| Author |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,136 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
401 Posts |
Hints of luster around the rims, but not a very good obverse strike...XF-40?  
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Israel
2420 Posts |
These pics makes it really hard to see, but it looks at least XF, and almost surely AU or higher. Clearer, sharper pics are needed, preferably with a less dominant background to call it precisely.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
716 Posts |
I agree that this could possibly be an AU coin, but clearer pictures are needed to have better view of the diagnostics.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1511 Posts |
 with both. Very nice IHC you have there and I would love to see some sharper pics!  
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18684 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3283 Posts |
I think AU58. But what's going on with the 'F' in OF?
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
401 Posts |
I didn't notice the "F". I only have a cell phone to take pictures so getting a truly crisp picture is very difficult. When I blow up the image on my phone it looks like the top triangular portion of the "F" is partially missing/broken. I'll post a pic tomorrow... Any IHC experts out there that know if this is a known Snow variety?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2757 Posts |
The broken F does not indicate a Snow variety - but it could still be a Snow variety, although unlikely. Closer pic will allow us to determine that. Broken F could be a delamination?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
401 Posts |
These are the best pictures I could take with my Cell. The "F" It looks like a bit is missing but not very much... AU-50 something?   
|
|
Valued Member
United States
380 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
171 Posts |
I'll second the AU-53. Much easier to grade with the improved pictures.
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,136 |
|