Home U.S. Coin Forum

I Do Dare Call This a Monster Toner

QCCoinGuyQCCoinGuy Posts: 335 ✭✭✭✭
edited August 6, 2019 8:09AM in U.S. Coin Forum

This was in a 20 year old ICCS holder, graded MS64 (that's the Canadian tpg). Will be sending this to our hosts in the near future.

Comments

  • ashelandasheland Posts: 23,765 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭

    think it has a monster fingerprint right on the cheek.

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Not a coin I would purchase... might go 63 at our hosts... Good luck and let us know.... Cheers, RickO

  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 24,701 ✭✭✭✭✭

    One sided toner ... strike one. Fingerprint in prime focal area ... strike two. Common date ... strike three.

    All glory is fleeting.
  • airplanenutairplanenut Posts: 22,390 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Pretty, yes. Monster, no.

    @ricko said:
    Not a coin I would purchase... might go 63 at our hosts... Good luck and let us know.... Cheers, RickO

    Might go 63? Unless something's really hidden in those photos, that's an easy 64/65.

    JK Coin Photography - eBay Consignments | High Quality Photos | LOW Prices | 20% of Consignment Proceeds Go to Pancreatic Cancer Research
  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @airplanenut ....You could be right Jeremy... between the mark on the neck, splotchy tarnish and what look like marks on the reverse, I could be judging it harshly.... Not my type of coin... Cheers, RickO

  • ElmerFusterpuckElmerFusterpuck Posts: 4,801 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That's a nice coin, but no monster. While two-sided toners are desirable, there is nothing wrong with a one sided one. The money side is the obverse, so that helps there.

  • DollarAfterDollarDollarAfterDollar Posts: 3,215 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Without the print it's a "mini-monster". Not Godzilla but not bad either. Clean cheek and left field tell me it gets at least MS 65 here. ATS it' likely gets a star.

    If you do what you always did, you get what you always got.
  • QCCoinGuyQCCoinGuy Posts: 335 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 7, 2019 9:05AM
  • airplanenutairplanenut Posts: 22,390 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ricko said:
    @airplanenut ....You could be right Jeremy... between the mark on the neck, splotchy tarnish and what look like marks on the reverse, I could be judging it harshly.... Not my type of coin... Cheers, RickO

    That's a minor mark on the neck, not to mention it's blown up in a big photo. And 65s have marks. To say it may be a 63 is to say it's a 62 with an upside. This coin isn't anywhere close to being as baggy and/or lifeless as a 62 would be.

    I know you don't like toning, but it's ridiculous to denigrate color beyond preference. This isn't splotchy toning. It's colorful, bright, and has smooth transitions. If you don't like toning, fine, it's not for you, but once we've established the coin is toned, the toning doesn't get worse just because it exists. I'm not a fan of most white coins that have been dipped, but there's a big difference between one that remains lustrous and has eye appeal versus one that's overdipped and flat. I can express a preference for a coin that isn't white, but just because a coin is white doesn't mean I'm going to say it's an overdipped piece of junk.

    JK Coin Photography - eBay Consignments | High Quality Photos | LOW Prices | 20% of Consignment Proceeds Go to Pancreatic Cancer Research

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file