Mini hoard of EOR toners pics inside

FreddieH

Just picked these up
Theyre all 1963 P roosie end of rollers from the midwest. I didnt pick up the last one since it was just a crusty black.
They are more neon and vibrant in hand not pastel like the photos show.
Hope you guys enjoy

milkcoin

lol..

magikbilly

Hello,

Hmm. Well, a lot of coins I have seen that look like that are either in a pile of stuff near a dirty laundry machine with half dried soap nearby, or are deliberate AT. Others might have different opinions/experience.

Best wishes,
Eric

Edited to add: I would suggest looking at the threads here about color and also searching through various websites and making notes, mental or otherwise, about color and so on. If you can get to a coin show by you and look around that would be better - nothing like in the hand. A young collector ought to look more than acquire IMHO. In short - you will save money.

FreddieH

Another for the night crowd.

magikbilly

Hello Freddie,

have you compared this look to other EOR toners?

Best wishes,
Eric

LanceNewmanOCC

.
the appear as authentic dimes to me, the toning however...questionable
.

halfhunter

<< <i>.
the appear as authentic dimes to me, the toning however...questionable
. >>



I was thinking the same thing, but really hate being the bearer of bad news . . .

HH

Rampage

I tend to agree with the previous comments. If these were true eond of roll toners, then the side not facing the outside would be white, not toned as these. The dimes do look to be uncirculated, but the toning is definitely questionable in my opinion.

ColonelJessup

NT.. thoughts about AT discount the established fact that there CAN be seepage from the chemicals in the wrapper that affects both sides of the coins and/or multiple coins in the roll. Certain 1939-D 10c's (all from two rolls found in PA) have amazing color that often bled onto the reverse. Even without reverse toning, how else would so many coins from the same roll(s) have such amazing color?. Consider the tightness of the wrapper, lack of uniformity of various wrappers and varying environmental factors involved.

And, considering the value of the coins involved, why would anyone bother to use any AT process on them?

djdilliodon

I'm willing to bet the coins look different in hand. I think this is a perfect case of poor imaging so calling them AT/NT from those pics is just a pure guess. People AT low value coins all the time for either practice or profit. A 1963 dime in ms66 with monster color will sell for much more than one without.

Jcarney

<< <i>NT.. thoughts about AT discount the established fact the there CAN be seepage from the chemicals in the wrapper that affects both sides of the coins and/or multiple coins in the roll. Certain 1939-D 10c's (all from two rolls found in PA) have amazing color that often bled onto the reverse. Even without reverse toning, how else would so many coins from the same roll(s) have such amazing color?. Consider the tightness of the wrapper, lack of uniformity of various wrappers and varying environmental factors involved.

And, considering the value of the coins involved, why would anyone bother to use any AT process on them? >>



Practice.

tlbrown

Although not for me, I believe these are NT in some pretty unfavorable environmental conditions.

jmski52

NT.. thoughts about AT discount the established fact the there CAN be seepage from the chemicals in the wrapper that affects both sides of the coins and/or multiple coins in the roll. Certain 1939-D 10c's (all from two rolls found in PA) have amazing color that often bled onto the reverse. Even without reverse toning, how else would so many coins from the same roll(s) have such amazing color?. Consider the tightness of the wrapper, lack of uniformity of various wrappers and varying environmental factors involved.

And, considering the value of the coins involved, why would anyone bother to use any AT process on them?



I bought a roll of 1964-D Kennedys with toning on both sides of every coin due to "less than archival" storage conditions. I still have 16 of them, and PCGS has certified all 4 of the ones I submitted to them, and another of the ones that I sold to a forum member.

I also have a bunch of original rolls of 1958-P and 1959-P Roosies with vibrant toning on the end coins. Those colors are entirely correct and possible.

AUandAG

You indicate they look different in hand. How about better, more accurate, pics?


bob

jmski52

How about better, more accurate, pics?





I'm guessing that his coins look lots better than his initial pics.

GMan

Don't like the colors. Here is a Roosie that I have with NT. While there are some blues and pinks, they're much more subdued.



Also and EOR Lincoln where you can see the reverse has stayed bright red while the obverse has some interesting colors.



I think these are examples of NT and NT EOR toners.

ColonelJessup

<< <i>... Practice. >>



As toning results vary based on series and even dates within a series, considering Roosies, why bother? Anyone risking doing this, even after good results on the same date, with a 67FB coin?

renomedphys

Just because most things are a certain way doesn't mean all things are that way.

CJ -