Opinions About Toned Coin Wanted

While I can appreciate toning, I prefer the Blast White of an original silver coin...

Excuse me? I don't appreciate your comment. It's not a matter of capacity to think. I'd paid well to think and my capacity to do so has rewarded me well in life.




It appears you fall into "thinking challenged" group. When some 12 year old kid can make a toned coin in five minutes with simple kitchen items you think the TPG's should slab it? Should collectors jump up and down and extoll the virtues of his creation and PCGS put it in a slab?

It's not a matter of permission, it's a matter of what is right and what is wrong in collecting. Identifying AT coins is important because ANYONE can AT a coin in minutes or even seconds. IT IS POST MINT DAMAGE, no different than taking a knife to the surface. I suggest you use your superior reasoning ability to digest that.

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

It's a pretty coin for sure but I wouldn't pay much of a premium for it. I've never been big into toners.

Let's keep things friendly here guys. Everybody has an opinion and there's no need for bickering.

Very beautiful coin Definitely one of a kind whether AT or NT.

We all have opinions and this is the Forum to express them. There is plenty of room here for all of us. Live & let live.

Metalman, the reason for that is precisely because the proponents of the use of that term, "artificial toning," aren't thinking. That's the reason this "debate" continues to go around in circles and nothing ever gets resolved. That's the explanation for that merry-go-round we continually find ourselves stuck on whenever we try to discuss the issue. How do you rationally resolve an issue when you're confronted with an opposing side that's reluctant to be rational?

All Biggfredd's asking, here, is, let's get that issue out on the table, let's define "artificial toning," once and for all, so that we don't continue to drive every thinking person, here, dizzy on it. Let's get that definition out from under the shroud of darkness and ignorance and into the light of day where it can then be subjected to public scrutiny and, gosh forbid, rational discourse. If you're using that term as a means of condemning the toning on a coin, one would reasonably expect that you have the intellectual capacity to rationally define what you mean by it. What's so hard to understand about that? But, still, that definition is yet to be forthcoming, isn't it? Could the explanation for that be that the proponents of the use of that term understand full-well that they're leading with their chins on it? I believe that one may reasonably draw that inference from that conduct, yes.

Let me just fast-forward a little bit to the present state of affairs on this term. Did you know that PCGS now has a submissions tier called "SecurePlus?" Did you know that they put every single one of those coins submitted at that tier through a chemical analyzer? Did you know that machine checks for, among a laundry list of other trace chemicals, the trace chemicals found in Verdi-Gone(TM)? I do. I submitted several coins at that tier that were treated with same, those were the only chemicals those coins had ever been treated with, and they all failed to grade at that tier, each and every one of them, being returned as "QT." PCGS SecurePlus is putting BadThad out of business, and he doesn't even know it, yet.

In short, that's what's wrong with unthinkingly adopting arbitrary grading standards. And, "artificial toning" is just such a standard. It permits collectors as well as TPGs to condemn coins for whatever pretentious reasons they feel like, without explanation. Nobody can question them, as nobody knows what in the heck they're talking about. Nobody knows what in the heck they're talking about, as they refuse to define what in the heck they're talking about. They refuse to define what in the heck they're talking about, as they don't have the slightest grasp, themselves, on what in the heck they're talking about.

One final thing. "Artificial toning" is a market grading standard. Don't anybody kid yourself on that. That's the reason it's important to clearly see that term for what it is. NGC, I believe, will slab the coin "AT." I hadn't had cause to do business with them in quite some time. PCGS, as I said, will slab it "QT," and, they're currently my preference, when I need to play that sucker game with my coins. The acronyms mean the same thing, however. They're each synonymous with this arbitrary, capricious, indescript term, "artificial toning." They're the kiss of death on our coins while we keep them in those slabs. As such, crack them out. What pretentious market grading standards NGC and PCGS choose to align themselves with is their business. Just look at that that way.

PS: Just for BadThad, FWIW, I don't collect "cooked" coins. Neither do I collect coins that are marked-up with a highlighter, as you had also erroneously suggested. Neither do I require an inarticulable crutch to hang my collecting decisions on. Let the record so reflect.

Were you standing at the Mint when those coins came off the presses? Nah, I didn't think so. You have no way of knowing what the previous owner(s) did to those coins and to say otherwise is completely disingenuous.



Nope, AT is a matter of chemistry- pure and simple. Certain reactions will only happen in a natural setting while other reactions can only occur when artificially induced. Target toning formed in an album over the course of years= natural. One sided circus colors from heating a coin on a hotplate= artificial. The key difference here is the kinetics of the reaction, slow kinetics equals a natural reaction while fast kinetics equals an unnatural reaction. Reaction kinetics can be sped up by heat, increasing concentration of the reactants, and the addition of catalysts. Your final product is not always the same in a fast reaction vs slow reaction- that pertains to the natural color progression mentioned BadThad mentioned and that progression is altered when the kinetics are changed dramatically. Yes, there will still be some grey areas for certain coins but AT vs NT is not as mysterious as most make it out to be and it is certainly not just a matter of opinion.