1892 Barber Half Dollar - Please Evaluate The Toning For Premium And Type

I will say, this IS the frustrating part with regards to photos...

PCGS "dolls up" the archive "TV" photo to a fault... You need to see the true skin of the coin, otherwise what is the point?

On the other hand, my camera and both owners of these barbers are at the mercy of THEIR camera when posting to sell... Any potential buyer that see's the ebay listing and looks at these photos would likely run away or likely do what I did.. and question it because relative to my coin.. they appear a lot worse.

The reality is they may very well be worse, but our cameras magnify the blemishes and make them look way worse sometimes than they really are - even under 3X.

Just food for thought.. Still believe, I could actually bump up potentially to PR64 after seeing the 1897 and 1911 however - especially with what I call early / mid life toning that adds to the eye appeal.

Like we all have been saying, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, which is why their is an absolute subjectivity in all of these coins that are graded.

You have a very attractive proof Barber half dollar. It seems like you want everyone to agree with your assessment, good luck.

Back to your original question,


In my opinion, no, it is not monster toning.

Regarding the grade, I think you have a high end 63. Send it to CAC? Just because there are less appealing versions on ebay, it does not mean yours should be graded higher.

If YOU are happy with the coin, that is all that matters. I think it is a very nice example, and I would be proud to have it in my collection

Just a few thoughts on the 19th Century proofs and collectors. As background, I've worked as a buyer's agent for 55-ish years. In that role, my duty is to flag as many concerns with a coin as possible for the buyers, so they can make informed buying decisions. Of necessity, that makes the way I look at coins more critical and more conservative on grading.

CCF has several members who collect 19th Century proofs, and a couple members who have fantastic collections of toned proofs.

Over the years. I've handled several Barber Half proofs. A quick look at my digital records shows that I handled five 1892 Barber half proofs, including one impaired proof, and it looks like none of those were slabbed. Most 19th Century proofs exist in sufficient quantity for the demand, which is why most dates don't attract huge prices in mid-Proof grades (63-64-65). Very few people actually try to assemble complete series proof date sets. More seek proof type coins for type sets. Because of suppressed demand, the seemingly low proof mintages are deceptive. Survivorship numbers for proofs vary widely. The depression of 1893-1897 forced many 1870s-mid1890s proofs into commerce. It is not unusual to see mid-UNC business strikes sell for much higher prices than the same mid-Proof grades. That is especially noticeable in the five cent series, where UNC Shield or Liberty nickels frequently outpace the proofs. Even the proof-only dates in those series don't command the premium people would expect.

There are still quite a few raw proofs out there, and most larger coin shows will have an ample supply of most common date proofs. Not many trade on ebay, but that isn't a surprise. Marketplaces such as Great Collections and Greysheet Marketplace handle many more proofs.

Toning is temporary. It is an ongoing process, and today's toning likely will not look the same in 20-30 years. There aren't many ways to arrest that process, although using Argon gas in sealed slabs would be an interesting option. Very few of the adjectives applied to toning matter. In reality, there are only two types of toning -- attractive and unattractive -- and perceptions will vary widely. See the old adage about beauty and beholders.

Typical album toning is light, with a golden ring inside the rim. Some of the brighter colors immediately start the debate about artificial versus natural toning, and several members on here will be quick (and correct) to point out that the real debate is between market acceptable and market unacceptable toning.

Just from my vantage point, the toning on a proof is far less important than the surface conditions, which will strongly affect the grade. Once the technical grade is established, then the attractive versus unattractive discussion comes into play.

Again, just some thoughts in general. I certainly agree with the comments upthread about the difficulty in photographing proof coins, especially the silver proofs.

Thank you for sharing your experience with us, FC!

I must quote this for truth...

I held back on some of my thoughts, but you asked again for my opinion on the coin. Again, I see the coin fairly critically because of my role as a buyer's agent. This is not a coin I would recommend to my buyers.

There are three things buyers want in any 19th Century proof coin.
First, authenticity. PCGS determined that this is a proof, and is genuine.
Second, technical grade. PR-63 is generally the floor for what collectors seeking proofs will buy. PCGS has this as PR-63, but I can't get there. More on that below.
Third, many buyers want CAM or DCAM proofs, and that's the one thing beyond technical grade that enhances proof value significantly. Correctly, PCGS didn't see this as a CAM.

You keep asking about toning. "Monster toning" isn't a category. It's a marketing slogan. Toning is simply a chemical process. Toning mostly is a neutral for most buyers. It isn't the reason people buy proofs. People either want a proof coin, or they don't.

If they want a proof coin, technical grade and CAM/DCAM designation are the price drivers. Attractive, unobtrusive toning can make some buyers take a second look. As others have noted upthread, this toning isn't attractive. In addition, what may be a fingerprint at the back of Liberty's head is an issue.

In terms of technical grade, I have reservations whether this may be an impaired proof. The obverse has a number of contact marks that are much more consistent with light circulation than with cabinet storage or mishandling over the years. The obverse rims have numerous very light scratches. Liberty's face has several longer scratches. Most notable are the scratch from the inner ear to the back of the eye, the scratch from the bottom of the earlobe to the lips, the vertical parallel scratches from the center of the jaw to the mid-neck, multidirectional light scratches above the truncation of the neck, and scratches on the higher edges of some of the leaves, e.g. the second leaf to the right of the cap curl and the upper leaf adjoining the first "T" of TRUST. There is multiple NW-SE pitting across the cheek and on the tip of the nose. These marks suggest light circulation, such as being scraped across a store counter. That would suggest PR-58. If a grader doesn't see this as enough to call it an impaired proof, these marks are more consistent with PR-62 than with a higher grade. To me, PCGS calling this PR-63 seems generous.

You've asked for honesty in the comments, and if I saw this coin in a dealer's case on a bourse floor, I'd walk away.

FortCollins

I appreciate your honesty and respect and appreciate your comments. I would respectfully disagree with all of them however. I trust PCGS as a grading service and though they sometimes can get certain aspects of a grade wrong, you made a list that I feel is unsubstantiated. Also, questioning the validity of their attribution was never meant to be the theme of this post.

When I purchased the coin and had several friends who are dealers look at the coin for the grade, they all agreed the grade is accurate and that the toning could actually push the coin to a PR64.

This is why I brought the coin here. To address another point you made, the very faint hairlines that your referencing in the fields of the coin are polishing lines, not countertop or cabinet scratching. Since these coins were made to be proofs, they used highly polished dies and that lends itself to the hairlines your concerned with.

In regards to a fingerprint, I just dont see it. I have taking about 50 pictures of the coin in about every kind of light and in hand under great magnification, I dont see any evidence at all of a fingerprint. I would have to give PCGS more credit than that for missing something so egregious as a fingerprint.

The scratches as I have indicated, are under 3 to 5x, and greatly exaggerated in most cases due to the lighting. They are not distracting in any way when looking at the coin in hand and barely if visable at all.

Since toning has been a thorn to some on this post its subjective and an acquired taste, but I would not dismiss it as unsubstantiated hype or a buzzword. Collectors appreciate toning in all types and it could bring thousands to an otherwise high pop coin or increase a coins grade.

There is a very strong market for toned coins and honestly, they are a breath of fresh air from the "blast white" examples that seemingly overrun the market. This of course is subjective and in the eye of the beholder and your entitled to your opinion. I would also strongly argue that DCAM or CAM are not the only drivers of price above the base price, that is simply not true. You are also making the assumption that on that day, there was one available or that I had the extra $600 for a CAMEO example. I bought what I could afford and this was the only 1892 PROOF on the entire floor out of 125 tables.

I am not scared when its described as corrosive, I already undestood that going into my many purchases of toned coins. To me, they add something unique and elevate a coins appearance.

This coin has both electric blue and pink hues around the rim of the coin that is exentuated against the background of the gun metal grey toning. The toning is even and not splotchy and is described as target toning, one of the most desirable types.

The one thing I will agree with is that it doe not reach the monster level of toning that could command thousands more.

Given the coin only has 124 combined examples from both PCGS and NGC of this coin in this grade, I would be happy and was happy the gentleman before me who wanted the coin put it down, because he could not afford it.

Some on this thread have acted like this coin is massively available in this grade, and thats relatively true but a PR63 is not a PR65 and there will be imperfections as with any coin graded in 63.

So, though this coin is not for you I feel it was a bargain as has others here have agreed at $1400. PCGS lists it at $1525 and a recent ebay sale sold for $1500. When you add the toning it elevates this coin to $1900 reasonably.

With only 124 examples available across both grading companies, I would argue that turning your back on a piece of history on the bourse floor, with hopes of finding something better in the same grade, may cost you months of trying to find something you may never find.

Thanks again

I admire your passion for this coin if you feel strongly it merits a higher grade or a + or star designation crack it out submit raw in the end the coin will speak for itself you may or may not be right about the grade. Here's a circulation strike and proof strike where dark splotchy toning likely held back their grade. Toned Barber's are not uncommon its circular rainbow toning that brings fierce premium at auctions I've handled very few Barber's rainbow toned and hope to locate one at some point. Good luck hope you stick to the series.

I was sitting down tonight, enjoying my coins and I captured an amazing few photos of the obverse and reverse.