| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 2,224 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5847 Posts |
Poll Question
I'm a huge fan of proof coins. I also really like nicely toned coins and think they can add a lot of character to an old coin. I have to say, however, I am really not a huge fan of toned proof coins, especially when the toning eliminates or diminishes the mirror-like finish of the coin. Basically, while I appreciate that proof coins have many things going for them, including sharper strikes, clearer details, lower mintages, etc., my favorite thing about them is the reflective surfaces. And as nice as toning can be to the eye, I just don't see the point of having a proof coin that isn't actually proof-like in appearance. Here's an example of a proof coin from my collection that happens to have some beautiful toning:   It's a great coin (graded PF65) and certainly has a lot of eye appeal, but I do wish the fields were more reflective. So, what do you think?
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4911 Posts |
I know exactly how you feel, the toning on some proofs and specimens can be extremely deceptive. I recall a story of someone who sent some coins to ICCS in their early days, the coins were 1935 can. silver dollars they were matte specimens with toning and came back as uncs! the guy broke them out and PCGS sent them back as spec. strikes.
Feel free to call me Will.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
Classic proof coins of the 1800's were never encapsulated by the Mint, so you have to take them as they are. As a result, bad toning has a negative effect on the value. The mirror effect lessens as the patination process takes over.
I would think that a proof mirror blast white classic silver coin of the 1800's would command quite a large pemium
over a grey patinated silver proof coin of the same period.
DMPL dollars are an example; I think ALL of these should be encapsulated.
Modern proof coins are almost always encapsulated by the Mint, so most people like their modern proof coins to remain mirror blast white.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5847 Posts |
Well, I don't know if any of my proof coins from the 1800s can really be considered "mirror blast white", but I have some that look like this:    The prices I paid were in line with standard price guides and I don't think I paid extra for lack of toning. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
11951 Posts |
I really like your 1910 ...has a lot eye appeal
But if I had to pick one, I would choose the 1882.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4911 Posts |
but with a blast white example the chances of a coin being dipped skyrocket especially considering many proofs were housed in yhings such as tissue paper which encouraged toning.
Feel free to call me Will.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5847 Posts |
Does dipping affect the mirror surfaces on proof coins? I've never tried doing it.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
barryg: I would think that most collectors would prefer their older U.S. classic proof coins to look like the one you posted, if they had the choice between patinated or white.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1839 Posts |
Edited by Tbone
02/12/2015 10:49 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187950 Posts |
I voted with the majority, A toned proof is fine as long as the toning has eye-appeal. I like what I am seeing, especially from Tbone.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
824 Posts |
I like older toned proofs a lot. Not so much newer ones. Especially milk spot toning.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7189 Posts |
It really is all about eye appeal. There is something about the vibrant colors I have seen that really are captivating. I also find it difficult to capture such toning in a photo. Take this for an example.   The colors are great with cameo and reflectivity but I have yet to be able to truly capture it in a photo. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5828 Posts |
Nice Benji |
|
Moderator
United States
187950 Posts |
Yes, very nice! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1511 Posts |
It's no secret I like toners... Period. Lol. For toned proofs or DMPL's.... Yup, don't mind them at all, though I like them to retain the mirror like look behind the toning or only visable at different angles... But I like the color... Quote:
barryg: I would think that most collectors would prefer their older U.S. classic proof coins to look like the one you posted, if they had the choice between patinated or white. I guess I fall out of the "most" category.... Though I think "most" may be a stretch... Maybe "some" would fit better. But proof or UNC I would absolutely take any toner over a most definitely dipped blast white PR/UNC.. To me that's a damaged coin, though I know many don't consider dipping (once) to be cleaned.... To me it absolutely is... It's basically the definition of cleaned, lol. Edited by NathanASE
02/13/2015 11:02 am
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 2,224 |
|
Posted 02/12/2015 4:14 pm
