16AM

I've seen this coin before in another dealer's inventory, I believe, and it made me look twice to determine what I thought about it. The spotting bothers me, but I think the colors will be more transparent in-hand. However, the plethora of cuts on the eagle's neck and right leg would disqualify the coin from MS65, in my opinion, regardless of other attributes that I might think the coin possesses. It's up to you, but I would pass.

mozin · August 29, 2006 9:21AM

That is one ugly looking Connecticut. It needs a quick dip.

Bear · August 29, 2006 9:22AM

Not my cup of tea.

Steve27 · August 29, 2006 9:23AM

Yuck!

ANACONDA · August 29, 2006 9:26AM

It's attractive to some degree because it's original but it might be more attractive and less original if you dipped it. I'm not sure it would be more attractive, but it might. I'd check with other board members about dipping it.

cape · August 29, 2006 9:43AM

i dont like it at all!

mommam17 · August 29, 2006 9:44AM

For me that coin would have to be in hand to render an opinion about it. I know the big pictures can make a coin look MUCH different than what the coin looks like in hand. I`ve seen big pictures of coins where the bag marks look like craters but in hand they are tiny and not detracting at all. I don`t think those spots would be as distracting as they appear. PLEASE do not dip it.