Toning school back in session!

[truthteller]

Ok. Do you think this is AT or naturally toned. Remember the rules and the threads from months ago. Don't forget to give your reasons.

 

http://cgi.liveauctions.ebay.com/ws/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=28292&item=2202071222#

 

 

TRUTH

[Bruceswar]

I would say natural... unless PCI is slabbing AT coins now... It looks natural.. but you can never be 100% sure.....

[Hoot]

Boy what a great coin! I have to lean toward artificially toned, and here's why... Most of the time when you see toning like that shown, it's much darker and less vibrant, especially in the flecks that cross the center. I like the purple on the coin, but it seems out of place - should be more toward the periphery and not the center.

 

Hoot

[TomB]

I'll post my usual caveat about not knowing if the colors as they show up on my monitor are the same as the colors in hand and also about how luster can be completely mis-represented in an image.

 

My opinion is that this coin is AT. I will give several reasons-

 

1) Toned Arkansas halves are really tough to find with pure or attractive colors. Therefore, should one be found it would nearly certainly be sent to PCGS or NGC for certification in order to capitalize on the market acceptibility of the piece. The simple fact that this is in a PCI holder throws up an enormous red flag. Note to Bruceswar: PCI slabs coins that I think are AT.

 

2) The striated speckeled pattern is highly unusual to find on both sides of a naturally toned coin. You may find coins from the older US Mint Sets that were stored in cardboard that have one side like this, but it is highly unlikely to find both sides like this. Also, this appearance is well known after treatment with certain volatile gasses and suspension of the coin.

 

3) The colors are bad. Specifically, the dirty blue/purple and green/purple on the obverse along the wording "ARKANSAS CENTENNIAL" is seen from certain chemical treatments. That type of dirty color is not often seen on naturally toned coins. That blue/purple mix extends into the obverse fields and is all around the reverse perimeter and I don't like the color at all. That color mix makes me run.

 

4) The brown spot in Ms Liberty's headband makes me wonder if that was an area where solvent did not evaporate quickly and it concentrated down any impurities in it to leave the residue. This happens when solvents are used to AT coins. This type of spot is also exceptionally common on naturally toned coins, however, with the other evidence, I would lean to this being a solvent residue spot.

 

5) Anecdotally, I just don't like the look of it.

[gmarguli]

Typical commem AT. Same crackle toning that is only really seen on the BTW and GWC commems naturally. Toning looks a little thick on the reverse. Colors don't change/flow well.

 

Last, but not least, it is in a PCI slab. If this were in a NGC/PCGS slab at MS67 it would be a $10-$15K coin.

[braddick]

Iodine and heat.

 

AT

[keithdagen]

AT -- don't like that area to the right of Liberty on the obverse, nor the blues around States Of on the reverse. Just doesn't seem to fit right in with the rest of the toning scheme.

[spy88]

I agree with Hoot. I do not think that NT would look like it has "flaked" off in various areas. I would not think NT would give that appearance.

 

And while we are at it, what are your opinions regarding this Jeffersons toning?

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2201561858

 

David

[Hoot]

David - That Jeff looks like it had something spilled on it! I've experimented with some toning on nickels to try to know what to look for. That coin looks exposed to heat - note the "hot spot" on the reverse. A 44-D, FS and great toning or not, simply is not worth that much! Why would someone want to AT such a coin?

 

What do others think?

 

BTW, I've bought several 44-D MS66FS nickels raw for less than $10.

 

Hoot

[spy88]

I agree with you 100%, Hoot. But why would someone want to do that?

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2201938218

 

At least I am honest with my experiments! And over 6 days with no bidders!

 

 

David

[Oldtrader3]

I would say AT because the Green to Blue toning transition looks fake to me. The blue is unnatural and not consistant with most blue toning.

[RobertB]

I think it's AT, but that is was done quite a while ago.

[Wihlborg]

I would say AT. I don’t like the vibrant blues and purple, as soon as I saw those colors red flags went up in my mind.

 

John

 

[EZ_E]

It probably would have fooled me except both the obverse and the reverse are near identical. This doesn't seem natural to me as opposed to having the speckled toning on but one side.

[truthteller]

In my opinion, this coin is Artificially Toned. The 'crackling' pattern that Greg alludes to is a signature pattern of gas application. It is an old technology that has been around for many years and is used by some old timer AT doctors. I know of one AT guy who used this application. PCGS got wise to this pattern of tone about 10 years ago and has since refused to grade them. NGC, however, seems to be more spotty for the 'no grade' . In addition, the pattern of colors are not correct, as many of you have mentioned. Purple and green rarely are seen together, usually the pattern of true color would have violet, magenta, light blue, gold, green. Purple is a red flag.

 

TRUTH

[MikeKing]

Crackling? Not craqueleur, or is it pointillism as per Seurat?

 

 

[jom]

In my opinion, this coin is Artificially Toned. The 'crackling' pattern that Greg alludes to is a signature pattern of gas application.

 

This was brought up before by me but....why is it that this "crackeling" is considered AT whereas many Roosey dimes have similar toning and is considered NT?

 

jom

[TomB]

The crackling pattern in and of itself is not indicative of AT, however, the crackling pattern in combination with certain color schemes or blends is indicative of AT. This is why Roosevelt dimes, with similar crackling patterns, are accepted as naturally toned when this commem was not; the colors on the dimes are natural.

[jom]

the crackling pattern in combination with certain color schemes or blends is indicative of AT

 

Is this "blend" you refer to the rainbow across the obverse from 9 to 12 o'clock?

 

jom

[TomB]

The crackling pattern with all the bad colors and transitions on this coin.

[jom]

The crackling pattern with all the bad colors and transitions on this coin.

 

One wonders why anyone would try to add "bad" colors. Must have been an "oopsy".

 

I do think that the mentality of ATing coins has changed over the years. Today it's whether you can get pretty toning so someone will pay a premium for an otherwise common coin. In the past, it seems, ATing a coin was to cover up something such as hairlines or whatever.

 

jom

[TomB]

One wonders why anyone would try to add "bad" colors. Must have been an "oopsy".

 

I don't know that anyone tries to poorly AT a coin for later resale, most just end up that way.

 

I agree with your idea as to why AT is done these days vs why it was done earlier.

[truthteller]

When I was dealing early in the 1990's, the doctors would produce these "wonders" for show and tell, not to really make tons of money. Most of the collectors knew the difference between real and fake, and many colored coins would sell for under $100. Today, many collectors do not know the difference, and the collectors who got into the color market in the late 1990's have a difficult time distinguishing real from fake. Yet, they will pay money for color. Thus, the AT doctors started emphasising and perfecting color formulas solely to capture the eye of the unknowledgeable collector with discretionary cash. The marketing has worked, the marketplace has made the demand, so the color has to look 'just good enough' to pass.

 

TRUTH

[jom]

Today, many collectors do not know the difference

 

I wonder why, over such a short period of time (10 years, say) people lost the ability to distinguish AT coins. Was it because the services got fooled and started slabbing hence when a new collectors sees the slabbed AT coin they get the "idea" that type of toning is "exceptable"? I remember it was Bob Campell who suggested as much when he gave that talk at one of ANA's in 94 and the interview he gave in Maurice Rosen's newsletter at the same time. Now maybe what was once "AT" is now legitimized?

 

jom

[truthteller]

I think collectors are too dependent on the grading service for the collector is really distinguish real from not real. Pre slabs, the collector had to know, now the reliance is on the holder to help distinguish.

 

 

TRUTH

[TomB]

I don't know that it's so much that people have lost the ability to distinguish AT coins, rather, I think the newer players in this niche market never knew what was AT to a high degree and, therefore, had to depend on the coin being certified. Remember, this area of numismatics has exploded in popularity, competition and price in the last decade and I would bet that those of us who made this area a specialty ten years ago are just fine when it comes to spotting AT while others who have come in later, perhaps much later, are more likely to depend on the services and their associated opinions rather than on any first-hand knowledge.

[jom]

perhaps much later, are more likely to depend on the services and their associated opinions rather than on any first-hand knowledge.

 

But you have to admit that the secrecy surrounding the coin doctors and the lack of any information on what is AT or not makes it exceedingly difficult to learn wouldn't you say? Sure, occationally there are threads like this but for the most part AT discussions end up breaking down into personal arguments into semantics or whatever.

 

I can say that personally I can only GUESS at what might be an AT coin. I would never guess the coin posted here was AT only because it isn't particularly attractive, with exception of that rainbow. On the other hand I've seen a bunch of major grading service slabbed coins, often posted by members at the both of these message boards (including possibly some of my own), that I would think are possibly AT. So if there is lack of info AND the "experts" are slabbing these things then how exactly do you learn?

 

jom

[TomB]

Those are valid points.

[truthteller]

Jom,

 

You've got to follow us old farts around the coin show. If the coin is AT, I'll make a funny face, if the coin is NT, I'll give a .

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRUTH

[braddick]

Jom,

 

You've got to follow us old farts around the coin show. If the coin is AT, I'll make a funny face, if the coin is NT, I'll give a .

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRUTH

Ok, but next time you like the toning make sure you use your THUMB.

 

There are children in the room.