What do you think of this color?

[morganguru]

Bought it 10 years ago, one of my early raw Morgan purchases. It's been in a Dansco ever since. The color seems odd to me. What do you think?

Scott

 

[bsshog40]

I actually like it!!!

[newprepper]

I don't think its odd, actually the bright ones are the ones that should be considered odd

[zboyle04]

i like the darker toned coins more than the bright ones, that one looks nice

[physics-fan3.14]

My first reaction on opening the thread "That looks suspicious." I'm not a fan from those pictures, whether its genuine or assisted its hard to tell.

[Kamillion]

i agree. not a big fan of the pictures either.

 

[MarkFeld]

For me, this is a tough call, but if I had to guess, I would say that it is not natural.

[jom]

It does look odd but has the coin been like that since you bought it? If so, at the very least the color is "stable".

 

I would look out for possible damage at 2 o'clock on the obverse as it is getting rather dark there....

 

jom

[morganguru]

Honestly I'm not a big fan either, my gut is telling me I made a bad choice.

As I acquired more coins over time with toning, I've grown to dislike it.

At least I have next to nothing in it. Thanks for all the opinions,

Scott

[Kurtdog]

Bought it 10 years ago, one of my early raw Morgan purchases. It's been in a Dansco ever since. The color seems odd to me. What do you think?

Scott

I wouldn't say I'm a real big fan of that tarnish. The surface is a little "washed out," but it's still a nice coin. That's not to say it's cleaned and re-tarnished, but what's going on is along those principles. That's why the tarnish just sort of lays there, buzzed out, rather than jumping off that surface at you. Again, I think it's an OK coin, no real problems with it. The tarnish, due to that surface, just isn't as lustrous as it perhaps otherwise could be.

[gmarguli]

From the pics, the surfaces look dead. I'd guess the color was added to help hide this.

[morganguru]

<<From the pics, the surfaces look dead. I'd guess the color was added to help hide this>>

 

I couldn't agree with you more. A great example of what not to buy.

[Kurtdog]

<<From the pics, the surfaces look dead. I'd guess the color was added to help hide this>>

 

I couldn't agree with you more. A great example of what not to buy.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that unless you've been hanging around these forums too long.

[jerseycat10]

I agree with the consensus, the toning is very suspicious.

[coinman1794]

My first reaction on opening the thread "That looks suspicious." I'm not a fan from those pictures, whether its genuine or assisted its hard to tell.

 

It's most likely natural, but the pictures certainly do not do it justice.

[morganguru]

<<It's most likely natural, but the pictures certainly do not do it justice.>>

 

It's how the coin looks in hand, it's not a pretty example.

[Walkerfan]

It's luster looks a little washed out or impeded and the color is not that good or vivid.

[grip]

Litter box coin J/K

[jom]

<<It's most likely natural, but the pictures certainly do not do it justice.>>

 

It's how the coin looks in hand, it's not a pretty example.

 

No big deal. Selling it for bullion (if it's low grade) might actually make you money. Put the dough toward a better example.

 

jom

[coinman1794]

<<It's most likely natural, but the pictures certainly do not do it justice.>>

 

It's how the coin looks in hand, it's not a pretty example.

 

Not pretty and not original are two different things, of course. This is an 1897-P, which isn't usually found with bright luster. Moderate to heavy satin is typical of this issue. The color itself seems natural in appearance, based on bad pictures. I reserve final judgements for in-person examination.

[yonico]

i really like it

[johnny9434]

that one is not for me.

[Kurtdog]

How many ways do we need to see it? It's a nice coin, it just lacks a little punch.

[TomB]

I don't like the feel of this coin.