| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 997 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
Yes, I know that really coins are supposed to be posted here one at a time, but these were acquired today as a pair, & do go togther rather nicely. I paid (at least by my standards) more than I normally would for them, but as I was catching the shop when they were just bringing them out to be priced & displayed & consequently got to cherrypick the lot of twenty or so, I wasn't about to leve them behind. Feel free to opine as to at what price you would've said, "Thanks, but no thanks." Note that the '78 is at least semi-prooflike.   Colligo ergo sum
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
Nice Morgans!
I'm at AU55 on the 78-S and MS62 on the 79-S.
Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
The 78 looks to have just missed MS so I'd say 58. The 79 looks fully BU with few visible abrasions so I'd be at 63.
As for price I'd buy at $90, maybe $100 depending on a closer look.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Examples of 1878-S can be pretty frosty; I'm ready to believe what we're seeing here is frost breaks rather than wear. The imagery isn't clear either way. Keepers, both.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
Tough to see any surface details when photo'd on an angle
|
|
Valued Member
United States
403 Posts |
I have said this before to another poster, I believe, but at those angles, these coins are impossible to grade. Please reshoot them straight-on and repost them.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4883 Posts |
 with both of the previous posts. I admit I wasn't especially happy myself with them & probably shouldn't have put those particular shots up to begin with. So with my apologies, let's reset this thread from a visual standpoint. '78-SI've actually gotten a somewhat less happy with this specimen since first posting it; under really good lighting and close examination, I can now detect striae on the surfaces that suggest to me that it may have been run through a coin counter (something that happened to a good many coins that comprised the Redfield hoard).   '79-SI'm actually not totally pleased with these images, either. Note how they give the impression of shadow toning around some of the legends and stars, which is absolutely not the case, as the supplemental detail photo clearly shows. Both coins are very much "blazers".    Colligo ergo sum
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36832 Posts |
The 79-S is a nice MS-64, the 78-S has some problems, rub on the obverse field and scratches reverse.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
171 Posts |
Looks like someone tryed to remove some marks just to the right of the date between 3 stars and the hair on the 78.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
403 Posts |
1878-S; MS details, cleaned.
1879-S; MS64.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I think streg2 was talking about the '78, not the '79. Could we have a close-up of the date area on the '78?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
Quote:
Could we have a close-up of the date area on the '78?  Frankly, I see no evidence whatsoever that the '78 has been cleaned. What I do see are the striae I previously mentioned, which are definitely not hairlines. Here's a picture of the ones on Liberty's face; there're others on the tip of her cap that run perfectly parallel to these, hence my conjecture about its having been run through a coin counter (there are also similar lines in the fields on the reverse, but those appear to me to be die polishing marks). In any event, I think this constitutes enough for it to receive a "details" annotation for mechanical damage. In fact, that gouge at the bottom of the reverse might on its own also put it in that category if it were not deemed to be a bagmark.  Colligo ergo sum
Edited by Lucky Cuss
08/25/2015 5:47 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
171 Posts |
Your 2nd set just before this post of the 1878 date closeup you tilted the coin again. You can clearly see where someone tryed to remove some marks between the stars and hair with what I bet was a pencil eraser. Blow the pic up. On your second set of pics I'm talking about.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
Without posting another shot, I've examined it very closely under the most revealing lighting, and can in fact detect localized hairlines there - so good photo interprettion on your part, and you may well be right in your conjecture. But casually in hand, you'd just never see it, and I certainly missed it when I purchased the piece. So this coin has lots more problems than I at first realized.
Colligo ergo sum
Edited by Lucky Cuss
08/26/2015 10:21 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
I have both of them at MS-64. I don't think that the 1878-S would make PL because only the reverse is prooflike.
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 997 |
|
Posted 08/24/2015 5:52 pm
