| Author |
 Replies: 36 / Views: 4,259 |
Page 3 of 3
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1913 Posts |
2,3,1,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,4
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19171 Posts |
3, 2, 1, 4 works for me. I do like toning.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
292 Posts |
I like to see the coins, and don't care how someone else might value it. Give me the shiny one that I can see!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7193 Posts |
Just as you have them, 1, 2, 3 then 4
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3325 Posts |
Thank you for the continued comments. What spurred me to do this was a visit to PCGS's price guide. All three examples they show at the top of the Antietam guide are toned coins - thought that was odd.
"Nummi rari mira sunt, si sumptus ferre potes." - Christophorus filius Scotiae
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
992 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
I agree with commems that #2 is the most appealing, but that is our preference.
I accept the opinions of others who prefer toned coins.
Numismatic market pricing seems to support the preference of these collectors.
|
|
Valued Member
299 Posts |
Anything except #2. I don't like dipped coins and there's no way this one hasn't had a bath after 83 years. Looks as if it had tab tone which was rinsed off and has begun to reform. #4 is a little too far gone ; somebody mentioned 'borderline environmental damage' which is a reasonable interpretation. 3-1-4-2.
Edited by freddo30
12/20/2020 01:14 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1775 Posts |
2, 1, 3 and like most others 4 would be last.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3325 Posts |
Thanks again for your opinions.
"Nummi rari mira sunt, si sumptus ferre potes." - Christophorus filius Scotiae
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2474 Posts |
all 4, any order.. just cos I roll that way sometimes..
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188770 Posts |
Quote:
all 4, any order.. just cos I roll that way sometimes.. Like a boss!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
591 Posts |
I'm curious about #2, totally devoid of toning. Either this coin was dipped or else it was stored in something extremely secure, right?
Personally, a vintage coin is much more interesting when it has at least some toning, not like it was minted yesterday, and coin #2 looks too fresh for 1937.
My preference is coin #3. While it primarily has rim toning, I think it has more subtle toning throughout. I wonder if you could view these coins in hand, if coin #3 would actually have more luster than coin #2.
Coin #1 and #4 look really cool in my opinion, but just a bit much on the toning. coin #1 could be 100% natural toning, but in my mind I'm questioning whether there was some artificial component. Coin #4 is cool, but I just feel that it really reduces overall eye appeal.
Thanks for posting this!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3325 Posts |
Quote:
I'm curious about #2, totally devoid of toning. Either this coin was dipped or else it was stored in something extremely secure, right? I can't say if #2 has been dipped. Given a 68 grade, I would guess that it is "stock." But, someone who knows how to dip a coin may get away with it. I have a couple of coins of this vintage that have absolutely no toning but they certainly could have been dipped. Unless it was heavily altered I really can't tell. "Nummi rari mira sunt, si sumptus ferre potes." - Christophorus filius Scotiae
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5191 Posts |
First #1 then #2.
The first coin reminds me of New England fall foliage. The second one is just a plain, high grade coin. Don't like the sharp circular toning of #3, and the toning of #4 is just over-the-top.
Edited by NumisEd
12/30/2020 12:45 pm
|
|
Page 3 of 3
|
Replies: 36 / Views: 4,259 |
Page 3 of 3
|
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 12/18/2020 11:34 am
