Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GROOVIE MOVIES

Rainbow toning on ZAR coins

Recommended Posts

GROOVIE MOVIES

Good day

 

With most circulated ZAR silver being either blackish or dull white (cleaned), I was wondering why we don't regularly see rainbow toning on ZAR coining similar to the rainbow tones on silver rands from the late 80's?

Parliament, JHB and Dias rands (one such beauty recently sold last night for only R130!) often have beautiful tones of gold, purple, green and browns and sometimes you'll come across these multi colours on Union coins as well.

Were the silver rands from the late 80's prepared in a special way (cleaning of the planchards prior to minting perhaps?) that resulting in this toning or is it that within a certain period, silver tones multi-coloured and then blackens after an extended period? If this is the case, does it mean even if you have rainbow toned coins in slabs that they will blacken with time?

 

Regards Robert

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
testrarossa

Hi Robert, 

I think the cases from SA munt esp with union and silver rands are to be thank for the toning we see with their coinage. There must be some reaction to the material which give us the toning we see. It’s certainly true with the coins in my collection which are cased vs the ones not cased or encapsulated. 

I for one prefer toned vs blast white. 

Regards

Andre 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GROOVIE MOVIES

Yes Andre, I myself am starting to take a liking to these toned coins. I've been thinking for a while now of starting a new collection of toned rands... Perhaps in future I will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
testrarossa

Hi Robert here’s some of my favourite toned R1.

All in NGC holders with grades of PF65 and PF66. 

03E1136E-55F8-4680-8AD6-1E2F91328897.jpeg

0E793ED2-6192-4348-BCF2-9AA2254EE20C.jpeg

3E1395C1-733A-4DA0-8616-43BBD6E5DE87.jpeg

9BECDBBF-62AE-46D4-9BB3-AC518B8AED78.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwither
Posted (edited)

 

8 hours ago, GROOVIE MOVIES said:

Good day

 

With most circulated ZAR silver being either blackish or dull white (cleaned), I was wondering why we don't regularly see rainbow toning on ZAR coining similar to the rainbow tones on silver rands from the late 80's?

Parliament, JHB and Dias rands (one such beauty recently sold last night for only R130!) often have beautiful tones of gold, purple, green and browns and sometimes you'll come across these multi colours on Union coins as well.

Were the silver rands from the late 80's prepared in a special way (cleaning of the planchards prior to minting perhaps?) that resulting in this toning or is it that within a certain period, silver tones multi-coloured and then blackens after an extended period? If this is the case, does it mean even if you have rainbow toned coins in slabs that they will blacken with time?

 

Regards Robert

 

Preference for toning versus untoned has changed noticeably in the United States since I first became a collector, as in within the last 15 years.  I haven't seen any evidence that collectors elsewhere have a preference for toned coins though, certainly not in the prices.

If the metal composition doesn't differ (and I don't recall if it does), the explanation will almost certainly be first, whether the coins were cleaned or not and second, the storage conditions.  My opinion is that most silver ZAR and Union coinage has been cleaned at least once in the past; that's why so few toned coins exist.  The evidence also demonstrates that whoever did it mostly botched the job because the coins aren't attractive either, whether it is a high grade coin or not and whether it's "market acceptable" in an NGC or PCGS holder.  It's evident not just on higher quality coins but even low or very low grades.

As for the prices,  I find the premiums and price structure on US toned coins frequently if not disproportionately absurd.  It's one thing to pay a "reasonable" premium for "originality" or "original skin" (much of which isn't original anyway and with no way to prove it).  It is entirely another to pay the premiums on "monster toned" US coins, due to the "scarcity" which is entirely contrived when the coins are actually practically as common as dirt.  It's yet another way US collectors find a way to exaggerate the merits of what they like and collect and rationalize an inflated price level.  I haven't seen this illogical price structure transfer over to South Africa (yet) but your sentiments imply that you agree with it at least somewhat.

Generally, I'd expect most RSA copper nickel to be untoned and most copper/bronze toned.  I have seen very few of the latter with original red.  With Union, it isn't unusual to see coins of this age untoned but I would expect a much higher proportion versus what actually exists, especially the earlier dates.  With ZAR, I'd expect most to be toned.

If you want to get a good idea of what kind of toning is in favor with US collectors, take a look at the Bakewell coins formerly in the Remick collection.  Previously, they were available for viewing in the NGC Registry.  Without access to the Spinks catalogues, I don't recall all of the specific coins but three are the 1925 2/6 MS-66, 1925 2/- MS-64 and 1926 1/- MS-64.  The 1925 2/6 in a particular is a very nice coin.

Edited by jwither

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwither
5 hours ago, testrarossa said:

Hi Robert, 

I think the cases from SA munt esp with union and silver rands are to be thank for the toning we see with their coinage. There must be some reaction to the material which give us the toning we see. It’s certainly true with the coins in my collection which are cased vs the ones not cased or encapsulated. 

I for one prefer toned vs blast white. 

Regards

Andre 

 

With proof sets, the case can contribute to the toning.  In 2001, I bought short sets for 1953, 1955 and 1956.  For the 1953 and 1955, the silver were not toned and bronze toned.  For the 1956, all were toned and some of the silver very nicely.  I paid $20 for each set and today, I'd have to pay a noticeable multiple from a US dealer.

Subsequently I wasted (yes, you read that correctly) the money to have the silver coins graded and sold off the 1953 and 1955.  (I made a small profit on the sale but not one worth the bother.)  I still have the 1956 which all graded 66 and 67.  I wanted RD bronze and substituted others for the 1956 which I also sent in for grading.  In retrospect, I would have preferred the original and matched set ungraded.

So to go back to your point, aside from the environmental conditions in which the sets (with the cases) were stored, I presume it's likely the velvet inserts were not chemically neutral.  This is most evident in sets where the side facing down is toned (usually the reverse) while the other is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GROOVIE MOVIES
6 hours ago, testrarossa said:

Hi Robert here’s some of my favourite toned R1.

All in NGC holders with grades of PF65 and PF66. 

 

0E793ED2-6192-4348-BCF2-9AA2254EE20C.jpeg

 

 

Beautiful, especially this one! I have a Dias rand with a similar circle toning but heavier on the greens and purples.                                   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
testrarossa

Thank you here’s another few eye candy.

I am starting to really like the toned cameo ones. Since the Proof rands were in capsules from the mint from 1989 (correct me if iam wrong) post ‘89 rarely show any toning while still kept in their capsules. 

I have a 2002 soccer R1 with lovely golden toning never removed from its munt capsule till grading. With NGC promoting conservation at every turn it seems toned coins won’t get the same grades as blast white ones unfortunately.

 

4F7E640D-6C07-481D-B587-155C5CADBCBB.jpeg

353DE6AE-40B2-444B-A776-CBFB91A5B04C.jpeg

8CF19444-ED2D-4498-826E-B1E28503375C.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GROOVIE MOVIES
2 hours ago, jwither said:

 

Preference for toning versus untoned has changed noticeably in the United States since I first became a collector, as in within the last 15 years.  I haven't seen any evidence that collectors elsewhere have a preference for toned coins though, certainly not in the prices.

If the metal composition doesn't differ (and I don't recall if it does), the explanation will almost certainly be first, whether the coins were cleaned or not and second, the storage conditions.  My opinion is that most silver ZAR and Union coinage has been cleaned at least once in the past; that's why so few toned coins exist.  The evidence also demonstrates that whoever did it mostly botched the job because the coins aren't attractive either, whether it is a high grade coin or not and whether it's "market acceptable" in an NGC or PCGS holder.  It's evident not just on higher quality coins but even low or very low grades.

As for the prices,  I find the premiums and price structure on US toned coins frequently if not disproportionately absurd.  It's one thing to pay a "reasonable" premium for "originality" or "original skin" (much of which isn't original anyway and with no way to prove it).  It is entirely another to pay the premiums on "monster toned" US coins, due to the "scarcity" which is entirely contrived when the coins are actually practically as common as dirt.  It's yet another way US collectors find a way to exaggerate the merits of what they like and collect and rationalize an inflated price level.  I haven't seen this illogical price structure transfer over to South Africa (yet) but your sentiments imply that you agree with it at least somewhat.

Generally, I'd expect most RSA copper nickel to be untoned and most copper/bronze toned.  I have seen very few of the latter with original red.  With Union, it isn't unusual to see coins of this age untoned but I would expect a much higher proportion versus what actually exists, especially the earlier dates.  With ZAR, I'd expect most to be toned.

If you want to get a good idea of what kind of toning is in favor with US collectors, take a look at the Bakewell coins formerly in the Remick collection.  Previously, they were available for viewing in the NGC Registry.  Without access to the Spinks catalogues, I don't recall all of the specific coins but three are the 1925 2/6 MS-66, 1925 2/- MS-64 and 1926 1/- MS-64.  The 1925 2/6 in a particular is a very nice coin.

I'm inclined to agree with you comments on most older coins being cleaned atleast once in their lifetime, hence the the limited choices to either charcoal blacks and dull whites. I must admit it's the reason I've steered clear of ZAR coins in that I don't see much point in collecting coins with a tired worn out look to them. At my price range I stick to Union era where I can get a much higher quality coin for my buck. 

With regards to my preference on highly price toned coins, there is none as yet as I have yet to fork out great sums of money on a toned collection. That being said, you can only look at white silver rands for so long until the same listed rainbow rand you've seen everyday starts to look much more appealing all of a sudden. But at the end of the day, a pretty coin is a pretty coin and given the chance, I'll buy one at the right price, but I'm not about to jump on the scares toned coin for 1000 bucks band wagon any time soon.

regards Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GROOVIE MOVIES
1 hour ago, testrarossa said:

Thank you here’s another few eye candy.

I am starting to really like the toned cameo ones. Since the Proof rands were in capsules from the mint from 1989 (correct me if iam wrong) post ‘89 rarely show any toning while still kept in their capsules. 

I have a 2002 soccer R1 with lovely golden toning never removed from its munt capsule till grading. With NGC promoting conservation at every turn it seems toned coins won’t get the same grades as blast white ones unfortunately.

Yes and with those early 90's protea rands which were almost always kept in capsuals many will only show some browning on the rim of the coin. I suppose air gets in them over the years through the seem of the capsual. 

It is funny that you implying that grades might suffer as a result of toning as I sent a few rands away to SANGS two weeks back, one of which was my purple Dias, another a goldlike banking rand and wrestled with the idea of the grading taking a knock for a while before going ahead.

regards Robert 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwither
36 minutes ago, GROOVIE MOVIES said:

I'm inclined to agree with you comments on most older coins being cleaned atleast once in their lifetime, hence the the limited choices to either charcoal blacks and dull whites. I must admit it's the reason I've steered clear of ZAR coins in that I don't see much point in collecting coins with a tired worn out look to them. At my price range I stick to Union era where I can get a much higher quality coin for my buck. 

My favorite color on ZAR is charcoal gray.  I've owned ZAR without toning in the past that looked nice and didn't notice any evidence of cleaning, but it's possible it happened by dipping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwither
1 hour ago, testrarossa said:

I have a 2002 soccer R1 with lovely golden toning never removed from its munt capsule till grading. With NGC promoting conservation at every turn it seems toned coins won’t get the same grades as blast white ones unfortunately.

 

 

 

 

Not necessarily true.  Though NGC and PCGS grade a much larger number of "world" coins than many years ago, I still presume that the assigned grades and definition of "market acceptable" reflect US collector preferences.  I consider this conclusion inevitable because:

One: I have never heard their grading standards differ between US and "world" and within "world", by country.

Two: Most coins are graded in the US and the graders are Americans who can reasonably be expected to have the preferences of US collectors, whether intentionally not.

Three: It's unrealistic to expect anyone to be aware of the preferences in every country, even those with scale.  I suspect preferences don't differ that much outside the US (more between the US and elsewhere) but there are going to be some differences.

In the US today, "rainbow" or "monster" toned coins not only do not get penalized, they are far more likely to receive a grade premium. I have seen no evidence either from my personal submissions or indirectly from other US collectors to indicate that NGC penalizes toned coins with lower grades to attempt to increase conservation revenue.  Conversely, I know that NGC predominantly (if not exclusively) assigns the * (star) to toned coins and have read many accounts which support the opposite.

Not all toning is equal.  In the coins you pictured, I would expect both to receive at least the same grade as one with no toning if not higher.  I just don't think it would make much difference in the price as I have no evidence that collectors in your country will pay up for it.

Lastly on conservation, NCS doesn't necessarily remove toning.  I expect they won't if considered "attractive" but would be careful in submitting a coin that had it for conservation if I care about it.  One of my two 1758 Peru half real MS-63 (I own both in the census) I bought ungraded and submitted.  It looks "original" but has a very small dark spot that if removed might improve the grade (unless of course, it is "white" underneath) but I didn't get it conserved for precisely this reason.  Dipping the coin would drastically reduce the eye appeal and reduce the value, even with the spot removed and with a higher grade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GROOVIE MOVIES
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, jwither said:

My favorite color on ZAR is charcoal gray.  I've owned ZAR without toning in the past that looked nice and didn't notice any evidence of cleaning, but it's possible it happened by dipping.

I want to give you a few examples what I'm trying to bring across. Find below pictures currently listed on BOB of ZAR vs Union toned. All four coins are blackened through toning, but because the ZAR coin was heavily circulated, the black surface has no lustre. This certainly is the case with circulated Union coins that have black toning as well, but you more likely to get a near uncirculated Union coin that's toned for a better price, than a unc ZAR.

Compare the blackened surface of the 5 shilling which was in a much better state before toning took it's course than the worn ZAR shillings:

regards Robert

ZAR.jpg

ZAR2.jpg

Union toned 2.jpg

Union toned.jpg

Edited by GROOVIE MOVIES

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
Sign in to follow this  

×