New member here - opinion on toned proofs?

LibertyEagle20 · September 25, 2026 12:46PM

Hi everyone. I'm a new member here. I've been collecting since around 2013. Right now I have been focused on certified mercury dimes. I recently picked up this pcgs graded 1937 proof dime. I personally like some toning to indicate a higher chance of original skin but some others told me this coin was ugly. I've researched 1937 dime proofs and many look very hazy or fogged up. I thought this had good eye appeal compared to many others I looked at but maybe not? I'd love your opinion on it. I can reveal the grade later, I didn't want to introduce any bias. Thanks!

LibertyEagle20 · September 25, 2026 12:47PM

Pics didn't go through, trying again.

LibertyEagle20 · September 25, 2026 12:51PM

Maybe I'm limited as a new member, pics aren't showing and I can't edit the post. I see the gear but it's not clickable on mobile or from desktop. Anyway here's a link of pics..

https://imgur.com/a/BOZQhKb

Apologies for multiple posts.

P0CKETCHANGE · September 25, 2026 12:54PM

Here you go:

P0CKETCHANGE · September 25, 2026 1:00PM

Welcome to the forum.

I have a strong preference towards the hazy, original toning that this era of proofs acquired from the cellophane mint packaging, which your coin demonstrates. I assembled a set of the Walkers with this look.

However, many do not like this appearance and prefer brilliant, untoned coins. I can certainly understand why, as they are flashier and brighter, although usually dipped.

As far as others’ opinions, the best way to enjoy collecting is to buy what YOU like.

Larrob37 · September 25, 2026 1:06PM

The opinion of others are not important. Buy what you like. I am not a fan of toned coins but I like the look of this coin for what it’s worth. Enjoy it.

coinbuf · September 25, 2026 1:15PM

As others have said buy what you like. However, as you asked I much prefer a blast white proof so this coin would not appeal to me.

MasonG · September 25, 2026 1:17PM

First thing- collect what you like.

As for my opinion... coins don't start out toned, so a toned surface is no more 'original' than the surface of a previously toned coin which has had the toning removed.

MFeld · September 25, 2026 1:27PM

@MasonG said:
First thing- collect what you like.

As for my opinion... coins don't start out toned, so a toned surface is no more 'original' than the surface of a previously toned coin which has had the toning removed.

I disagree. Typically, the term “original” is used to describe a coin that hasn’t been messed with. And regardless of how widely accepted dipping is, it’s a form of messing with. On the other hand, a coin which tones in its original mint cellophane, in an album or envelope, etc., is widely considered to be original.

MasonG · September 25, 2026 1:45PM

@MFeld said:
Typically, the term “original” is used to describe a coin that hasn’t been messed with.

Just to be clear, I know what people typically mean when they say 'original surfaces'. Personally, I prefer not to go down the "intent" rabbit hole (let alone trying to define what's attractive vs. unattractive) when it comes to toning but I understand others don't mind doing so.

Here's one reason "hasn't been messed with" can be a poor measuring stick:

MsMorrisine · September 25, 2026 1:47PM

drag and drop pics

this is a new and broken forum software. edit is broken and files don't attach. many here don't open attachments anyway

not so sure i like the coloring on yours, but it's what makes you happy

MFeld · September 25, 2026 1:49PM

@MasonG said:

@MFeld said:
Typically, the term “original” is used to describe a coin that hasn’t been messed with.

Just to be clear, I know what people typically mean when they say 'original surfaces'. Personally, I prefer not to go down the "intent" rabbit hole (let alone trying to define what's attractive vs. unattractive) when it comes to toning but I understand others don't mind doing so.

Here's one reason "hasn't been messed with" can be a poor measuring stick:

Why do you consider that coin to be a poor measuring stick? “Original” (as in hasn’t been messed with) coins can look anywhere from gorgeous to ugly.

MasonG · September 25, 2026 1:55PM

@MFeld said:
Why do you consider that coin to be a poor measuring stick?

Because when people describe a coin's surfaces as 'original', it's more often than not intended to indicate a coin with superior attributes, not one that was dug out of a landfill (not that the coin I pictured above was, BTW).

Eldorado9 · September 25, 2026 1:58PM

Did someone say toned proofs?

davewesen · September 25, 2026 2:20PM

Everyone likes different things. What is attractive to some could be ugly to others. I remember viewing some early (1936-1942) Washington PROOF quarters that were graded PR68 and I thought they were ugly with high grades. If you like it, who cares what others think (until it is time to sell).

winesteven · September 26, 2026 2:41AM

Here’s mine. Possibly been dipped some time ago, and if so, like many of my much more flashy lustrous coins, was apparently dipped gently enough to still merit CAC stickers. While that eye appeal is what I prefer, I fully agree that each of us should collect what each prefers - there is NO right or wrong!

Regarding my friend @Eldorado9 ’s quarter above, all I can say is WOW!!!

Steve

Morgan13 · September 26, 2026 3:36AM

Cool coins

jmlanzaf · September 26, 2026 3:44AM

@MFeld said:

@MasonG said:

@MFeld said:
Typically, the term “original” is used to describe a coin that hasn’t been messed with.

Just to be clear, I know what people typically mean when they say 'original surfaces'. Personally, I prefer not to go down the "intent" rabbit hole (let alone trying to define what's attractive vs. unattractive) when it comes to toning but I understand others don't mind doing so.

Here's one reason "hasn't been messed with" can be a poor measuring stick:

Why do you consider that coin to be a poor measuring stick? “Original” (as in hasn’t been messed with) coins can look anywhere from gorgeous to ugly.

Isn't the real problem that cleaned or dipped coins also tone? I don't think you can, as the OP did, state that they like toning as an indication of originality. A coin dipped to blast white lacks "originality:. But a coin that has been dipped out cleaned and toned again is no more original than the blast white coin.

On a side note: i think "originality" is overdone. If your neighbor had a 50 year old original paint job that was faded and cracked, would you applaud is originality or report him to the town for having an eyesore? 😅

Harlequin · September 26, 2026 4:49AM

@LibertyEagle20

WELCOME to the forums !!!! With regard to the coin I think it's cool and I would prefer that over a dipped coin any day although nice original white examples are my personal preference!!! Keep building the set and most importantly enjoy the hobby 😎👍

MFeld · September 26, 2026 5:36AM

@jmlanzaf said:

@MFeld said:

@MasonG said:

@MFeld said:
Typically, the term “original” is used to describe a coin that hasn’t been messed with.

Just to be clear, I know what people typically mean when they say 'original surfaces'. Personally, I prefer not to go down the "intent" rabbit hole (let alone trying to define what's attractive vs. unattractive) when it comes to toning but I understand others don't mind doing so.

Here's one reason "hasn't been messed with" can be a poor measuring stick:

Why do you consider that coin to be a poor measuring stick? “Original” (as in hasn’t been messed with) coins can look anywhere from gorgeous to ugly.

Isn't the real problem that cleaned or dipped coins also tone? I don't think you can, as the OP did, state that they like toning as an indication of originality. A coin dipped to blast white lacks "originality:. But a coin that has been dipped out cleaned and toned again is no more original than the blast white coin.

On a side note: i think "originality" is overdone. If your neighbor had a 50 year old original paint job that was faded and cracked, would you applaud is originality or report him to the town for having an eyesore? 😅

That dipped coins also tone isn’t the problem but it certainly is a problem. 😉 And of course, toning isn’t always an indication of originality and originality isn’t always synonymous with attractive (or even meh looking).

Typekat · September 26, 2026 5:38AM

Some folks like tarnish,
some like the Worst Graded,
Some collect counterfeits
some are fans of 1980s vintage slabs.

American numismatics is a big tent!

LibertyEagle20 · September 26, 2026 6:47AM

I appreciate the warm welcome and opinions on the coin. This one graded 66+. I thought maybe it got the "+" due to some of the blue/rainbow toning on the surfaces but I'm not sure. Doesn't a "+" typically indicate the grader felt the coin had above average eye appeal?

Anyway I agree - it's all about buying what you like, I see the appeal of blast white coins but I've come to appreciate original toning as long as the whole coin isn't covered like one of the pics another member posted above. I don't have many "plus" coins so I thought that made this coin a little more unique as well.

MICHAELDIXON · September 26, 2026 7:39AM

I would pass on LibertyEagle20s Mercury dime, as I do not like the toning and prefer winesteven's coin. Over the years, I have found the toned Mercury dimes, like the OPs, to be a hard sell at the coin shops I have owned and at the coin shows I have sold at. But...like others have said: Buy what you like.

rooksmith · September 26, 2026 7:49AM

@P0CKETCHANGE said:
Welcome to the forum.

I have a strong preference towards the hazy, original toning that this era of proofs acquired from the cellophane mint packaging, which your coin demonstrates. I assembled a set of the Walkers with this look.

However, many do not like this appearance and prefer brilliant, untoned coins. I can certainly understand why, as they are flashier and brighter, although usually dipped.

As far as others’ opinions, the best way to enjoy collecting is to buy what YOU like.

Well said. This is time where everyone in the world would say: whatever you do dont dip (clean) a proof. Not if you want to submit it. PCGS often "pluses" a coin with original in the cellophane toning.

Ronsanderson · September 26, 2026 9:41AM

This proof is partway between pristine and toned. I happen to like the patches of blue that are forming on the reverse, but less happy to see a tiny corrosion spot on the front. Reactions may differ.

FlyingAl · September 26, 2026 9:45AM

I'm a big fan.

BillJones · September 26, 2026 10:41AM

@MasonG said:

@MFeld said:
Typically, the term “original” is used to describe a coin that hasn’t been messed with.

Just to be clear, I know what people typically mean when they say 'original surfaces'. Personally, I prefer not to go down the "intent" rabbit hole (let alone trying to define what's attractive vs. unattractive) when it comes to toning but I understand others don't mind doing so.

Here's one reason "hasn't been messed with" can be a poor measuring stick:

This is an example of where “original” has gone too far. The coin has not been stored properly. There is an outside chance that it was dipped and not rinsed properly.

This piece probably will not dip well. Some of the black spots on the reverse appear to be into the surface. As it is, this coin would not be easy to sell.

As for the coin in the OP, it is an original surface piece. I like a little of the original haze from celluloid sleeve storage, but this piece is borderline for me. For me, it has a little too much haze, but many will disagree with me.

winesteven · September 26, 2026 9:30PM

@jmlanzaf said:

@MFeld said:

@MasonG said:

@MFeld said:
Typically, the term “original” is used to describe a coin that hasn’t been messed with.

Just to be clear, I know what people typically mean when they say 'original surfaces'. Personally, I prefer not to go down the "intent" rabbit hole (let alone trying to define what's attractive vs. unattractive) when it comes to toning but I understand others don't mind doing so.

Here's one reason "hasn't been messed with" can be a poor measuring stick:

Why do you consider that coin to be a poor measuring stick? “Original” (as in hasn’t been messed with) coins can look anywhere from gorgeous to ugly.

Isn't the real problem that cleaned or dipped coins also tone? I don't think you can, as the OP did, state that they like toning as an indication of originality. A coin dipped to blast white lacks "originality:. But a coin that has been dipped out cleaned and toned again is no more original than the blast white coin.

On a side note: i think "originality" is overdone. If your neighbor had a 50 year old original paint job that was faded and cracked, would you applaud is originality or report him to the town for having an eyesore? 😅

I agree. Let’s not forget that in the art world, not only is restoration of old paintings allowed, it’s widely accepted. While they like to call it “Conservation”, the professionals not only remove grime, but they also add paint where needed! I’m at art geek too, and when my wife and I travel, we always go to that city’s top art museum. I’m ok looking at 400+ year old artworks with bright prime colors of paint. We know that’s not “original”.

While I’ve grown to appreciate attractive toning (as exhibited in first class toning in the phenomenal Barber collection of my friend @Eldorado9), how many times has a dealer shown us an “ugly” coin, and said, “that proves its originality”, lol.

Steve

SanctionII · September 27, 2026 5:55PM

I have these three toned 1941 proof silver coins. They are very eye appealing.

winesteven · September 27, 2026 8:27PM

@LibertyEagle20 said:
I appreciate the warm welcome and opinions on the coin. This one graded 66+. I thought maybe it got the "+" due to some of the blue/rainbow toning on the surfaces but I'm not sure. Doesn't a "+" typically indicate the grader felt the coin had above average eye appeal?

Anyway I agree - it's all about buying what you like, I see the appeal of blast white coins but I've come to appreciate original toning as long as the whole coin isn't covered like one of the pics another member posted above. I don't have many "plus" coins so I thought that made this coin a little more unique as well.

A plus grade just means the grader(s) believe the coin is high end for that whole grade, but not quite at the level of the next grade. I believe eye appeal is part of what graders take into account, along with the technical grade. But plus grades are not concentrated only on toned coins. About half of my classic coins eligible for a plus grade have a plus, and most (but far from all) have no toning. Here’s an example of a coin currently at Great Collections (yes, I consigned it, lol). While it’s not a Proof, many of my Proof coins have plus grades, and have eye appeal similar to this coin:

Steve

air4mdc · September 27, 2026 9:13PM

@Larrob37 said:
The opinion of others are not important. Buy what you like. I am not a fan of toned coins but I like the look of this coin for what it’s worth. Enjoy it.

While I totally agree that collecting is all about collecting what you like, whether it be toned coins or blast white, original skin coins. However , I base my purchase decisions on the fact, “ Someday, my heirs will need to sell these coins.” Even though I collect, I also invest and investing means a return. Someday, AI will be able to separate AT from NT or some other type of way to differentiate between the two. I wouldn’t want to be sitting on close to six figures of toned coins determined AT. I’ll purchase a toner here and there if appeals to my artful eye, paying no more than a couple of hundred bucks each, at the most. I am a fan of toners buy not a buyer. I’m looking for a return someday. If there is such a thing in this hobby.

winesteven · September 28, 2026 4:18AM

@air4mdc said:

@Larrob37 said:
The opinion of others are not important. Buy what you like. I am not a fan of toned coins but I like the look of this coin for what it’s worth. Enjoy it.

While I totally agree that collecting is all about collecting what you like, whether it be toned coins or blast white, original skin coins. However , I base my purchase decisions on the fact, “ Someday, my heirs will need to sell these coins.” Even though I collect, I also invest and investing means a return. Someday, AI will be able to separate AT from NT or some other type of way to differentiate between the two. I wouldn’t want to be sitting on close to six figures of toned coins determined AT. I’ll purchase a toner here and there if appeals to my artful eye, paying no more than a couple of hundred bucks each, at the most. I am a fan of toners buy not a buyer. I’m looking for a return someday. If there is such a thing in this hobby.

In my opinion, while not AI, in the meantime for the few toned coins that you do buy that you like, you can increase the odds of that toned coin having NT, by buying coins that are straight graded AND have a CAC sticker. The sticker not only means that CAC agrees with the whole grade number on the label, and also agrees with the suffix portion of a grade, if any, bit it also means they agree (along with the TPG) that the toning is natural and not artificial!

tradedollarnut · September 28, 2026 4:56AM

Coinbert · September 28, 2026 9:06AM

This dollar was part of a collection sold by Stack's Bowers in March 2023. The collector had died in 1911 and his collection was kept intact by his descendants until 2023. There were many fabulous coins in the sale with wonderful toning.

air4mdc · September 28, 2026 9:58PM

@winesteven said:
@air4mdc said:

@Larrob37 said:
The opinion of others are not important. Buy what you like. I am not a fan of toned coins but I like the look of this coin for what it’s worth. Enjoy it.
While I totally agree that collecting is all about collecting what you like, whether it be toned coins or blast white, original skin coins. However , I base my purchase decisions on the fact, “ Someday, my heirs will need to sell these coins.” Even though I collect, I also invest and investing means a return. Someday, AI will be able to separate AT from NT or some other type of way to differentiate between the two. I wouldn’t want to be sitting on close to six figures of toned coins determined AT. I’ll purchase a toner here and there if appeals to my artful eye, paying no more than a couple of hundred bucks each, at the most. I am a fan of toners buy not a buyer. I’m looking for a return someday. If there is such a thing in this hobby. 
In my opinion, while not AI, in the meantime for the few toned coins that you do buy that you like, you can increase the odds of that toned coin having NT, by buying coins that are straight graded AND have a CAC sticker. The sticker not only means that CAC agrees with the whole grade number on the label, and also agrees with the suffix portion of a grade, if any, bit it also means they agree (along with the TPG) that the toning is natural and not artificial!

I do believe there has been TPG holders with a CAC bean that displayed toning that was questionable, such as AT. Discussion was brought up referencing gassing and various methods applied to create the toning after the straight grade and the CAC bean. There is no human eye that can differentiate between AT and NT 100% foolproof. The human eye doesn’t even see the full color spectrum. Will AI?
It amazes me at all of the Peace toners that all of the sudden hit the market when there was a jump in price for them several years ago. Hmmmm.

Typekat · September 29, 2026 8:32AM

Hmmmm…wouldn’t a jump in prices naturally bring more toned Peace dollars out of hiding?

LibertyEagle20 · September 29, 2026 9:51AM

I've really shifted my mindset over the last decade. When I started off I really liked the blast white coins. But then I found out many of them have been dipped and have lost some original luster. I also started to notice a lot of "lifeless zombie" straight grade coins in the Walker, Peace, and Merc Dime series. For example I was recently looking for a 1928-S walker. Anyone who collects can tell you it's a tough date/MM in higher grades. The market was pretty tough and the only AU I had seen recently was an AU50 for nearly $1400 on Ebay! It's still up if you want to look at it, but it was totally dull and flat and looked totally ridiculous for the grade/price. My patience paid off as I scored what looks to be an original skin XF45 for 1/3 of the price. I will take a nice light toned original coin even in a slightly lower grade vs. an overly dipped zombie coin.

I'm not saying a coin is bad just because it's dipped but I do put more scrutiny on a "blast white" older US classic coin. I still have plenty of blast white coins in my collection but I'm much more open and into natural attractive toned coins vs. blast white lifeless ones now.

New member here - opinion on toned proofs?

Comments

Leave a Comment