| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 1,864 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4541 Posts |
nice coin! I agree with 63 but dont care for the toning on this at all
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4944 Posts |
I am going to say MS-62 based on all of the marks on the obverse.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
 for the same reason. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
i also agree with 62.
too many bag marks to pull a 3.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
374 Posts |
agree with all the ms 62 grades. I like the toning even though its not the prettiest.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
9104 Posts |
Don't like the tarnish covering lots of cheek damage, 61
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
509 Posts |
Thanks for the feedback. My own guess was MS60/61. This one's in a Redfield holder. Guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The unusual toning is why I bought it. I know it's not worth the price of grading but might give NGC a shot at it. Not that I'm expecting a higher grade; just prefer em slabbed.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
You're falling victim to your increasing skill in photography, Sidekick.  The shots are displaying the annoying tendency of accurate imaging to overstate marks - it gets tough to tell how significant those marks on the cheek area would look if viewed in-hand or with a less-capable photography rig. Keep in mind, guys - the better an image, the more likely it is to show a coin a grade (or perhaps two grades) lower than you'd award it in-hand. As regards this one, I think in-hand I'd call it MS62, but it may be deceiving me as well. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
Interesting toning I will say MS-61
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1150 Posts |
Maybe this one was at the bottom of a bag, face down, on his basement floor?
I agree the toning isn't the 'nicest', however it is interesting and unique. Very cool.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
648 Posts |
With SD Quote:
You're falling victim to your increasing skill in photography, Sidekick Super nice photo's   so good their  ing.. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
At least MS-63, I think the toning gives the illusion of a lot more marks than there really are.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
509 Posts |
Quote:
tokenmast SuperDave Quote:
You're falling victim to your increasing skill in photography, Sidekick Thanks for that and BTW I invested in the purchase of one of Ray's Bausch & Lomb camera stands. Perfect if you're doing manual focusing. Or auto for that matter but it's especially well adapted for manual. Two vertical adjusters with increments possible within an nth of an nth. Not much need for my focusing ring. Surprisingly small, compact and mobile. I can move/rotate the entire apparatus under the lights adjusting for just the right look under the lens without actually having to move the lights. Glad I got it. There are drawbacks using my native Canon 100MM lens due to it's diameter but nothing I haven't been able to work around when shooting the larger coins like Morgans. I'm also able to mount my bellows for use with either of the 2 Nikkor enlarging lenses I have. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
I generally don't advise this, but have a go at the obverse of this coin with diffuse lighting. Diffuse lights will de-emphasize the luster breaks on the cheek, while the accuracy of your equipment will still easily capture the actual scrapes on the surface. I suspect it might make some change their mind about the grade, as well as making an interesting point regarding coin photography.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
I think I could see buying that at MS-63 money for the toning but I think it's a technical MS-62 principally for the heavy luster grazes. Either way, there isn't that much of a price difference, anyway. Pretty coin, though, IMHO.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 16 / Views: 1,864 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 07/24/2011 4:37 pm
