AT, NT and a Discussion of Determining Between the Two

Leiana · November 13, 2006 2:34PM

Let's have a thread where Known or Likely AT coins are directly compared and contrasted with Known or Likely NT coins.

PLEASE explain why the particular coin you post is AT or NT, and try to stay away from generalizing. For instance, "This coin is AT all day just because it looks AT" would not be a good explanation.

On the other hand something like "This coin is NT because of the *intelligent explanation*" would be ideal.

Also, I would ask that you not go to random eBay auctions and pull pictures.

Lets keep it civil and educational!

Thanks!

-Amanda

Edited to add a more descriptive title.

MikeInFL · November 13, 2006 2:41PM

Here is a known AT coin:

Here are, most likely, more examples of the same effect:

pharmer · November 13, 2006 2:49PM

Amanda, I have learned from this forum not to say either way. It can't be proven conclusively, only opined on subjectively. You also cannot know someone's motivations for their judgemental statement. Mike has just demonstrated that you may be able to know for a fact that a coin is AT. But the claims in this forum of the greatness of coin docs precludes ever knowing for a fact that a coin is NT. That is what it has come to.

Leiana · November 13, 2006 9:42PM

<< Amanda, I have learned from this forum not to say either way. It can't be proven conclusively, only opined on subjectively. You also cannot know someone's motivations for their judgemental statement. Mike has just demonstrated that you may be able to know for a fact that a coin is AT. But the claims in this forum of the greatness of coin docs precludes ever knowing for a fact that a coin is NT. That is what it has come to. >>

I think you are on to something!

-Amanda

AuldFartte · November 14, 2006 12:29AM

This one is AT because Russ says it is

Seriously, what I've been told that the boundaries between colors are too sharp or sudden, and the reverse toning being so obviously different than the obverse is also suspicious. Then a guy admitted to "making" it.

FullStrike · November 14, 2006 1:24AM

AT or NT? Who knows. But what I do know is that eBay is rife with schills and judas goats. If you see a whole herd of bleep baaing over Peter Max Coins and bidding them up to the sky - be very careful about joining in. Just the fact that there are AT coins out there should alert you that there is great potential for being taken for a ride.

Remember P.T. Barnums quote - There's a sucker born every minute.

Also, a fool and his money are soon parted.

Leiana · November 14, 2006 1:57AM

Interesting. It would seem that one cannot be sure of the toning on a coin from an image.

These findings go directly against my previous experience with the subject.

-Amanda

AU58WALKERS · November 14, 2006 2:08AM

<< Interesting. It would seem that one cannot be sure of the toning on a coin from an image.

These findings go directly against my previous experience with the subject.

-Amanda >>

I doubt that anyone can be sure of the tonning of a coin when in hand.
although some say they can, I would bet that have been fooled also.

cape · November 14, 2006 2:59AM

SOMETIMES , IF i have a question in my mind about whether it is at i smell the coin. If the coin smells the coin is definately at. I KNOW THIS SOUNDS STUPID BUT I AM SERIOUS! It can smell like rotten eggs or like vinegar. an oldtimer showed me this at last years fun show.

Kimchee · November 14, 2006 3:56AM

Swabbed with an ms70? That can't mean what it sounds like.

WoodenJefferson · November 14, 2006 4:31AM

<< Swabbed with an ms70? That can't mean what it sounds like. >>

MS-70 is a cleaner used to remove newly placed finger prints etc. from silver coin surfaces. (dipping) It generally evaporates completly when the coin is removed and leaves no residue on the coin...used on any other surface than silver, who knows what will happen.

edit: I should have relayed that there is no rubbing with q-tips/brushes or anything that would cause hairlines, the coin is carefully dipped and removed.

if finger prints are allowed to remain on a silver coin for an extened period of time, they cannot be removed with MS-70. The prints more than likely have already started to be imbedded into the surface of the coin.

dorkkarl · November 14, 2006 4:35AM

as usual, the premise of this article is entirely erroneous. the issue is not whether toning is natural or artificial, it's whether the toning is mkt acceptable or UNaccpetable.

"natural" IS NOT THE OPPOSITE of "artificial"

but "acceptable IS the opposite of "unacceptable"

you are simply wasting time & effort fretting over the whole bogus "at vs nt" so-called debate.

instead, focus on what YOU like!!!

K S

pharmer · November 14, 2006 4:41AM

<< "natural" IS NOT THE OPPOSITE of "artificial" >>

OK, what is the opposite of artificial?

First that, if you please, then we can debate the rest of your post.

dorkkarl · November 14, 2006 4:42AM

there IS'NT 1! that's the point!!!

the opposite of "artifiical" would be "unartificial" but there's no such word.

the opposite of "natural" is "unnatural".

K S

Baley · November 14, 2006 4:43AM

another point is that it's not a binary choice "between" AT and NT, but rather an evaluation "among" all the points along a continuum,

from unquestionably natural bag toned silver dollars on one end of the spectrum

through album, envelope, endroll, and other incedental toning which may or may not be intentional but nevertheless is acceptable to most collectors,

on through various accelerated means of toning which have questionable appearance to most collectors (and these are the most controversial appearances)

and finally, on the other end of the spectrum, obviously cooked and chemical application methods which almost always look terrible and artificial.

StrikeOutXXX · November 14, 2006 4:44AM

<< you are simply wasting time & effort fretting over the whole bogus "at vs nt" so-called debate.
instead, focus on what YOU like!!! >>

Good advice. I think most people can spot the eBay ridiculous AT coins a mile away, but other than extremes, I think RYK said it best - the grey area is too big. This is my only coin of considerable color I own. Although the original post when I showed it as well as PMs about it all said NT, since I or a family member hasn't owned it for 115 years, I suppose I'll never know for sure. But like DK said - I like it, so it's good enough for me.

dorkkarl · November 14, 2006 4:45AM

<< another point is that it's not a binary choice "between" AT and NT >>

absolutely agree, which is why i keep coming back to the real binary choice.

either it's natural toning, or it is not natural toning. that's it. no other choices, no other arguments, no other noise. it's a real, real simple choice.

natural, or unnatural.

that's it.

if it is'nt natural, then it's unnatural. "artificial" is utterly irrelevant

K S

WoodenJefferson · November 14, 2006 4:49AM

I was exasperated by asking and pointing out the same things in that long thread started yesterday evening reguarding AT/NT.

I finally stated:

<<It quickly became apparent that once again it was futile to argue with yet another self proclaimed expert in the field of Numismatics...it's really a shame that novice people have to be exposed to such actions as his.>>

I just don't get it at times how ignorant these people sound spouting off words of wisdom that they think are sweeping you off your feet...well, they are not sweeping me.

It is unfortunate that you arrived in this hobby with all of this going on...you need to be educated in this arena but how do you go about that without having hand grenades flying all over the place, while stepping through a mine field of negative posters and naysayers. I don't think there will ever be a "common ground" with this issue...it is too much like politics to be discussed on a forum floor.

~shaking head~ it upsets me

pharmer · November 14, 2006 4:50AM

OK, that's fine, unnatural in place of artificial. Works for me. Really a distinction without a difference for this ongoing discussion, but if that's what it takes, fine, just different letters representing the same concept.

Edited to add that I was going to quibble with the attempted shift by a few to define this now as market acceptable/unacceptable, as it seems an obvious element but which does not represent the ultimate defining difference between natural/unnatural. But, I can't work up enough concern about it to waste the time or energy. It's a non sequitur IMO.

dorkkarl · November 14, 2006 4:54AM

<< OK, that's fine, unnatural in place of artificial. Works for me. Really a distinction without a difference for this ongoing discussion, but if that's what it takes, fine, just different letters representing the same concept. >>

nope, that is not correct. "unnatural" does'nt simply replace the bogus "artificial" concept. rather, it points out that the real problem is that the arguments get brought up over & over w/out ever DEFINING "NATURAL"!!!

it's absoulutely ridiculous, stupid & time-wasting about arguing something vs. something when you've defined neither "something" in the argument. just plain stupid!

so i propose this:

"natural toning" on a coin is toning acquired through the coin being in it's natural, expected environment. for typical coins, that includes circulation, pockets, cash registers, coin counting machines, piggy banks. for proof coins, it includes proof holders. it does not include washing machines, coin albums, potatoes, cigar smoke, foot fungus, or septic tanks. any toning acquired in a environment that does not fall in the "natural" cateogory IS UNNATURAL.

see? simple!

K S

pharmer · November 14, 2006 5:00AM

<< "natural toning" on a coin is toning acquired through the coin being in it's natural, expected environment. for typical coins, that includes circulation, pockets, cash registers, coin counting machines, piggy banks. for proof coins, it includes proof holders. it does not include washing machines, coin albums, potatoes, cigar smoke, foot fungus, or septic tanks. any toning acquired in a environment that does not fall in the "natural" cateogory IS UNNATURAL. >>

OK, there's a lot there to chew on. I see one hole right away, but will wait a while.

pharmer · November 14, 2006 5:12AM

No one else gonna weight in? Oh, well. You forgot the biggie re the kind of toning we are seeing/discussing: storage medium toning. To me, the very basis of intent. Of course, there is an insidious attempt here to throw out intent as a parameter of toning naturalinityism. A pox upon their humble abodes.

If it's in a toning medium merely for storage, it's natural as well. Mint bags for Morgan storage. Out.

dorkkarl · November 14, 2006 5:23AM

<< No one else gonna weight in? Oh, well. You forgot the biggie re the kind of toning we are seeing/discussing: storage medium toning. >>

coins are not meant to be stored in albums. i did mention that. a album is an ARTIFICIAL environment.

<< If it's in a toning medium merely for storage, it's natural as well. Mint bags for Morgan storage. Out. >>

correct. mint bag toning on a morgan is natural, because the mint/federal treasury intended storage (of some) to back currency. so that is NATURAL.

storing morgans in wayte-raymond folders is NOT natural though. might be pretty, but definitely & very obviously not natural

K S

Baley · November 14, 2006 6:38AM

Some wise folks simply say, "it's natural if someone let it happen, and it's artificial if someone made it happen"

and then go on to discuss matters of degree and appearance.

IGWT · November 14, 2006 6:50AM

<< No one else gonna weight in? Oh, well. You forgot the biggie re the kind of toning we are seeing/discussing: storage medium toning. To me, the very basis of intent. Of course, there is an insidious attempt here to throw out intent as a parameter of toning naturalinityism. A pox upon their humble abodes.

If it's in a toning medium merely for storage, it's natural as well. Mint bags for Morgan storage. Out. >>

Natural toning forms on the surfaces of a coin as the result of gaseous compounds that are present in the ambient atmosphere where coins are placed (1) for purposes consistent with their intended use in commerce, or (2) for storage in a manner traditionally accepted by numismatists.

Artificial toning forms on the surfaces of a coin by any process other than that which causes natural toning.

Leiana · November 14, 2006 7:01AM

<< you are simply wasting time & effort fretting over the whole bogus "at vs nt" so-called debate.

instead, focus on what YOU like!!!

K S >>

Karl, I like original, unmessed with coins. I am not very efficient at recognizing unoriginal coins all the time.

-Amanda

WoodenJefferson · November 14, 2006 9:32AM

The originator of these images says this Bust dollar is Artifically Toned and I belive him.
TTT

Flyfishguy · November 14, 2006 9:46AM

I don't have a picture, but I thought I'd relate the following. Like most coin dealers, I know a few people that I'm pretty sure are coin doctors. One in particular came in and showed me a couple of Morgan Dollars in NGC holders and beatifully toned. He asked me to show them to Bob Campbell (the ANA's toning expert) at the Long Beach Coin show last June. I showed them to Bob and after he studied them he assured me they were NT. When I returned home and gave the coins back to the owner and told him what Bob said he laughed. He then told me he had toned them himself INSIDE the slab.

That's scary.....

pharmer · November 14, 2006 10:02AM

Actually, it's not, as it's merely anecdotal, and this discussion has passed beyond unsupportable claims either way.

Well, as Amanda's intent was for folks to show images of at or nt coins and support their contention, any takers other than Mike?

Sunnywood · November 14, 2006 10:34AM

Of course there are coins that are unquestionably naturally toned. I would prefer not to have to write on this subject again, but since no-one else is bothering to take up the standard, then i shall do it. There are several perfect examples of natural toning, which also provide us with a key to understanding the process of toning formation. One of these is the classic banded rainbow toning that is found on some Morgan dollars that were stored undisturbed in the original Mint bags for decades in bank vaults. The very slow process of toning formation that occurred in an undisturbed environment, with very little change or movement in the ambient atmosphere, created uniform toning layers of increasing depth across the exposed surfaces of coins that were sitting on top of the "pile" within the bag. The toning formed in such a way as to neatly demonstrate the naturally occurring color progression that is associated with thin film toning, which produces colorful hues based on refraction of light. These coins provide us a roadmap or blueprint to understand which colors should normally be adjacent to which other colors in a naturally toned coin. (There are many exceptions, of course, but this is a valuable first step toward understanding toning.) Follow the colors from the "white" untoned portion of the coin through the various bands, and notice that on each coin the progression is essentially the same, although the relative strengths and widths of different color bands varies. These are unquestionably naturally toned coins ...

Here are a few additional illustrated comments, all based on the above notion of the standard thin-film color progression:

a) Most toning is in the first few bands, which correspond to the thinnest toning layers, formed in the shortest time. This is the familiar light gold toning, which then intensifies to deeper gold, to amber, and to russet, and then onto the next color band, which is blue. This is why lightly toned coins are generally in the gold russet family, and often album-toned coins will have light gold, deepening to russet at the perimeter, with bits of electric blue at the perimeter. Here are a couple of examples:

b) Album-toned coins form the same colors, generally progressing from the center of the coin outwards, as the heaviest toning occurred closest to the album material at the perimeter. Notice how the toning on the 1883 below goes past the blue band, and into some lighter greenish-yellow at the perimeter. Compare that with the rainbow examples above, and you will see how that is the correct next color to be expected at the perimeter. (Contrast with the 1894-O above which does not get past the blue band.) Then look at the 1882 below right, which goes past the greenish-yellow and into orange-red at the lower right perimeter. Had it stayed longer in the album, the progression would have continued. These colors are definitely signs of natural toning.

c) Not all examples show the full progression. Notice in the rainbow examples at the top of this post, the first band is very thin, whereas below left, the first band is expanded into a tan area. You can also have a coin that is uniformly toned (monochromatic) in any one color, if the toning conditions were just right.

d) You might also have a coin that shows colors from two or three of the adjacent bands in the progression. Many of the best Battle Creek coins had brilliant vibrant red, yellow and green toning. This corresponds to three adjacent bands (see rainbow examples above). The toning conditions had to be "just right" with decades of undisturbed storage to result in the entire surface of the coin toned in those colors.

e) The bands may not always be "stripes" but could also be patches (large, or very small). The coin on the left has large patches caused by end-roll toning (the coin spent years at the end of a paper roll with the roll paper folded over on the ends to cause a geometric pattern; this is an extraordinary end-roller with unusually colorful and vibrant toning). The coin on the right has "micro patches" or mottled colors of the same red-yellow-green. Incredibly, this is an 1896-S Morgan. (Its reverse has a more classic album-toned appearance with a blue perimeter.)

There are many more "fine points" that become apparent after you look at hundreds of toned coins. I could go on and on ... but the principles that are demonstrated by the classic banded rainbow-toned Morgans at the top of the thread lay the groundwork for understanding all the rest.

Best,
Sunnywood

Leiana · November 14, 2006 10:39AM

Thank you, Sunnywood!!!

I have never seen it spelled out like that. I now have a better understanding of what I am seeing in toned coins.

The bit on album toning especially cleared some things up.

Again, thank you.

-Amanda

FatMan · November 14, 2006 10:45AM

<< I don't have a picture, but I thought I'd relate the following. Like most coin dealers, I know a few people that I'm pretty sure are coin doctors. One in particular came in and showed me a couple of Morgan Dollars in NGC holders and beatifully toned. He asked me to show them to Bob Campbell (the ANA's toning expert) at the Long Beach Coin show last June. I showed them to Bob and after he studied them he assured me they were NT. When I returned home and gave the coins back to the owner and told him what Bob said he laughed. He then told me he had toned them himself INSIDE the slab.

That's scary..... >>

Yep, very scary. This is not the first I've heard of toning in the slab. I have heard others talk of the same. And of course recently we had the MOC case outed right here on our forum. I hope everyone here reads your post. Buying coins holdered by Top Tier TPGs is not a guarantee to NT. The Doctors are getting very good at these sorts of things.

Just curious, now that you know this guy is a coin doctor what are you doing about it, if anything?

FatMan · November 14, 2006 10:55AM

Excellent post Sunnywood. Well done.

lsica · November 14, 2006 11:02AM

These are NT, and are from Wayne Millers Book.

Last time I posted these, you had to SEE all the people who SCREAMED AT

pharmer · November 14, 2006 11:06AM

So, broad banded full silver sulfide toning progression rainbow, and you're saying "unquestionably naturally toned" regarding this type of toning pattern?

relicsncoins · November 14, 2006 11:13AM

With advancing technology and continued coin doctor experimination, there will come a day when "Good" AT jobs will be indistinguishable from NT. When that time comes, the market will begin to be flooded with these coins and all toners will take a significant hit in price......Ok, flame away.

Sunnywood · November 14, 2006 11:17AM

Yes pharmer, the example in your post is a classic banded rainbow bag-toned Morgan dollar. I have no doubt that such toning could in theory be produced synthetically, but I wager it would be extremely difficult to get that appearance. Nature did it slowly, over a period of decades. Heat & chemistry can produce rainbows more rapidly, but not quite with that type of appearance. Perhaps someday someone will effectively replicate rainbow bag-toning .... but it has not been done yet.

I have already written volumes in other threads over the last three or four months, so I will not say more here ...

relicsncoins, technology allows us to produce synthetic gemstones, and superb forgeries of artwork. However, technology also allows us to determine the real thing. When that day comes, those of us who care will undoubtedly develop ways to distinguish the originals. I will agree that, should the day arrive when it is strictly impossible to tell the difference, then thee would be a problem. Ditto for gems, art, etc. But I don't see that happening in my lifetime. Just put my set next to a "white" set and you'll understand why I care, and why I have paid substantial premiums, even multiples, to acquire these coins.

Best,
Sunnywood

pharmer · November 14, 2006 11:21AM

This point is made repeatedly in this forum, and is why I never opine on AT or NT. Those that do cannot prove it. I wanted his imprimatur on my coin so I can say, however briefly, that it's "unquestionably naturally toned" as it fits his criteria outlined above. But with all due respect, I think his discussion is more of the same "how toning occurs" which we have all become familiar with, but does not address Amanda's request for definitive at/nt determination.

Wow, you're quick, bud:

<< Yes pharmer, the example in your post is a classic banded rainbow bag-toned Morgan dollar. I have no doubt that such toning could in theory be produced synthetically, but I wager it would be extremely difficult to get that appearance. Nature did it slowly, over a period of decades. Heat & chemistry can produce rainbows more rapidly, but not quite with that type of appearance. >>

Edited to say "yay". I got one! Nyah, nyah

Leiana · November 14, 2006 11:23AM

<< But with all due respect, I this his discussion is more of the same "how toning occurs" which we have all become familiar with, but does not address Amanda's request for definitive at/nt determination. >>

I still learned alot about toning.

-Amanda

Sunnywood · November 14, 2006 11:24AM

pharmer, not true. I am stating definitively that classic banded rainbow toning of the type shown in my post, and also exhibited on your coin, is unquestionably naturally toned. Many such coins have been pulled directly from Mint bags, yet no-one has ever produced such a coin in a laboratory. Also, if you will pay attention to how toning occurs naturally, and what natural toning looks like, then you will be able to make definitive determinations in many cases, such as noted in my post.

Amanda, thanks, I'm so glad you enjoyed the post. Contrary to the popular notion that all toning is questionable, and that no-one can tell the difference, it is in fact possible to recognize certain forms of natural toning. And yes, that also paves the way to recognizing "market acceptable" toning, even if it is AT but resembles natural toning.

I am just trying to dispel the notion that we can't know anything about toning, and that we can't ever make accurate determinations about toning. Like every subject, with careful study, it is in fact possible to learn something about natural toning, and to be able to recognize it !!!

Best,
Sunnywood

relicsncoins · November 14, 2006 11:26AM

<< pharmer, not true. I am stating definitively that classic banded rainbow toning of the type shown in my post, and also exhibited on your coin, is unquestionably naturally toned. Many such coins have been pulled directly from Mint bags, yet no-one has ever produced such a coin in a laboratory. >>

Not yet anyway.

Leiana · November 14, 2006 11:27AM

Sunnywood's post was great, but I fear the thread might be devolving into arguement, especially with conjecture about possible future toning technology.

-Amanda

Sunnywood · November 14, 2006 12:14PM

I'm doing a "ttt" so everyone can go look at my revised post on page 2 of this thread, a starter course on natural toning with 12 pictures !!

Leiana · November 14, 2006 12:21PM

<< I'm doing a "ttt" so everyone can go look at my revised post on page 2 of this thread, a starter course on natural toning with 12 pictures !! >>

-Amanda

AT, NT and a Discussion of Determining Between the Two

Comments

Leave a Comment