1960 Lincoln Proof- NT or AT?

[Deerefan8420]

I purchased several Proof sets recently that were in Capital Holders and in the 1960 set was this cent here. What do you guys/gals think? NT, AT, Questionable, or other opinions are welcomed. Thanks!

 

And since I am still not too familiar with Lincoln cents, would this be considered the Large Date cent?

 

[Kurtdog]

Large Date. On the tarnish, I think I can do that, if that's what you want to know.

[physics-fan3.14]

Almost 100% certain that is AT. The spottiness is a key sign, as are the random colors - no progression and no evidence of natural toning. The coin is probably worth about 2 cents.

[MarkFeld]

While I wouldn't bet on it, I think the color could be natural.

[e1cnr]

looks NT to me

[coinsarefun]

Natural and looks nice.

 

 

 

[bsshog40]

I like the colors but all those wierd spots in the fields look odd to me.

[coinman_23885]

The spottiness bothers me and looks questionable to me.

[TonerGuy]

NT... I have regularly seen colors similar to this from Capital Holders. Beautiful penny BTW.

 

If you want to let her go I would be happy to take her off your hands. ;-)

[Coindude]

I've seen that type of toning from capital holders before. Although natural I personally feel it's unattractive. Unless you call album toning AT them you have to consider this NT even if you don't like the pattern. Whether or not the tpgs would call this AT is another story altogether.

[physics-fan3.14]

I've seen that type of toning from capital holders before. Although natural I personally feel it's unattractive. Unless you call album toning AT them you have to consider this NT even if you don't like the pattern. Whether or not the tpgs would call this AT is another story altogether.

 

I've never seen or heard of capitol holders causing toning before. Do you have more examples to post, or a thread where it is discussed? Not saying I don't believe you, just saying I'm not familiar with it.

[Coindude]

I can dig around and see if I might have some. I normally don't buy them as I find the pattern unattractive. I'll post with photos if I come up with something from my own hoard.

[Prethen]

You gotta love responses on threads like this: Everything from 100% AT to 100% NT.

[brg5658]

I was waiting for Robec or WingedLiberty to chime in, but I know the 1960 proof Lincolns are well known for all sorts of colorful toning in the original proof set packaging.

 

With that being known, why do you (or others) suspect that the toning came from the Capitol holder, and wasn't already on the coin when it was put in the holder? For all we know, it could have been put in the Capitol holder 6 months ago (or right before you purchased it -- whenever that was).

 

The toning on that 1960 looks completely natural to my eye based on the dozens from around this time frame that I have seen Robec and WingedLiberty post from original packaging.

[jom]

You gotta love responses on threads like this: Everything from 100% AT to 100% NT.

 

...and that, my friends, is the nature of the coin market summed up in one sentence.

 

I'd say a couple of things:

 

1) Probably natural

2) Not sure at all whether a TPG would deem it "Market Acceptable"

3) I don't like it too much so I don't really care either way...so I'd just pass and not worry about it.

 

 

jom

[Red Llama]

I've seen that type of toning from capital holders before. Although natural I personally feel it's unattractive. Unless you call album toning AT them you have to consider this NT even if you don't like the pattern. Whether or not the tpgs would call this AT is another story altogether.

 

I believe they would but then again--who knows

[TonerGuy]

Modern toners with NGC is iffy at best recently.

[Red Llama]

Modern toners with NGC is iffy at best recently.

 

I hear people say that and I am not really into moderns but can you really blame them?

I mean everybody and their mother is doing AT now.

 

(I hope I don't get people all riled up but I did have a big rant on toning and how it is has gotten out a hand recently and how it hurts the collector community.......)

[Red Llama]

I've seen that type of toning from capital holders before. Although natural I personally feel it's unattractive. Unless you call album toning AT them you have to consider this NT even if you don't like the pattern. Whether or not the tpgs would call this AT is another story altogether.

 

I've never seen or heard of capitol holders causing toning before. Do you have more examples to post, or a thread where it is discussed? Not saying I don't believe you, just saying I'm not familiar with it.

 

I think he means that capital holders are not all that good at being 100% air tight which is true.

 

I don't think he meant it was the holders themselves toning but I'll let Dude chime back in

[TonerGuy]

Actually I think its a factor of both the plastic and the how the coins when not properly set into a Capital holder allow for a thin opening between the 3 pieces of plastic that allows air to reach the surface of the coin.

 

I am not a chemist so I cant really say what exactly it is though. I can just make my casual observations of many toned coins in Capital holders.

 

As for the AT/NT debate, Im really about the MA. After more than 15 yrs of looking at toned coins I feel fairly certain in my abilities (in the coins I collect and like). Anyone can be fooled though. And usually I stay away from Monsters on common date coins with huge premiums. I couldnt tell you the first thing about toned Morgans because I dont specialize in them. But as for toned Peace $ - there's little I havent seen.

 

I dont necessarily agree that AT is hurting the collector community though. I see PCGS certified toned ASEs going for huge premiums. Are they AT ? I dont know but some are 10 yr old coins (or newer) coins with some crazy colors selling for $300-$500. Is that bad IDK -- ?

 

Do others here think its bad ?

[Red Llama]

Capitals are no so easy to seal perfectly and most are not so it is certainly possible to get that toning from the holder.

 

I don't want to go too off topic but I think AT is just bad news. Toning was supposed to be cool -it is not becoming what guy in his garage can get the prettiest colors to sell some chumps to pay 10x what a coin is worth.

 

IMO

[Raisethis2]

Here's one I clipped out of a Proof Set, shipped to NGC and now it sits in a PF 66 BN holder. Notice the blue rim. I'm told that if the blue goes all the way around, the coin fails.

 

[jpcienkus]

Wow, that '62 is beautiful!

 

Why would they fail it if the blue covers 100% of the rim? I'm going to assume it's a sign of coin doctoring, but how have they come to that conclusion?

[coinman_23885]

 

In my opinion, there is no comparison between your coin and the one in the original post.

[$ilverHawk]

 

Toning? Strike? Coloration? Just wondering.

 

I don't know this series very well, but the OP's coin seems to be a NT variant of the 1962 Proof.

 

Carl

[Raisethis2]

Yes, that's why I posted the 62. It got slabbed and shows very similar toning characteristics IMO.

[coinman_23885]

The first coin looks questionable, but it could appear natural in hand. This coin has a bunch of random colors mixed together with no real color progression, and the toning is very splotchy and interrupted by significant spottiness, which raises red flags for me. The coloration of the second coin looks a bit more even, and even though there are some areas of discontinuity in the toning, it doesn't look splotchy like the first example at least to me. Holistically, I think the second coin, its color, and its pattern of spotting is very different. I don't think the two coins are comparable.

 

Edited to add: Justin, could you add a few more photographs of the coin from different angles?

[Deerefan8420]

 

Edited to add: Justin, could you add a few more photographs of the coin from different angles?

 

I sure will Kenny. I am headed out of town for the day but I should be home later in the afternoon. I'll get some images up then. Thanks for all of the opinions and discussions so far everyone!

[kryptonitecomics]

The toning looks natural to me and I think the light shinning directly into the fields at an angle is what is throwing some of you off. If you image enough toned coins you understand that certain lighting conditions make NT coins look neon and AT.

[e1cnr]

I've seen that type of toning from capital holders before. Although natural I personally feel it's unattractive. Unless you call album toning AT them you have to consider this NT even if you don't like the pattern. Whether or not the tpgs would call this AT is another story altogether.

 

I've never seen or heard of capitol holders causing toning before. Do you have more examples to post, or a thread where it is discussed? Not saying I don't believe you, just saying I'm not familiar with it.

 

There are many types and versions of Capital Plastics holders and some very definitely do cause toning. I collect Jefferson nickels and there are versions with white or black cardboard inserts (especially in the war nickel sets) that are caused by the cardboard.

 

The 3 layered plastic holders also will cause toning to varying degrees - the translucent colored middle layer (I have seen many colors-> blue, green, orange, red, yellow) more than the solid black or white.

 

Coins base metal also is involved.

 

The Capital Plastic holders are no where near airtight, nor do they claim to be.

 

 

I could post pictures, but would be a waste of time as they are so plentiful.

 

The real questions are 'what did the coins look like' when they were put into the sets and how many years have they been there. Many proof sets from the 50's turned a purple/blue peripheral haze from the government packaging.

 

As far as OP question 'is this AT?' -> does it really matter on a $5 coin?

It does not look attractive, so no color bonus by me.