How Long Does Toning Take?

As a trained scientist (but one no longer working as a scientist) I have to say that I believe that if we start with identical coins (composition, surface quality, etc.) and subject them to identical conditions, that all will tone in predictable, repeatable ways. Now getting identical coins with identical surface qualities, and being able to precisely control the toning process may not be so easy for a backyard chemist to do, so getting predictable, repeatable results could be tricky.

If the process repeats a "natural toning" process, then the results will be indistinguishable, all other variables being equal (i.e., time since toning occured, storage since toning, etc.)

In the end...there really would be no tangible or measurable difference. Because precision is so difficult to accomplish, I'm certain that a trained eye can distinguish between "well-toned" and "ill-toned" coins.

As long as differences are discernible, then differences in value are supportable. I'm not at all sure that it should make a difference, but it does, and so be it. The objective and subjective reasons we collectors value different qualities in our coins are myriad and not always rational. A repunched date or mint mark on one coin can command a huge premium; on another coin in another series, even if equally or more rare, the same variation commands little or no premium. That's not rational...but it is still valid.

Toning can add to eye appeal...and when it does it will tend to enhance the value of the coin, since more buyers will be attracted to it. Is it "rational" that most collectors want "natural toning" if looking for toning at all? I would suggest that it is rational. We tend to value coins primarily for what happened at the time of minting. Examples: number minted, quality of strike, minting errors, etc. We tend to devalue things that happened after minting ("environmental damage", wear, and so forth.) Value is inversely proportional to scarcity, so long as demand exceeds supply. So even though toning is an "after the mint" occurence and should actually devalue the coin, it's enhancement of eye appeal increases rarity and adds net value. Just as soon as the "enhancement" is predictable and repeatable, then scarcity goes out the window, and value to a collector diminishes. It is this subtle interplay of attributes that are the result of minting, and after-minting, rare and random (unrepeatable) occurences that develop demand for a coin and result in a "value" attached to it.

Sorry for the long and rambling post...

Again...just some thoughts...

quote:

---

Im a bit predjudiced against coin doctors

---

Absolutely! If I had two identical, beautifully toned coins (impossible I know).. one was by chance, and one was diliberately done using the same conditions... I would be attracted to the coin toned by accident, and I would consider the "doctored" coin to be trash.

But it strange when you think about it because there's NO DIFFERENCE between the coins. I just feel like the latter coin has been.... molested.