Is this "terminal toning" to you....

[TonerGuy]

Braddick, do you own that coin and what's the grade? I like it a lot. I collected black beauties for awhile and I love them. I understand your confusion toner guy, there really is no rhyme or reason to the TPG's grading these, the ones with luster are beautiful in my opinion and even some lacking luster can look good, the splotchy toning like the quarter posted in this thread I find completely unappealing. I owned the peace dollar mumu speaks of and it has good luster and I'm in agreement that it should straight grade, I had intended to send it in but never did. Here are a few black beauties I owned and loved the last picture lacked luster and wasn't my favorite but it was pretty enough for me, I would consider it terminal but it was in a problem free slab. I miss collecting these coins and I personally love the original posted Mercury, it would have fit into my dark side of the moon collection nicely, if I was still collecting I would have over paid to win it.

 

 

 

Very nice coins. I have a three Black Beauty Morgans and like you dont mind dark toning.

 

I found a rainbow/black Washington Quarter much like the Merc in the OP post of this thread at a local show for a reasonable price but I passed on it because I really thought it would get details graded. So it got me thinking about how the TPGS are very inconsistent when it comes to black toning.

[Nutmeg Coin]

I don't buy the terminal toning argument, another 20 years in the holder in a proper low humidity environment and it will essentially be the same coin.

[johnny9434]

not for me, i dont like the toning on it. jmo

[lehigh96]

I see significant black/terminal toning on both the obverse and reverse. I find it acceptable as long as the luster is not impaired which is rare with black toning.

[e1cnr]

I am not sure what the definition of terminal toning is, but I would think it as end stage with no more possible toning. These would be dark as could be.

[SunriseW]

To me, this all begs the larger question that I generally don't see being discussed:

 

Given that toning is a chemical reaction and is environmental damage, why don't we, as collectors who presumably would like to see a given coin survive for many future generations, do all that we can to remove toning by cleaning the coin (yes, I used the "c" word) and then conserve the coin in ways that discourage toning for the future? It's counter-intuitive to me that in general, collectors value a coin that with respect to wear is as close to the true mint state appearance as possible but simultaneously value damage (wear) to a coin in the form of oxidation and other chemical reactions we call toning. If the toning formed a protective coating on the coin, that position might make a little more sense to me, but from what most of you have said above, it is an ongoing process of corrosion. Isn't toning the enemy if we want someone to see a given coin in a thousand years? And conversely, shouldn't cleaning (done in ways that do not damage the coin) be something positive in the name of conservation? Conservation cleaning is a necessary part of the art world, for example. Without it, we would never be able to appreciate the true colors painters used hundreds of years ago because of the "toning" on the canvas.

[mumu]

To me, this all begs the larger question that I generally don't see being discussed:

 

Given that toning is a chemical reaction and is environmental damage, why don't we, as collectors who presumably would like to see a given coin survive for many future generations, do all that we can to remove toning by cleaning the coin (yes, I used the "c" word) and then conserve the coin in ways that discourage toning for the future? It's counter-intuitive to me that in general, collectors value a coin that with respect to wear is as close to the true mint state appearance as possible but simultaneously value damage (wear) to a coin in the form of oxidation and other chemical reactions we call toning. If the toning formed a protective coating on the coin, that position might make a little more sense to me, but from what most of you have said above, it is an ongoing process of corrosion. Isn't toning the enemy if we want someone to see a given coin in a thousand years? And conversely, shouldn't cleaning (done in ways that do not damage the coin) be something positive in the name of conservation? Conservation cleaning is a necessary part of the art world, for example. Without it, we would never be able to appreciate the true colors painters used hundreds of years ago because of the "toning" on the canvas.

 

How would you clean a coin to remove what you call a "chemical reaction" without an even stronger chemical reaction? I assume you are pro dipping unless you know of some other way of removing toning? Dipping a coin strips metal off the coin, how is that less of a chemical reaction or even wear for that matter than what happens naturally in the alloys?

[jerseycat10]

To me, this all begs the larger question that I generally don't see being discussed:

 

Given that toning is a chemical reaction and is environmental damage, why don't we, as collectors who presumably would like to see a given coin survive for many future generations, do all that we can to remove toning by cleaning the coin (yes, I used the "c" word) and then conserve the coin in ways that discourage toning for the future?

 

No.

[coinman1794]

To me, this all begs the larger question that I generally don't see being discussed:

 

Given that toning is a chemical reaction and is environmental damage, why don't we, as collectors who presumably would like to see a given coin survive for many future generations, do all that we can to remove toning by cleaning the coin (yes, I used the "c" word) and then conserve the coin in ways that discourage toning for the future? It's counter-intuitive to me that in general, collectors value a coin that with respect to wear is as close to the true mint state appearance as possible but simultaneously value damage (wear) to a coin in the form of oxidation and other chemical reactions we call toning. If the toning formed a protective coating on the coin, that position might make a little more sense to me, but from what most of you have said above, it is an ongoing process of corrosion. Isn't toning the enemy if we want someone to see a given coin in a thousand years? And conversely, shouldn't cleaning (done in ways that do not damage the coin) be something positive in the name of conservation? Conservation cleaning is a necessary part of the art world, for example. Without it, we would never be able to appreciate the true colors painters used hundreds of years ago because of the "toning" on the canvas.

 

...because removing toning through chemical processes is not a from of conservation, but rather, an abrasive action that is just as bad as the toning process itself. Conservation is removing surface contamination without affecting the actual surfaces.

 

Furthermore, as you eluded, what we consider to be toning is many times actually build-up that is preserving the metal in the first place. It is ok to remove these contaminants, as long as you are planning to properly store the coin.

[SunriseW]

I assume you are pro dipping unless you know of some other way of removing toning? Dipping a coin strips metal off the coin, how is that less of a chemical reaction or even wear for that matter than what happens naturally in the alloys?

 

No, I'm not a pro, and I've never dipped or otherwise cleaned a coin in my life. But as someone who is a professional fine artist, the idea of preserving the original appearance of the coin seemed a worthwhile conversation starter.

[SunriseW]

Furthermore, as you eluded, what we consider to be toning is many times actually build-up that is preserving the metal in the first place. It is ok to remove these contaminants, as long as you are planning to properly store the coin.

 

That makes sense. But it also suggests that there is a nebulous line between what some would call preservation and others might call improper cleaning, right?

[jerseycat10]

Furthermore, as you eluded, what we consider to be toning is many times actually build-up that is preserving the metal in the first place. It is ok to remove these contaminants, as long as you are planning to properly store the coin.

 

That makes sense. But it also suggests that there is a nebulous line between what some would call preservation and others might call improper cleaning, right?

 

There is a gray area, and it gets argued, ad nauseam, fairly often.

[coinman1794]

Furthermore, as you eluded, what we consider to be toning is many times actually build-up that is preserving the metal in the first place. It is ok to remove these contaminants, as long as you are planning to properly store the coin.

 

That makes sense. But it also suggests that there is a nebulous line between what some would call preservation and others might call improper cleaning, right?

 

"Improperly Cleaned" is used to describe a coin that has been visibly damaged during a cleaning process, whether by adding hairline scratches, or by dipping a coin to the point where the luster begins to erode away. True conservation, the removal of surface contamination, will not result in damage. If someone dips a coin, they are damaging it microscopically, and people might not notice. It is still not conservation, however, as it is destroying the safe surface layers as would toning.

[BROADSTRUCK]

Yes as if I saw it on the ground raw I wouldn't touch it with my bare hands

[Catbert]

Yes as if I saw it on the ground raw I wouldn't touch it with my bare hands

 

Frank - would you pick this one up? MS66

 

 

[ron_c]

[JIM F.]

I like the toning on the Merc dime. I think CAC also likes toning like this, but I can't speak for them. Thanks for posting.

[clydedenver]

OP Dime is not terminal toning. It is in the middle of the toning spectrum sporting a nice amount of class 2 green. However, what makes it dark on the right side seems to be some kind of residue.

 

Terminal toning is the obverse of the 1881 Morgan posted above me. After you get past about a class 6 red or class 6 green, the toning progresses to black.

[jerseycat10]

 

That's incredible. Another example of a "lustrous" black toned coin.