How can you tell whether this is Natural vs AT?
Matt04
Posts: 604 ✭✭✭✭
Recently, I've been looking into/studying the different forms of toning shown in higher grade example Washington Quarters. In contrast to Morgan's I would say the signs of natural vs AT are abit tougher as you don't usually see what they call "pull-back" toning. Obviously there are tones that you know are either Natural or ones too good to be true that seem very obviously AT.
I believe more commonly seen on Washington Quarters are target type tones or Roll toning etc.
The following example was one I stumbled upon sold on GC and baffles me, I'd love to get some insight as to how both PCGS & CAC came to the conclusion of this being natural. I found a Morgan with similar color tones which is clearly AT, I also noticed a burn like quality on the reverse of the quarter.
Quarter in Question Trueview: Note* It was regraded and upgraded to MS68
Comments
Based upon the images you have provided, I would have called the 1935-S WQ AT to begin with and would have expected CAC to reject it for a sticker. I still think it AT and the Morgan I definitely believe is AT. However, folks don't pay me for my opinion and what I think might not carry weight with others.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
In the end, it doesn’t matter how the toning got there - if the AT is so good that it is indistinguishable from natural toning then they will usually ok it. The Morgan dollar is not such a case - though the quarter might be.
I don’t like toning on that quarter at all. The colors are too bright, and I don’t like that blue spot on the reverse one bit. It’s AT in my opinion.
I attached the Morgan as a comparison to the colors when it comes to AT examples. I found that Morgan to have very similar colors to the quarter.
Which is why I shared this example. I'm trying to see what I'm missing, what firstly PCGS, then CAC saw and agreed with for this color as being natural. PCGS then again agreed & even upgraded this example to MS68. I have not been able to find any other examples in high grade or lower grade with color that comes even close to that 1935-S.
This example sold for $8182 on GC in July 2024.
The color sort of reminds me of what you see from coins exposed to sulfur from eggs. That yellow & purplish color.
It reminds me of the proof dime I let sit by the window in my old apartment. The general consensus on that piece was AT.
Custom album maker and numismatic photographer.
Need a personalized album made? Design it on the website below and I'll build it for you.
https://www.donahuenumismatics.com/.
The quarter may be AT, but there is no doubt about the Morgan.
Curious, would love to see a photo of it
Just comparing the colors, the Quarter has those crazy purples + reverse has that golden orange
This illustrates why seeing coins in hand helps develop a numismatic point of reference which is significant and often overlooked
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I agree with PCGS and CAC that the quarter is natural. Note the hint of green which is rarely ever seen on artificially toned coins, and when it is, it looks nothing like that.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
If you see ‘toned’ coins on eBay that look artificial, you can pretty well verify it if many of the coins they are selling have identical colors and toning patterns. Here’s a 1931S that got a 91 grade from PCGS…that I purchased from Steve Ivy auctions in the late 80’s. All the dealers I have shown it to don’t understand the grade because it looks perfectly acceptable to them. The lighting makes it look more dramatic than it is as in the holder the coin looks fairly dark. .
"How can you tell whether this is Natural vs AT?"
To be honest, the question you need to answer is not "Is this NT or AT?" but rather "Is this market acceptable?"
See above: tradedollarnut, August 28, 2026 4:04PM
That is not a coin I would consider properly graded, nor market acceptable.
Coin Photography
The color screams AT to me. Market acceptability notwithstanding, I think the spot on the reverse should keep it out of a superb gem holder.
Another one I just stumbled upon, it's very interesting.
Not a coin I would consider, but I have seen a lot worse in straight graded. Which is what this thread seems to agree on.
Let ‘s take a moment and think about photography, enhanced photography and reality. Is that the limited edition 1967 Wavy Gravy 1922 Peace Dollar or am I just showing my age?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
morgan and peace at
quarter, likely at. i think if the tv was viewed before stickering, it would never received a sticker
100% AT
some of the pics in this thread seem juiced or AT and probably do not look much like coin in hand.
Could very well be, I just grabbed both TV's & either the auction or listing photos.
The quarter baffles me the most. Approved by Cac then upgraded to 68 by pcgs.
I personally do not think the quarter is AT because if it was you’d see a bunch more with that look - because why would you stop at just one?
-
Your hobby is supposed to be your therapy, not the reason you need it.
Might've been a one off kinda thing. The quarter shows colors I have never ever seen before in how Washington Quarters have toned. The strange orangy/gold + purple & the reverse has a burn like mark.
lol PCI giving Questionable Toning
How do you know there aren’t many more like it that never made it into a slab? The colors are reminiscent of several AT pieces I have seen on eBay over the years advertised as such as “art.” Keep in mind that the artist may not have been the submitter and may not genuinely know the coin was slabbed. I can’t say definitely what happened, but the point is I wouldn’t draw any conclusions as there are far too many variables to blindly make that assumption.
Forget the slab and sticker for a moment. If you saw that coin on a bourse floor advertised as a raw superb gem, what would your initial thoughts be?
Wrong thread
Quarter = good.
Morgan = AT.
JMHO.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
It might have been - and if it came out looking that good ONE time, it’s probably going to get holdered. That’s my point.
What catches some of these guys - like the Chicago area buffalo nickel dealer - is not that they aren’t good. They do so many that all of a sudden the TPGs say ‘whoa - enough’
But he did pretty good work. This coin definitely is a “monster” but not in the way a toned collector wants it to be.
Does anyone other than myself and TomB remember when NGC holdered this thing as an MS67?
-
Your hobby is supposed to be your therapy, not the reason you need it.
Is that the Peace dollar that originally came out of a small white ANACS slab (labeled at AT)?
There was a board member here from ten to 15 years ago that was eventually caught toning mostly Morgan dollars with this exact toning colors. Alex's specialty was pinks and yellows. He also did other silver coins too. He kind of got caught and apologized publicly never to be heard from again.
I think the quarter is MA, it is 90 years old and not a 10 year old ASE. Could have been in a kraft envelope for a long time. Also the trueview is slightly juiced to show the colors more vividly. Also agree with @hummingbird_coins that the light green toning next to the yellow and orange is a good sign. Magenta is a common NT toning color. Including my Washie that had for almost 60 years. It is NT. Also cannot compare the quarter to that Morgan which is obviously AT.