Options
A great coin to help teach us about natural monster toning - updated
coinguy1
Posts: 13,484 ✭✭✭
This coin was originally mentioned by baccaruda in another thread, yesterday. I asked him if he minded if I started another thread about it (I didn't want to hijack his thread) and he was extremely accommodating.
As soon as I saw the images, I realized that we were being presented with a wonderful opportunity to study ORIGINAL monster color. In this particular example, the pictures vividly and clearly tell us, what is often so difficult to put into words.
For purposes of this thread, I will define "original" toning as unintended toning, the type of which can occur when coins are in original mint bags, etc. I believe that this coin's color is the result of it having been stored in a mint sewn bag.
I have no doubt that there are a good number of forum members who know considerably more about chemistry, coin storage and toning patterns than I do. It is my hope that they will contribute here.
In the mean time, here are my very brief comments about this coin, that I posted to the original thread:
This coin serves as an absolutely fabulous visual example / lesson of one way to assess originality of toning / color.
See how the colors blend together, gradually and unevenly in some areas, as if an artist (a real artist, not a coin doctor!) had painted them on there, but delicately lightened the shades, along the way, as he did so.
The bands of color are not clearly defined or uniformly distinct in all areas, as would more likely be the case with artificial / enhanced color. Sometimes it is difficult to explain the concept, but this coin does it on its own.
Edited to add : Beneath the image of the coin is a link to its Ebay listing, where you can view larger images.
Link to the Ebay listing for larger images
As soon as I saw the images, I realized that we were being presented with a wonderful opportunity to study ORIGINAL monster color. In this particular example, the pictures vividly and clearly tell us, what is often so difficult to put into words.
For purposes of this thread, I will define "original" toning as unintended toning, the type of which can occur when coins are in original mint bags, etc. I believe that this coin's color is the result of it having been stored in a mint sewn bag.
I have no doubt that there are a good number of forum members who know considerably more about chemistry, coin storage and toning patterns than I do. It is my hope that they will contribute here.
In the mean time, here are my very brief comments about this coin, that I posted to the original thread:
This coin serves as an absolutely fabulous visual example / lesson of one way to assess originality of toning / color.
See how the colors blend together, gradually and unevenly in some areas, as if an artist (a real artist, not a coin doctor!) had painted them on there, but delicately lightened the shades, along the way, as he did so.
The bands of color are not clearly defined or uniformly distinct in all areas, as would more likely be the case with artificial / enhanced color. Sometimes it is difficult to explain the concept, but this coin does it on its own.
Edited to add : Beneath the image of the coin is a link to its Ebay listing, where you can view larger images.
Link to the Ebay listing for larger images
0
Comments
Truly, a beautiful coin. I'm guessing an 1884O so there will be some nice luster there as well.
I'm thinking hit marks=MS64 but the toning has to bring it up. Would MS-65 be fair to say?
designset
Treasury Seals Type Set
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
63? you've got to be kidding me!
designset
Treasury Seals Type Set
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
I've yet to see an AT coin capture this.
if i could exhibit a lab-created coin that accurately simulated the characteristics that you described, as depicted by that coin, what would your reaction be?
(not trying to stir up the old "a-t" argument again, just looking for gut-reaction)
K S
to educate the Forum , as to natural vrs artificial toning.We all need to have our minds refreashed
on this topic periodically. Bear
Camelot
To me this is like a foul in basketball, or holding in football....
If the refs don't call it, it isn't a foul.
So if you can get an AT coin past one of the reputable services, then for all intent and purpose, it isn't AT
"France said this week they need more evidence to convince them Saddam is a threat. Yeah, last time France asked for more evidence it came rollin thru Paris with a German Flag on it." -Dave Letterman
it is why i think there should be instant-replay in slabing of coins. timeouts, too.
K S
btw, not saying i have such a coin to exhibit, but i'm working on it. it's an enjoyable challenge
You don't know how hard it is to sell my very best toned Morgans.....yes, yes, i know what you're thinking......"they wouldn't be so hard to sell, Crane, if you lowered the price....." That's not what i mean. What i mean is that some of them may be overpriced but the very best are not easy to come by. Take that ANACS turquoise monster i have for sale at like 2750. I have seen exactly one of those offered for sale. That one. I have seen several others, in Andy Kimmel's personal collection. I paid around 2k for the coin and i make 750 before ebay fees. Yes, i'll make 750 if and when it sells but i'll remember that coin for years. So, you ask yourself, "why don't you just keep it, doomkuf?" And the answer is, once you start keeping things, where do you draw the line? Before long, you call yourself a dealer but the truth is you aren't. I know I'm rambling a little but I'm according that luxury to myself....again (!). So, if you have really, really cool Morgans (i have plenty that are just cool....those are common....but really really cool ones aren't) OFFER THEM TO ME!
GSAguy showed me a coin that was in a cellophane wrapper and put there, i'm pretty sure, by our US government. It had cool toning with a thread impression that would have probably been put there by the seam of the canvas bag. Isn't it nice that our government didn't clean the morgans before putting them into holders?
GSAguy also had a placard that was used by some entities (banks?) to promote the sale of CC dollars, i believe, or maybe it was the release of the morgans by our government last century.
adrian
alright i'm gonna be the troublemaker here.
many people compare "natural tone" to "AT" with their points of reference being original toned pieces. but how do you know that the "original toned pieces" you are referencing are actually original? is there a set of scientific diagnostics used to distinguish natural toning?
i had a 1997 SAE tone while in my possession. it was blast white when i bought it and eventually the obverse was fully rainbowed except for liberty's head. i know it was original but i've seen SAEs like it called A.T. on the forum. are there rules or only opinions?
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
mark has posted the ebay link above.
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
<< <i>many people compare "natural tone" to "AT" with their points of reference being original toned pieces. but how do you know that the "original toned pieces" you are referencing are actually original? >>
another brilliant question (see how valuable coinguy1 is?) that underscores the problem beautifully. DEFINE characteristics before asking questions about the characterstics.
baccaruda, i've proposed my def'n before for this:
natural toning: toning that occurs when a coin is in it's intended environment. all other toning is "artificial".
<< <i>is there a set of scientific diagnostics used to distinguish natural toning? >>
using my simple def'n, there would be.
<< <i>i had a 1997 SAE tone while in my possession. it was blast white when i bought it and eventually the obverse was fully rainbowed except for liberty's head. i know it was original but i've seen SAEs like it called A.T. on the forum. are there rules or only opinions? >>
was the SAE in it's intended holder? if so, then the tone was natural. if however, you stored the coin in the exhaust pipe of your volkswagen rabbit (clearly NOT the intended environment), then the toning was artificial (whether you put it there w/ the intention to tone it or not)
K S
again, very subjective.
that half roll of 1997s was my first official coin purchase. after 6 months or so in a wood box some started to turn splotchy gold. then i saw that you weren't supposed to keep coins on or in wood. so i took them out and stacked them on a shelf in my library on top of an old tapestry. they only got worse. then i saw that cloth or textiles were a no-no too. so now i was trying to blueprint an atmosphere-free vacuum i could suspend these coins in.
anyway i got into other areas of coins, lost interest in them and gave up on trying to keep them white. a couple years later i looked at them for the first time and 1 was a rainbow, the rest were kinda nasty.
while still in my learning stages early last year someone told me you could "dip" the tarnish off, so i practiced on the others and eventually the rainbow. yes, i'm an idiot
what seems like improper storage to you made perfect sense to me at the time.
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
I hate it when you see my post before I can edit the spelling.
Always looking for nice type coins
my local dealer
For example, I picked this coin up in Houston for a song from a guy named Texas Bullion Traders:
Morgan for a Song
Some of the diagnostics that I will be talking about are typical, but certainly not totally determinant of whether a coin is naturally toned or not. I guess they apply to about 80-90 percent of toned coins, but I'm sure, as with ANACONDA's example above, they are not totally inclusive of all toned coins. As I looked at this piece, and actually looked at the oversized picture of it, here is what I saw:
1. The color looks right. When I started having an interest in toned Morgans I made the same rookie mistakes that a lot of people make. I fell for the wild weird colors and assumed that they were right. After being “healed” by such good people as Tonelover and GSAGUY, I began to understand the importance of looking for colors that you normally see in these type coins. As NWCS mentioned the scheme of yellow->magenta->cyan->yellow->magenta->green is a scheme that occurs in many of these rainbow toned coins. This is cited in the toning video (which anyone interested in these type coins should see) and if you look at enough of these coins at shows or through pictures, you begin to realize the importance knowing which colors occur naturally, and which colors send up red flags. You also don't see the patterns that remind you of what I call a "dried lake" that is liquid that has evaporated and left toning in it's wake, leading one to think that a coin has been potentially treated with chemicals.
2. As you look the coin over you notice also that the toning is different over the E PLURIBUS UNUM and over the date as opposed to inside the letters and inside the date (particularly noticeable inside the 8’s). This is a good tell-tale diagnostic for determining whether a coin is AT or not.
3. If you look at the letters of the word LIBERTY which are incused, you notice again that the letters are one color and the surrounding field is another color
4. The wheat shafts and cotton bolls show one color, surrounded by a totally different color which gives them an almost halo-type glow.
5. The toning does not extend over the rims and if you look at the denticles, particularly at 2 O’clock and 4 O’clock, you see that the toning actually seeps in between the denticles, while the denticles themselves are a different color. On some pieces you can actually see the color crawl up the sides of the denticles and not cover the tops of them.
Again, these are some diagnostics that will give you a good idea of what to look for, but by all means are not all inclusive, and there will be exceptions.
Frank
Good addition to Mark's post. One thing you said got me thinking--and this is a little off topic--but, you mention learning from GSAguy and Tonelover about toning on Morgans... I just started thinking how much influence key individuals in certain series can have on the perception and acceptability of certain coins. GSAguy is becoming an acknowledged and sought out expert about toning on Morgans. Other dealers like Kline with SLQ's, Snow with the Indian cents, Tomaska with modern proofs, have developed reputations of such that their word and preferences can greatly influence a series.
I guess my point here is it's remarkable to me, the impact that individuals can have on numismatics. How a certain person can come along and greatly influence how a series of coins or attribute of a coin (such as toning) is accepted by the collecting community. These people create a ripple effect, and with their efforts they reach people, who in turn reach more people and on and on.
I have been thinking a lot lately about "The Numismatic Ripple Effect." Because I see it in action on this forum all the time. For good and bad--knowledge and negativity. Goodwill and discontent. But, I digress. I think my ultimate point is I am impressed with how much one person can do within their field. How much one person can contribute in areas that ultimately affect us all.
Clankeye
<< <i>natural toning: toning that occurs when a coin is in it's intended environment. all other toning is "artificial". >>
Karl:
What is a coin's intended environment? Coin bag, coin roll, coin cabinet, coin album, an envelope, the bottom of a sock drawer or a cash register? Let's face it (and I do know what your intention here is) coins wind up everywhere. However, when someone sets out to purposely expose or add certain "agents" to the coin in order to get a desired look in less time than the chemical reaction would normally take, then you're talking artificial.
Before you get revved up for a "no it's not-yes it is" argument, let me just say that I respect your opinion, but don't accept it.
Frank
Pat - ditto!
dorkkarl - you asked :
<< <i>if i could exhibit a lab-created coin that accurately simulated the characteristics that you described, as depicted by that coin, what would your reaction be? >>
Show me such a coin and I'll be happy to show you my reaction.
baccaruda - you asked ;
<< <i>many people compare "natural tone" to "AT" with their points of reference being original toned pieces. but how do you know that the "original toned pieces" you are referencing are actually original? is there a set of scientific diagnostics used to distinguish natural toning? >>
That is a great question (even if dorkkarl agrees
MainMoose - for the record, that is not my coin!
Frank - great comments. I have a confession, everyone - I asked Frank if he would post, because I was confident he would make this a better thread. I think I was right.
Clankeye - you raised an interesting and important point about the influence that various individuals can have on our hobby. Think about the subtle (or not) effect that a grading finalizer might have on various designations such as FB dimes, FH quarters, FBL halves, DSL dollars (ok, forget about the DSL dollars - just checking to see if people are paying attention
Certain well respected numismatists can definitely help set or influence standards by which coins are judged or evaluated. It might make for a fun thread sometime, for forum members to nominate those who they think qualify for that status.
CG
<< <i>was the SAE in it's intended holder? ... that half roll of 1997s was my first official coin purchase. after 6 months or so in a wood box some started to turn splotchy gold. then i saw that you weren't supposed to keep coins on or in wood. so i took them out and stacked them on a shelf in my library on top of an old tapestry. they only got worse. then i saw that cloth or textiles were a no-no too. so now i was trying to blueprint an atmosphere-free vacuum i could suspend these coins in. >>
let me word the question in a different, maybe rhetorical manner: what storage mechanism was intended by the manufacturer of the SAE?
my little def'n doesn't rely on "proper" or "improper" storage, but just where the coin was meant to be stored.
<< <i>What is a coin's intended environment? Coin bag, coin roll, coin cabinet, coin album, an envelope, the bottom of a sock drawer or a cash register? >>
hey fc57, sounds like your asking me to be more specific in my def'n. "intended environment" (for coins) would be where the manufacturer intended the coins to reside. for example, modern proof coins are intended to reside in their plastic encasements, so by my def'n, any toning acquired as a result of that would be "natural" toning.
<< <i> Let's face it (and I do know what your intention here is) coins wind up everywhere. >>
i have absolutely no ulterior motives in trying to come up w/ a def'n. but i am proposing that other who are interested in the topic kindly spell out their definitions!!!
i have never claimed my def'n to be THE RIGHT one, but when the question is asked: "is this a-t", i gotta believe that a meaningful answer just can't occur until the term is defined!
<< <i>However, when someone sets out to purposely expose or add certain "agents" to the coin in order to get a desired look in less time than the chemical reaction would normally take, then you're talking artificial. >>
my def'n would agree
<< <i>Before you get revved up for a "no it's not-yes it is" argument, let me just say that I respect your opinion, but don't accept it. >>
i appreciate that, but it would really, really help me out to have some useful discourse, like you've done. what do i need to change about my def'n to be more in line w/ what you see?
K S
well, since the SAE was never meant to circulate one could argue those little white and green tubes are their home. i wouldn't say that however, since my coins invariably enjoy much daylight and are constantly getting much attention.
alright - easy for the SAE. but what about circulating coins that have no intended environment. what if i left a morgan dollar in the pocket of an old pair of pants for 50 years? i would definitely define a pocket as a coin's intended environment.
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
Randy
Clearly Mark is trying to teach us how to identify a bag toned dollar and to help us diffentiate bag toned coins from doctored coins meant to appear bag toned, to the extent that that can be done.
I think it would be nice if Mark could do a follow up thread showing album or tissue toned coins from old collections with a discussion of the character traits to look for to distinguish them from those altered by chemical applications or other doctor tricks.
If some of you think that the distinction is with out merit, or that there is no such thing as "AT" or "original" or whatever, so be it. But kindly spare us the same harrange every time the issue of toning comes up.
CG
This is a great thread. I usually don't respond in these because I don't know dick about toning, so I have nothing to offer, but I do read every one. Each time I read one, I'm .00000001% closer to understanding, so if you live for another 100 years or so, I might be halfway there.
Thanks.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i><< << Let's face it (and I do know what your intention here is) coins wind up everywhere. >>
<< However, when someone sets out to purposely expose or add certain "agents" to the coin in order to get a desired look in less time than the chemical reaction would normally take, then you're talking artificial. >>
<< Before you get revved up for a "no it's not-yes it is" argument, let me just say that I respect your opinion, but don't accept it. >>
. >> >>
Karl:
With regard to intent - I meant to say that I've seen your posts, and I know that your definition, at least for silver coins is that their natural tone tendency is to go from silver to brown to black. You're right, that happens sometimes, but not always, as witnessed by the various colors available. On the last part of the quote - it's not that I don't want to argue - I love to argue a topic, but I don't want it to seem like a "you're right, I'm wrong" diatribe. I think you have your opinions, and they're well founded. But I feel that your definition is too narrow for the scope that we're discussing. Silver, depending on what it's exposed to, can turn any number of colors, why? Well - actually - the silver itself doesn't turn colors, the oxydation that's created on top of it bends the light differently, based on what agents the coin has been exposed to. If sulfur is involved, you have a tendency to develop different color hues from browns to reds to yellows to blues. Can these hues be considered artificial in some definitions? Sure, but that definition, by it's mere content would then have to include brown or black as well, since these colors too are the cause of a chemical reaction that is foreign to the metal itself.
Frank
<< <i>Here are two coins. One is a presumably AT coin from another current thread, worth melt value if AT, the other is presumably album toned and sold for $1,000. Would the AT coin have looked like the $1,000 coin if the doctor called it quits after applying the rim tone? >>
That's the beauty of toning. I don't believe it can be controlled in the lab, hence the doctor would not have been able to "call it quits" at a certain point - though I would be interested to see other points of view on this.
Frank
what if, instead of asking the question
"is this a-t?"
i propose that a better question might be
"is this toning market-acceptable?"
i guess that my problem is, i think that "market-acceptable toning" does not equal "natural toning".
there is no question in my mind that some coins have been intentionally toned through artificial means, & subsequently slabbed, making them "market acceptable". (i don't have a problem w/ that, because plenty of rare coins are only available w/ problems). but that also means that sometimes, an a-t coin IS market acceptable.
so what i'm trying to say is that when someone asks "is this coin a-t", aren't they really asking whether the toning is market-acceptable or not?
that's why i'm trying to come up with a def'n that admits that some coins with artificially-applied toning are nonetheless market-accpeptable, & therefore slab-able.
K S
<< <i> guess that my problem is, i think that "market-acceptable toning" does not equal "natural toning". >>
I agree wholeheartedly with you on this point. However, I think your endeavor to create a definition to exclude artificially toned coins from market acceptability is almost impossible, as it seems that the coin doctoring business has been elevated to heights where it's almost impossible at times to tell the difference between NT and AT. I see this as a subject akin to smoking or drinking... these things are going to happen, and only by informing as many people as possible about what's AT and what's not will market acceptability narrow it's acceptance to coins that are not naturally toned. I think we're chasing our tails on this one Karl - I think you're a sophisticated enough collector to know that as soon as anyone can define what's market acceptable - someone will come up with a better way to tone coins.
Frank
<< <i>as soon as anyone can define what's market acceptable - someone will come up with a better way to tone coins. >>
sage advice, fc57. you are w/out a doubt, 100% correct.
K S
interesting. similar to lab-created gems? they can create an emerald in a laboratory with the same exact characteristics as a real one - only without the flaws. people don't seem to care. they sell for as much as the real thing.
me personally, i'd never buy a man-made gem, but many would. translating this back into coins, if you can simulate the exact characteristics of natural toning artificially, why is there such an uproar about AT?
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
<< <i>me personally, i'd never buy a man-made gem, but many would. translating this back into coins, if you can simulate the exact characteristics of natural toning artificially, why is there such an uproar about AT? >>
Because you really can't Barracuda. If you look at a blowup of the coin in Mark's original post, you will see all sorts of intricacies. How do you get toning between the denticles around the coin, but not on them? How do you get one color around the wheat shafts and cotton bolls, and another color on them? how do you flow color in such a way that it ebbs and flows naturally in an unplanned fashion. Anyone can grow mushrooms, but no one can grow truffles. Think of naturally toned coins as truffles - there may be substitutes, and there may be mushrooms that "look" like truffles, and to the unitiated these could infact be the real thing, but once you start appreciating the real thiing, then it becomes more evident.
I would hope that the grading services realize the potential damage that artificially toned coins can pose to their business, and begin publishing material in earnest to educate collectors on this subject.
Frank
it was more of a hypothetical question - assuming that it could be done. i'm not suggesting that it can, but what if it could be done?
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
Some claim it can be done, while others say it can't. I'm with Frank on this one, though talk of mushrooms sort of spoils the wonderful visual image I had of that beautifully toned dollar!
Yes, there are some coins in NGC and PCGS holders that have been helped along by coin doctors. But in my opinion, the numbers and quality of the "worK" are not nearly what many would have us believe.
If people could replicate the type and look of the toning / color that appears on the coin that led to this thread, you would see many, many more of them that looked like that, floating around. If that happened, values / prices would decline. I don't see it happening though.
Anyway, here's a thought - NGC gives coins a star...
There are different classifications out there like DMPL, PL, Cameo, etc.
Why not consider giving only certain "monster coins" that deserve it - a classification worthy of their status. I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
Superior Toning and Toned.
Only those coins that are truly acceptable as "monsters" would qualify as the superior toned ones. Everything else would receive the secondary "toned" classification - if you want to pay a premium for these - it's on you - but only the "superior toned" pieces would get the attention they deserve. In this way, anything that falls short of being actually acknowledged as such, would get second billing, and then perhaps the market would not react so radically to what might or might not be... Just a thought.
Frank
Frank
this also assumes it can be done cheaply. it may be possible but not cost-effective.
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
as some of you know, i am experimenting w/ duplication of the so-called "monster" tone. so far, i have gotten some "very nice" tone, but what i've discovered is that for every "nicely toned" coin, 8 (approx) coins come out awful. AND, they don't take well to re-dipping.
however, friends, i am utterly convinced that so-called "monster toning" CAN be duplicated in the lab.
btw, the morgans i'm using are common-date low-grade unc's that were already dipped. i've culled them from dealer stock over the past several months.
when i get something worth showing, i will either break-down for a scanner or digi-cam, or i'll get a buddy to get images.
K S
These coins, the dollars anyway, came from bags. We used to see a lot of them in the 60s and 70s as U.S. Treasury bags and other bag hoards were broken up and dispersed. In the 80s, these monster tone coins became much scarcer. Now they are really hard to find. If the doctors could do it, they would be easier to find.
I believe most of the dimes, quarters, an halves come from old mint set holders (the cardboard ones) or old coin albums. In 1961, there was a coin shop in downtown Santa Ana. The dealer had a Roosevelt dime set in a Whitman deluxe album that he kept in his window facing the Sun. After a few years, every coin in the set looked like Mark's dollar!
The point is time and enviroment create these coins and every doctor's attempt to speed up the process leaves something to be desired. The AT coins just don't match the real deal.
David Hall
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
<< <i>Dont throw your money away! >>
A direct quote from Wallstreetman's mother when he told her he was considering college.
Carl