Options
So, what is different about these three coins?
lablover
Posts: 3,731 ✭✭✭✭✭
I'm curious what you guy's say about the three below coins, without looking up the Cert's. So, what if different between them? One is different. Edited to remove the word "proof".
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers
2
Comments
Easy - the '64 is Denver (mint state), the other two are proof.
Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]
You are correct, but it was my mistake to say "three proofs". The word proof has been removed. There is something other than mint vs. proof.
@lablover no problem was fun and they are beautiful coins!
Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]
Two are 1961 and the other is 1964.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
True, but that's not it...
Yes, but which one is graded AT, i.e.: Quest. Color - UNC Details?
The 3rd one.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Correct! But why? The colors and pattern are very similar. It's been through grading multiple times without success. The cent, nickel, dime and quarter from the 1961 set all graded, and the dime/quarter had the same type toning.
The certificate numbers.
I'm not going to make any comments about NT or AT because I believe there is a difference between scientific fact on what constitutes chemical reactions, in this case oxidation, and the dogmatic numismatic quarrels over the vague, unscientific terms, NT and AT. Anybody can be a dogmatist, but not everybody is a scientist.
If you don't know its history you don't know the coin. Me
Are all 3 artificially toned or natural?
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
There was a great thread here a year or so ago on 'mapping' tone colors.
I can't put it into words but the third one just looks more 'man made' than the other two.
Perhaps it is the appearance of more 'well defined' lines of separation between the colors, more like the rainbow produced with a prism. In the end without more well defined scientific analysis it seems subjective.
Just my uneducated opinion.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
having coins in hand is also better than pictures- even though they may look very similar, the AT colors 'float' over the coin more.
Sunnywood's great 2009 thread:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/716279/a-color-chart-for-the-thin-film-color-progression/p1
The first two are graded MS65 and MS64. The third one is "Quest. Color". Based on images alone #2 would appear to be the most AT'd of the three. The overall light pink color, to me, is not natural. #1 and #3 coin are the most similar in regard to color and the circle rainbow toning. So, if #1 grades and #2, why would #3 not? I own #3 and can say the color progression is natural and the color is not etched into the surface. Well, for whatever it's worth that is my opinion. We're going to try the fellows ATS and see what happens.
Thanks all for the comments and thoughts!!!!!
They all look AT to me
Jumped out to me that the toning is too target looking. Yeah, there will be some like that, due to being in holders and such, but with the vibrant colors on the obv/rev like that and it being so, almost perfectly, target toned, likely set the grader off on it.
Were all 3 sent in on the same submission? If so, I'm surprised, by the pics, that the other 2 graded.....
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I have been saying it here for over a year. The grading room is putting straight grades on too much AT material. Ruining the market. You cannot depend on them getting it right. IMO, all three are AT.
I do not know about others, but I would be very happy to own (or even just hold in my hand) one, two or all three of these coins, raw of course. AT or NT? For modest priced coins like these, who cares?
As far as I know, except for #3 which I own, the others are not related.
Just my opinion, and I do not begrudge others opinions.............but I do not like any of these three.
Again, just my own tastes.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Below are the other coins from the same 1961 proof set. Each graded, except for the Half. I owned all of the coins. Not all were submitted at the same time. Just thought you'd like to see the entire set.
Lablover, Did you get any pics of the cellophane containing all of the coins before they were sent off for grading? This is something I have been doing and will continue to do in the future.
No, guess I should have...duh!!!
3 was my choice for AT, #2 was iffy AT and #1 was maybe AT
What do I know.
I have no answer>
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Was the cello intact when you got it. No punctures or slits?
Bought the set from a dealer I trust, he said it was totally original. I have no reason to doubt him. I've done business with him for years. As honest as they come.
I'm not trying to be difficult, but was the cellophane compromised? The reason I ask, is that there was another thread during the holidays where it was determined that the cellophane did have pinholes created in each coin section.
They all look "questionable" to me, the Kennedy especially so. The first Franklin in the most MA of the three.
To my knowledge no. I asked the same questions and the dealer said he acquired the set with others and no holes, etc. were in the cello.
I'm probably too jaded at this point with the whole AT/NT deal, but you realize that the Frankie was graded a year or two later than the Washington based on the cert #'s ?? Even the Lincoln and Jefferson are not close to the Roosie and Washington. If I had found a killer set like this in original cello, I would have sent them all in at once. Wouldn't you?
@bolivarshagnasty
What you say makes some cents [sense].
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
For some strange reason, 1961 sets seem to tone more weirdly than other years from the same era.
I have seen several 61 sets that had a bright pumpkin orange/sunshine yellow hue, as well as some reddish/magenta blue ones.
The Franklins from those sets I had slabbed and they straight graded several years ago, as well as a bright "Great Pumpkin" Roosie which I sold.
But the banded color coins I have not seen.
Doesn't mean they're AT of course, but if the graders see something out of the ordinary, they're much more likely to not straight grade it.
Coins like that are always a crap shoot. Break em out and resubmit... you'll get different results. All are QT. Maybe real ...maybe not.
Judging from a TruView is difficult especially for proofs. PCGS does a decent job, but getting both color and luster is exceedingly difficult for monster toned coins. My proof quarter set demonstrates this. If you matched up some coins with the photos, you would likely have different opinions as to the colors. I now own the dime pictured above. In hand, there is absolutely no question as to its originality. The colors dance on the surface. As for the three above halves, I'd be most concerned about the Kennedy. The pink/green flow and the splotchy brown on the left rim concern me. I would not buy it unless it looks different in hand. As for Jim's half, I know the history. However, just from this TruView, I'd be suspicious. As pictured, it resembles toning produced by a current seller on eBay, who offers hundreds of similar looking coins (must have been stored in the same very large holder). I empathize with Jim since I've had several monster toned NT coins rejected by the grading services, when I knew their origin and had personally removed them from their original holders...when you want truly great toning, you pay your money and take your chances. :'(
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
Great comments, excellent thoughts and some very good takeaways.
Thanks to one and all!!!!!
@lablover
If you like them, that is all that matters in this life.
That is what COLLECTING is all about.
Obtain, collect, save and enjoy the things that you enjoy !
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
There was an ebay seller many years ago that had a seemingly endless supply of coins of all dates with this toning pattern.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Not sure why the 3rd coin is AT and the others are not... but perhaps the small spot/stain on the reverse near the eagle gave the graders a reason/excuse to call that one AT???
Pretty coins in any case!
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 700