NT or AT? Updated with pics of coin in hand. BillJones was right.
coinpictures
Posts: 5,345 ✭✭✭
From the description:
...we have a very attractive 1832 Classic Head Half Cent which we grade at an attractive Toned Uncirculated. Long term storage in a forgotten leather wallet created an attractive toning while leaving plenty of luster showing through. It is a surprising coin from one of the lower mintage later date half cent years.
Hype or possibility? Pics are excellent though.
...we have a very attractive 1832 Classic Head Half Cent which we grade at an attractive Toned Uncirculated. Long term storage in a forgotten leather wallet created an attractive toning while leaving plenty of luster showing through. It is a surprising coin from one of the lower mintage later date half cent years.
Hype or possibility? Pics are excellent though.
0
Comments
They are my girl friends grandmothers coins. She has had them since she pulled them from circulation and has stored them in the same small coin purse for the last 50+ years.
I have 4-5 of the Lincolns here and will try to get some pics. All of them toned very close to what this one looks like.
Every coin is different, but it is possible for the colors you are seeing to be NT.
Lance.
<< <i>I'm also guessing PCGS will BB it.
Lance. >>
Yeah, that's the real issue, isn't it? It doesn't matter what it is or is not, but how PCGS will perceive it.
Even if it doesn't holder, I like the eye appeal (assuming it actually looks like that in hand), as I have an affinity for toned coins, especially toned copper.
For what amounts to 60BN Greysheet and with a 7-day return privilege, I felt it worth taking a flyer on.
We'll see.
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
1879-O{Rev}: 1st coin of my "secret set"
I know that is often the prevailing sentiment, but bottomline a coin is either NT or it's not. On the rare occasions when PCGS slabs an AT coin, usually the coin is eventually maligned by collectors anyways. I don't want to own AT coins in PCGS slabs, just because they made it into PCGS slabs. As for this one, I'm definitely thinking NT, but it may be too colorful for its own good in the eyes of PCGS.
AJ
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
on toned coins as of late, Good Luck.
The only NT old copper I've seen with purple had an even colored chocolate brown gradually turning to a dark purple. I had PCGS slab one of them 10 years ago when I crossed it from NGC. I normally run from light purple on 19th century business strike type, and would not buy this coin based on the image displayed.
That being said, I've seen a much greater variety of color combos re 19th Century PF vs. business strikes, due to the tissue in which the former were stored.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
That may be true, but pretty much meaningless until everyone works under the same definitions of NT & AT.
As for the coin, I love it and would not feel bad at all having it in my collection. I really don't care how any TPG feels about coins with color like this, this month or next month, since their opinions on the matter seem to change fairly regularly anyway.
My opinion is that this one is NT.
Indeed - this is an across the board observation with no one particular Name, in mind.
Makes us all really start to wonder - eh?
Consistancy - consistancy - consistancy ..... very much needed.
Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>Is it for sale?
AJ >>
I won it the other night; it's en route.
At some point within the last week I've seen pictures of another classic head half cent with virtually the same type of coloring in an NGC or PCGS holder, but I'll be darned if I can remember where it was. It's bugging me now... darnit!
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
The coin has been cleaned and it has retoned. The closest you have to this "NT but clenaed and retoned." It should read "AT cleaned and retoned."
Early copper does not tone like this from the original red. Some people might like this look, but it's not natural and will get a body bag for sure. And to top it off, it's got some wear so it's not Unc.
Here's an Unc. half cent from the same period. The picture is not quite in focus (sorry), but you can see that this coin has more detail.
<< <i>My guess was cleaned and retoned, but a very nice coin indeed. >>
I know that you are trying to be nice, treeman, but we really need to educate collectors and advise them about copper coins that look like this. I’m not saying that coins like this are worthless, but when they are marketed as “Mint State” and sold at Mint State prices, that’s a problem.
<< <i>
<< <i>My guess was cleaned and retoned, but a very nice coin indeed. >>
I know that you are trying to be nice, treeman, but we really need to educate collectors and advise them about copper coins that look like this. I�m not saying that coins like this are worthless, but when they are marketed as �Mint State� and sold at Mint State prices, that�s a problem. >>
Conversely, you think the coin is a POS, which is fine. We all have our opinions (hence my posting the thread to begin with, to solicit opinions). It may very well be that once I have it in hand, I will think it's a POS too. However, it caught my eye as unusual and didn't break the bank, so curiosity won the day.
It's no different than all the discussions that take place here on toned morgans, and which of them are AT versus NT versus "market-acceptable" AT. Everyone has their opinions and their aesthetics. You are certainly entitled to state that you don't think the coin is worth the price paid, and the market may (or may not) agree with you. Once I get the coin in hand I may (1) agree that it is a POS and it will go back as quick as I can send it, or (2) I think it may have a chance to holder (I have seen copper with color similar to this in holders; I just can't find the dang links at the moment) or (3) I may see that there's no way it will ever holder, but despite that it may have enough eye appeal (to me) that I may decide to keep it anyway.
I have several morgan dollars in ANACS net holders for questionable color, that I purchased as such, simply because I thought they were neat. I posit that there is nothing wrong with that.
It is what it is. Possibly/probably won't holder, but I thought it unusual enough to take a chance. Some people like their coins to fall within strict boundaries with respect to color and surfaces, whereas others lean towards the more unusual. I have a fondness for unusually-toned coins. See the two links below; it's what I enjoy. Is it everyone's cup of tea? Hell no.
P.S. At $185 it's really only AU money anyway, so it's not like I paid a huge premium for it. If it looks anything like the pictures at all, I'll be quite pleased with it at the price paid regardless of whether it ever holders or not.
My morgan toners: www.cheapmorgandollars.com
My Canadian toners: www.canadiantoners.com
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
<< <i>I bet the coin is significantly darker than the image would imply. >>
My thought as well, and in fact I hope that is the case.
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
The only thing I will say is that the tolerances for toning for copper coins is far different that it is for Morgan Dollars. SOME Morgan Dollars can be dipped and then tone and people will think that they’re beautiful. That’s not the case with copper.
With copper, at least 9 times out of ten if not more, when you dip it you are headed for disaster. I’ve handed a lot of R&B copper because that’s what I prefer. None of those coins looked like this piece. I also once bought and sold a full Red common date Classic Head half cent from the 1830s that was in an MS-65 holder. I sold that coin for over $8,000 more than ten years ago. And yes true full red copper with no spots of that age is rare.
The price of $185.00 should be a tip off to you. True Mint State 1832 half cents, with some original red surfaces, sell for more than double that. Heck true brown Unc. half cents sell for more than that. Most dealers avoid selling their coins for under wholesale, especially on line.
I hope this works out for you, but I think it’s going to be headed back to the seller.
<< <i>From the description:
...we have a very attractive 1832 Classic Head Half Cent which we grade at an attractive Toned Uncirculated. Long term storage in a forgotten leather wallet created an attractive toning while leaving plenty of luster showing through. It is a surprising coin from one of the lower mintage later date half cent years.
Hype or possibility? Pics are excellent though.
You have an 1832 Half Cent Cohen-2 upper leaf under E, unusual spacing & lettering in "STATES"
All 1832 had the same obv die, with 3 rev dies. This is an R-1, common in all grades except for uncirculated
mint red. Most were a dull brown.
Although common these are not as available as you would think. It took me awhile to find one.
Here is an AU-55 in a PCGS holder for grade comparison.
I don't think your coin will look like the image you posted. Mark is right that the coin will be darker. One can't
tell if it is NT, or AT with that image IMHO.
It sounds like you paid the going price for an AU coin and I agree with your statements that if you like the coin
keep it. Who should care but you! Enjoy it for what it is.
R.I.P. Bear
<< <i>I'm sorry that you feel like shooting the messenger for not telling you what you what to hear. Next time I'll won't respond. >>
???
Where did that come from? I was simply responding with clarification and explanation. I didn't take what you said as confrontational, nor was I "shooting the messenger" (at least I don't think I was). Can we not have a discussion about and/or difference of opinion on the coin? Why does everything have to be in black and white?
P.S. I appreciate your replies, really I do.
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
I know that is often the prevailing sentiment, but bottomline a coin is either NT or it's not. On the rare occasions when PCGS slabs an AT coin, usually the coin is eventually maligned by collectors anyways. I don't want to own AT coins in PCGS slabs, just because they made it into PCGS slabs. As for this one, I'm definitely thinking NT, but it may be too colorful for its own good in the eyes of PCGS.
"... but bottomline a coin is either NT or it's not. "
That may be true, but pretty much meaningless until everyone works under the same definitions of NT & AT.
But since that will never happen, each of us needs to become as educated as possible regarding toning. Nobody's going to be perfect 100% of the time in picking out NT versus AT.....but it sure helps to look at thousands upon thousands of toners across many types over many years to get a feel for what's what.
No matter what the coin looks great, don't get too hung up on the 'need' to have the PCGS place your coin in a holder. The PCGS is most likely going to be very tight and conservative when it comes to the possibility of the coin being AT. I would guess they'd bag it just to err on the side of caution.
The great thing about EAC grading is that it won't consign a problem coin like this to the body bag dustbin. Collectors and dealers will put a net grade on it. The problem is that net grade will be pretty severe if the coin looks like the photo.
My goal is not to determine if PCGS will grade this coin or not. The important thing to me is to educate collectors about factors that cause a coin to lose a lot of its value. It's hard to read posts about how beautiful this coin is when experienced collectors known darn well that it's been doctored. At best the photo has been doctored. Collectors should get to know as much as they can about doctoring.
<< <i>The great thing about EAC grading is that it won't consign a problem coin like this to the body bag dustbin. Collectors and dealers will put a net grade on it. The problem is that net grade will be pretty severe if the coin looks like the photo. >>
... in EAC circles, yes, which we all know the grading is quite conservative compared to other standards to begin with, so I would expect a harsh net grade. Then again, if as you claim, EAC collectors are as narrowly constrained with respect to originality and/or color acceptability, I doubt any EAC collectors would ever be interested in this piece anyway, so the point is somewhat moot.
Different audiences will perceive the same coins differently. I have seen dipped out dead coins here on the board that people go ga-ga over, that I find as repugnant as you find this coin. Yet somehow their dipped-stripped pieces are perceived as acceptable. Is one any better or worse than the other?
<< <i>My goal is not to determine if PCGS will grade this coin or not. The important thing to me is to educate collectors about factors that cause a coin to lose a lot of its value. It's hard to read posts about how beautiful this coin is when experienced collectors known darn well that it's been doctored. At best the photo has been doctored. Collectors should get to know as much as they can about doctoring. >>
You are wanting everyone to obey the same set of criteria and aesthetics that you subscribe to. The problem with that, is that while you may be 100% absolutely technically correct about the piece, and that it may have been monkeyed with, and from a strict EAC standpoint the coin may be an unreserved piece of crap, that doesn't mean that someone may not find the end result attractive and have redeeming aesthetic characteristics.
We've all seen coins of all types that sell for more than their technical grade (in many cases much more) because someone finds some aspect of that coin appealing. It's often baffling to many people why a certain coin sells for what it does, when the consensus deems otherwise.
You state:
<< <i>It's hard to read posts about how beautiful this coin is when experienced collectors known darn well that it's been doctored. >>
But even if a coin has been doctored, can it not also be beautiful? Must the two aspects be mutually exclusive? From a strictly conservative perspective, yes, but from an aesthetic perspective why?
Are not love tokens defaced coins? If so, then how can some find them beautiful? Same with enameled coins. Some would argue that colorized coins are attractive, yet they are defaced/damaged coins.
There are technical grades and then there is eye appeal, and while ideally you have a piece that is tops on both aspects, there are technical dogs that look wonderful, and pop tops that I wouldn't spend a plugged nickel on.
At any rate, I agree with you that there may be some additional artifice at play in the image manipulation (at the very least the lighting). I will post pics once I receive the coin. It may look completely different.
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
<< <i>The coin looks great and does have a bit of non-normal toning, such toning is usually caused by being stored in an old wallet or purse for a long time, perhaps sitting on velvet in a draw, etc. Typically, that type of colorful toning is not very deep into the coin but it sits more on top of the surface. Unfortunately, the "on top of the surface" type of toning is also what you get from intentional artificial toning.
No matter what the coin looks great, don't get too hung up on the 'need' to have the PCGS place your coin in a holder. The PCGS is most likely going to be very tight and conservative when it comes to the possibility of the coin being AT. I would guess they'd bag it just to err on the side of caution. >>
This is what I meant with the red, "sitting" on the surface. It is very pretty.
I think one should have a good idea of what is and what is not original. That being said, you buy what you like. While I wasn't interested in a number of 'pretty' CBHs which were slabbed, others couldn't spend enough money to get them.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>My guess was cleaned and retoned, but a very nice coin indeed. >>
As I said above, I believe the coin was cleaned and retoned. I also think it is a nice coin, and it would look great in a Dansco. Then again, I am of the opinion that the TPGs, and a lot of collectors, are too tough on gently cleaned coins (or dipped copper" that have retoned. I also believe that most coins were cleaned, brushed, dipped, or whatever, at some time in their existance. I have an easier time believing in the Easter Bunny, than I do believing in a lot of these "original" Morgan toners. Maybe I'm just cynical... Anyway, my main point is, experienced or not, I like the coin, the TPGs may not...
<< <i>I hope this works out for you, but I think it�s going to be headed back to the seller. >>
Give BillJones a cigar! (several actually).
I received the coin today. Someone took what was a very nice coin and forked with it. There are aspects of the coin I really like - the stars are fully struck and the coin has a lot of lustre. However, it is definitely a technical AU, not UNC as touted, there are some scrapes/scratches in the reverse fields, and the toning, while vibrant, comes off as very AT in hand.
Back she goes.
Oh well, no harm done. Pics are below. Please bear with me, as I'm shooting through the original flip (I have to leave it in the holder in order to return it).
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
Different opinions develop even more so when judging by photos.
The colors on that copper are similar to the wild toning that has come to be accepted as NT on silver. Another reply suggested a coin is either NT or AT. To me there is not such a sharp distinction between AT and NT. A coin stored in a vacuum should not tone. Coins stored other ways will tarnish. They can be cleaned (AT!), dipped (AT!) stored in cardboard (AT!) or stored in US Mint packaging (AT!). Or maybe we consider coins stored in US Mint packaging or Canvas Bank Bags NT, but only if stored there just because and not because someone put the coin in that packaging to obtain the "NT" look...
Old copper doesn't normally look like that. Seasoned collectors like LeeG prefer a more chocolate look for their early copper. True some proofs were stored in tissue paper but those had a different color, wild, but different. Anyway there is no doubt this coin is a business strike.
I find the coin interesting. Please PM me if I can use photos posted here on my website.