| Author |
 Replies: 23 / Views: 2,808 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19966 Posts |
Keep in mind, this coin probably looks a lot better in hand.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2448 Posts |
Boy it must! I can't belive it was graded that high with all that wear.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
469 Posts |
I have some very much like it and when you hold the coin so that the light hits it where you can properly examine it, the things have amazing luster and full details. It is very hard to photograph though.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
880 Posts |
Wow I started a decent conversation! haha...
The reason I posted this was 1) It looks almost... rusted is what comes to mind 2) my dad has silver Roosies in a Whitman folder that is 25+ years old and they have toned like this. But they also look real cruddy to me. I kind of wanted to know if it's common or do I need to open my view of grading up a bit.
I really can't see purchasing this coin at all. I would pay melt for it because of the silver content, but above that... It would be a stretch. Even in the NGC case.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
880 Posts |
I would also like to say that this seller has other pretty hideous coins for sale in slabs. So I don't know. I feel like it wasn't a once in a life time grading error.
Lastly (shoulda kept this in one post sorry), I understand toning affects flaws, luster, grading differently. But how does the wear on that coin allow it to come even close to MS? That's my biggest question. My computer is having problems, but if I remember correctly, you couldn't even see one of the bands on the torch.
|
|
Valued Member
Philippines
386 Posts |
Quote:
No, most likely the coin is a mint set toner that was already toned when sent to be slabbed. whew... now it's a relief. Now I should not be worried on my 1st slabbed Morgan that it might be almost the same as the abovementioned coin. Thanks for the enlightenment Wheatguy. Quote:
Wow I started a decent conversation! haha... That's the main reason why we are all enjoying the community, thanks to our senior members too  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
173 Posts |
I can't add much to Wheatguy's post (which I fully agree with), but will say that I've seen many higher grade (usually 66) MS coins with this type of toning. I've also photographed this type of toning. If you've ever taken photographs of coins from this era with similar toning you know what you're looking at here. The olive you see in the photo is a bright chartreuse green in hand. What looks like a copper hue in the photo, is probably bright red. My point is that photos can be misleading. I'm not defending this coin, or suggesting that I particularly care for this toning, but am surprised so many of you absolutely detest it and oppose the grade assuming it isn't worn.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1027 Posts |
" Morgan dollars were never in mint or proof sets" Actually, there were proof sets produced that contained Morgan dollars. The 1878 10 piece proof set contained proof examples of both the 8 and 7 tail feather coins and a Trade dollar, for instance. The 1879 7 piece proof set contained both a Morgan and a Trade dollar. Even the 1904 six pice proof set has a Morgan in it. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1534 Posts |
Quote:
but will say that I've seen many higher grade (usually 66) MS coins with this type of toning. I've also photographed this type of toning. If you've ever taken photographs of coins from this era with similar toning you know what you're looking at here. The olive you see in the photo is a bright chartreuse green in hand. What looks like a copper hue in the photo, is probably bright red. My point is that photos can be misleading. I'm not defending this coin, or suggesting that I particularly care for this toning, but am surprised so many of you absolutely detest it and oppose the grade assuming it isn't worn.  Lukkyseven, you need to keep in mind that the images are digital, not guaranteed to be an accurate representation of the coin in hand. I'm sure in hand that isn't actually wear, and to be honest I have enough faith in the expert graders at NGC to assume that they know what they're doing and don't blatantly give circulated coins MS grades. Toners are notoriously difficult to image and I'm sure in hand the coin is different than the image implies. Edited by wheatguy
11/13/2010 3:56 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
958 Posts |
sometimes the picture is not even of the coin 4sale.
The fine print usually indicates
I have emailed people on coins and this is the case
A person that sells alot of coins often mixes up pics by mistake.
One seller emailed me and said something to this effect
" I'm just a reseller using a stock photo, the wharehouse has all the coins the email me the sales price and discription if each coin. I list auction and take payment then they mail out the coin , I dont actually have that coin in my possesion or mail it, But do offer a money back return if its not up to par with the discription."
|
|
Valued Member
United States
66 Posts |
Toning hides features and is hard to catch well in a photo from what I see it's not clear enough to give a proper representation so unless the coin is in hand we must give the graders the benifit of the doubt
|
|
Valued Member
United States
455 Posts |
What a bunch of crap is right! It makes me so angry when I see coins like this one falling through the cracks!
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 23 / Views: 2,808 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 11/12/2010 9:06 pm
