Newest Nickel
0

13 posts in this topic

I like the color and I think it is NT. May be the toning pattern, but looks AU to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The image looks juiced to me. If not juiced, I am not convinced the piece is original. Even if the piece was original the spots lower the eye appeal and grade to low MS at best in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The saturation is cranked way up on that picture. It will not look like that in hand (when coinman says the images are "juiced", what he means is that the settings have been played with to make the coin look better than it really is).

 

I think the coin has been artificially toned. I strongly suspect that chemicals have been applied to induce that color, and that it is not natural. Sorry, but I am not a fan of this piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the same thing - juiced. That being said, I own two collections of toned Jefferson nickels (one complete, one in progress), and some of mine are not terribly far off that image.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i asked the seller if he knew about the history of the coin (i.e. toning process). He said it was naturally toned in a cardboard album. along with 2 other pieces i purchased. he also is sending me a photocopy of dvds that explains how to detect toning that is artificial in case i am interested in that as well. I will post photos once i get in hand.

 

i appreciate everyones feedback. I like colorful jeffersons and my purchases have leaned heavily that way recently, but this is one I was curious about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like James, I own a number of nickels with similar toning, and they have been in Whitman folders for decades. It's a very good possibility they are indeed NT as the seller claims. However I also agree with other responses that its likely the images have been tweaked. Remember though, tweaking is often done more to compensate for the lack of skills on the photo taker's part than to 'puff' the piece being sold, but I realize this can make the coin appear better than it would look in hand. So long as the seller has a return policy, and you like the coin enough to purchase it, than it's up to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Low MS, possibly AU58, color won't be that vibrant in hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jeff%20I_zpsztwuueba.jpgjeff%20II_zps07ws0lv4.jpg

 

I took the liberty to unjuice them a bit, I think the tone is a natural album toning with some sort of MS (Mint State) designation for a grade. Massive hit on the steps so count that out.

 

jeff%20I_Fotor_zpsjyrgaphi.jpgjeff%20II_Fotor_zpsguwp6gu0.jpg

 

$15 for the nickel

$15 for the tone

 

Note: As noted, the carbon spots on the truncation of the bust detracts a bit from the eye appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I obviously have received this coin by now.  I will upload the pics of it this afternoon.  It looks like the original sale pics.  It is a brighter purple than the unjuiced photos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ummm, so i have beautiful pictures to upload but max file size is about large enough for a Letter J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The images in the ebay listing look significantly juiced (altered color saturation).  If you have images that are too large you might host them on another server or copy the image and save it with a higher compression setting.  The compression setting will reduce the file size, but if you go too high you degrade the image quality, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
0