| Author |
 Replies: 37 / Views: 12,763 |
Page 3 of 3
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Andre, I'll give it some thought, but I've found grading from pics is really hard--particularly Canadian coins.  Lighting plays such a crucial role in the details you can see. That said, the coin in the sleeve (ICCS?) appears to be a better grade than the other--AU55 perhaps? Don't hold me to my guesses, lol...I'm not that good a grader! Edited by KurtS
03/23/2008 2:37 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
868 Posts |
So it come to say that a picture those not reveal the real grade of a coin since the sleeve one is better grade then the ICCS.The ICCS is MS63
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Wow...see?  I think my photos often capture too much detail (scratches), but not the luster of the coin. The tiny surface scratches start to look like wear, and give the wrong impression. Edited by KurtS
03/23/2008 2:54 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
868 Posts |
One thing for sure Kurt if whe wher pro whe would be making lost of money grading coins :-))))))
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Well Andre, I'm getting pretty beaten here... I have a 1957 that I personally graded MS-64 and a 1955 Arnprior ANACS MS-64 that look very much like the top one. So I'd go for MS-64. The bottom one does not look as good, yet could be uncirculated. My eye tells me more like AU-55.
Marc
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Ah.... I saw your previous posts. I over estimated with MS-64. But sometimes pictures do reflect exactly what it is. Guys, what is your opinion on this one:  Marc |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Marc, very nice!
That looks like a cameo coin to me. I'm not very familiar with MS grades, but it almost looks like a PL--PL65?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
1953 SF, PL but PL-65... probably not. BTW MCGS stands for My Coin Grading Services... But there is a problem: Charlton does not list any HC (only in 1954). Mine is astonishingly High Cameo no doubt about it. To my point, if a scan enhances defects like bag marks, stains (the subject coin of this thread) or renders a dull image (the 1949 MS-65) than opinions could very well be negative. "Lustre that is dull or lifeless can have the opposite effect on the coin viewer and make the coin a very undesirable object" - p. x Charlton 61st Ed. Hence the very valid question: Would you buy this coin at EF? And I certainly did not intent to offend you Kurt in any way. It was an honest question. Now I don't know what happened to Andre's coin, but the fact that it was cracked open is a tiny bit suspicious to me. In light of my personal opinion (and others) on the coin, the seller might have had a good reason for this breach... Happy grading! Marc |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Marc, That's a nice coin, no doubt about that. It seems to be high cameo to me, but I haven't any to compare. I do have the '53 NSF LD, but certainly not PL or Cameo! I doubt whether I'll ever know the difference between PL64 and PL65...that's a realm for the grading companies to decide. And, regarding Andre's coin (or any other), I really don't like buying from a photo unless I know the seller and trust their grading, or it's slabbed by a company I trust. Otherwise, I grade down when buying--but talking about a friend's coin is different. Edited by KurtS
03/23/2008 10:36 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Like Andre I have coins I eventually want to have certified (never done it before). This coin is one of them. I have many PL-sets so I can only compare and assume PL-64, because well... it has more marks than the others.
On ICCS certification, Andre you said $2000 - for how many coins?
Marc
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
I would like to eventually get many Canadians certified, but info on ICCS and their prices is available online. If anyone has some experience here, I'd like to hear! |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
868 Posts |
Hi Marc & Kurt It look like that whe are only tree on this forum talking on that 1945 of mine :-))))).Anyway to andswer your question Marc I have reads many comment about ICCS Certification and I don't think that I will take this place as to grade my coins I have 300 Canadian dollar coins to be certified I have contacted CCCS Grading Service they have a better rate for certification I have included a link for you guy's to have a look,as to my 1945 I will take it tomorow to a coin dealer in Montreal to get a fix on it as to the grade of this coin.Also this is one comment about ICCS. It is true that there have been some fake ICCS holders showing up on ebay (and elsewhere as well). ebay's policy is that they "don't allow" coins to be listed with a non-authorized 3rd party grading name (eg PCGS, NGC, ANACS, ICG and I think one other). Any coins in ICCS or other holders are considered raw, and it is against their new policy to put a numerical grade (eg MS-65) in the title on "raw" coins. I think this mostly came about from many, many coins showing up in slabs of no name companies that severely overgrade their coins. These listings often included PCGS or NGC trend prices with them, which created a pretty bad situation for new collectors who weren't yet wise to the fact that some grading "companies" aren't respectable at all. Although no holders are completely tamper proof, ICCS should do something more on their holders to make it harder to counterfeit them. As it stands now, it isn't hard for someone to cut open the flip, remove the inner sealed piece and certificate, then reseal in a new identical outer flip. I like that CCCS adds a hotstamp to their outer flip, so that if someone were to do this, they would need to use a real CCCS outer flip which would show evidence of being tampered with when it was cut and resealed. Here the link: http://www.canadiancoincertificatio...m/index2.phpAndre Edited by andre1621
03/24/2008 06:31 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Thanks Andre, I wasn't aware of ebay's policy regarding grades in the title for raw coins. But you said "any coins in ICCS or other holders" are considered raw. So then what is "not raw"? What about coins from the Mint with COA, can I state PR-67? So PCGS among the rest (ACG is an other) you have listed is considered "non-authorized" and as such I cannot *list* the item? This does not sound right, or did I misunderstand? Yes I will also consider CCCS, but honestly I prefer slabs. I know this is cosmetics and has nothing to do the grade but PCGS sure look and feel better. Marc |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
868 Posts |
Hi Marc The comment about ICCS above was not from me it's a comment that I seen on a other site and this is not the first time that I read something like this about ICCS this is why I decided to go with CCCS it is a grading institute that are specialized in Canadian coins from what I can see on ther site,and this is the site that I did have an estimate for grading over 300 coins,as you say you like slabs they are nice by protecting coins with it's hard sealed plastic,the only problem with those is to find a place to stack them :-)))))Can you imagine the size of safety boxes in the bank that I would need to secure my coins once certified I would have to rent half of the bank safe :-)))))))).Also Marc have a look at this link very interesting stuff. http://www.coinlink.com/Opinion/?p=9feedEdited by andre1621
03/24/2008 10:53 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Thanks for the link Andre, valuable information.
Marc
|
|
Page 3 of 3
|
Replies: 37 / Views: 12,763 |
Page 3 of 3
|
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 03/23/2008 2:50 pm
