Similarities In Toning On A "Details" (At Or Qc) Dime And A PCGS "Top Pop" Dime

Hello Numismatists,

I tried to tack this on at the end of a recent post I made in the coin grading forum for a very blue, smurflike 1803 dime. I really appreciated the discussion on this coin, during which some parties described the toning as natural (envelope toning maybe?) while others described it as QC or AT. NGC straight graded the coin at MS(61), but it's likely that whoever owned it tried to cross it at PCGS and wasn't able to (hence my calling this coin a "details" coin in the subject). This speculation isn't based on fact--I know little about the coin's pedigree, I'm just assuming because a PCGS cross would probably increase the value dramatically, so it must have been tried before, right?

I also saw this PCGS MS(67)+ 1805 (4 Berries) dime with similar blue toning, albeit much better fields. I have seen neither coin in person.

Here are my questions:
1) Do you see differences in the toning on these two coins that makes one "natural" and one "questionable?" If so, can you explain the difference? I am trying to learn about toning.

2) Is it possible these coins once were storied together in the same collection and acquired their toning together?