WHEN do you consider it AT'd ???

[GDJMSP]

Mike, better yet, why don't you answer your own questions as best you can, based on Lou's definition? And others will hopefully answer too. If we reach the same conclusions, that probably means the definition is workable.

 

 

I think the definition was reached some time ago, problem is not everybody is willing to accept it. That is - if you can't definitively tell the difference - who cares ?

[GDJMSP]

 

Oh, you're too smart for me.

 

Who me Rather doubt that.

 

 

Please go back to your forum, thanks.

...Mike

 

 

Nahhhh - I kinda missed the place. That's why I started posting here again

[MarkFeld]

Mike, better yet, why don't you answer your own questions as best you can, based on Lou's definition? And others will hopefully answer too. If we reach the same conclusions, that probably means the definition is workable.

 

 

I think the definition was reached some time ago, problem is not everybody is willing to accept it. That is - if you can't definitively tell the difference - who cares ?

A lot of people care, and appreciate beauty more thinking or knowing that it's nature's own work and that it can't be easily or widely replicated. Think about people who prefer to pay thousands of dollars for genuine antiques, but don't want to buy near-perfect reproductions for fractions of the price.

[bsshog40]

You can call it what you want to, but I'll bet the TPG's will make the last decision on that.

 

Don't bet on that. The TPG's will slab whatever the market will accept. And the market - well, that's us.

That was kind of my point. Blatant AT'd coins will not get anywhere, but market acceptable AT's will. Some person may not like an AT'd coin but I have seen them in slabs!! I don't mind owning one if it looks good. In fact, I think I have one that I like alot. Some of the obvious poorly done AT'd coins though, I do not care for.

[GDJMSP]

A lot of people care, and appreciate beauty more thinking or knowing that it's nature's own work and that it can't be easily or widely replicated. Think about people who prefer to pay thousands of dollars for genuine antiques, but don't want to buy near-perfect reproductions for fractions of the price.

 

I agree, a lot of people do care. But don't you think that it is more of a psychological issue than anything else ? I mean really, if you are handed two beautifully toned coins, same date, mint & grade, and you were absolutely convinced that both were NT - and then you were asked to choose the one you wanted - you wouldn't have any problem with that would you ?

 

But if given the same choice, and again you are absolutely convinced in your own mind that both are NT - but one coin is labeled AT and one is labled NT - you're gonna pick the NT coin every time, and so would everybody else on this board - including me. Why ? Because of the psychological aspect - we are convinced that NT is better in some way - original if you will.

 

The only difference in the above scenario is the label. You still can't tell the coins apart in regard to AT/NT, but because of the label we make a choice because our minds tell us one is better than the other.

 

Are labels that important ? Sounds remarkably similar to buying slabs instead of coins. And we wonder why people do that. Never underestimate the psychological aspect.

[MarkFeld]

I agree, a lot of people do care. But don't you think that it is more of a psychological issue than anything else ?

Yes, I do think that in some cases it's largely psychological - that was part of my point. But it still counts.

[MikeInFL]

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 protective storage or display 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.

 

I figure that someone might eventually agree with me if I say it often enough.

 

That sounds pretty good.... but answer me a question or two...

 

Scenario 1 If a person buys an old album, fills it with untoned coins with the intention of toning them, then places the album on a bookshelf that gets afternoon sunlight, are the coins that result a few years later NT or AT?

 

Scenario 2 How about if he places it on top of his water heater and the coins tone in a month?

Mike, better yet, why don't you answer your own questions as best you can, based on Lou's definition? And others will hopefully answer too. If we reach the same conclusions, that probably means the definition is workable.

 

Using Lou's definitions, I would say scenario #1 is NT and #2 is AT, as I wouln't define placing coins on a water heater as "for protective storage or display in a manner traditionally accepted by numismatists".

 

 

[coinman1794]

This is a complex issue, and here are my thoughts.

 

Manslaughter and murder both produce the same result. Intent is meaningless to the lifeless body, the same as it is to toning on a coin. I think the end result is what counts.

 

A coin that is attractive but where the process was hurried along is not the best situation (to someone who appreciates an original coin) but it's still ok if the coin is not in danger. But if gone too far, i.e., if the results are ugly, if excessive chemical damage has occured, or if it is not favorable to the coins long-term stability, then there is a problem. It's always nice to see truly original coins, but I have to make this distinction because toning is a natural reaction; it can be spead up by catalists, such as heat, moisture, sulfer, etc, but it's still the same reaction, whether it takes 50 years or 5 months. The degree to which the surfaces are oxidized (which depends on how it was done) determines the thickness of the deterioration and in turn, the color. Virtually every spectrum of the rainbow can occure, it just depends on how light is refracted from the oxidized surfaces. (Coins with sped-up toning tend to aquire certain colors more than others, just as original coins, that's the only real difference).

 

Cases where chemicals are applied to the coin should be considered AT without question; the coin was chemically treated and will probably have that chemical still on it, making continued change and deterioration of the surfaces likely. Plus the chemical itself may make up part of the color.

[MikeKing]

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 protective storage or display 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.

 

I figure that someone might eventually agree with me if I say it often enough.

 

could you please repeat that again for me?

 

...

 

 

..

 

but in all seriousness, what would you consider Waite Raymond whatever toning on a dipped piece broken out of a holder and auctioned off a year later as having beautiful blue peripheral toning?