The problem I see with "shiny, gleaming vintage specimens" is that if its a restoration, the bike often ends up looking better than it did when it was new, and even if it's original it looks more like a trophy that's been hanging on someone's living room wall and never ridden. Either one is a sad state of affairs in my book. Bikes (most bikes anyway) are made to be ridden, the more the better.

The "excessive patina" issue is rather more difficult. There is such a thing, but if the bike's been honestly used (not abused) the patina is rarely "excessinve". Is it the result of the bike being ridden long, hard and often? Or has it been sitting in a barn with pigeons sh***ing on it for decades? Are the paint and decals dull from years of loving use, or years of neglect? I think you can see where I stand on this. To me it's far more interesting to look at a bike that was built and USED for a purpose, a cooperative effort between the builder and the rider, if you will. Rather like my former neighbor's 1954 Jaguar XK120(?) that had been in the family since 1960. Not a daily driver by any means, but still original, lovingly cared for, with plenty of patina.

I'll get down off my soapbox now.

SP
Bend, OR