| Author |
 Replies: 37 / Views: 12,759 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Marc, I'm not going to split hairs over "grading" a photograph or what Charlton's says--which evidently differs by edition.  I appreciate your strict grading standards--but this is also such a thing as too strict; we all try to out-do each other. So I suspect this is EF, and if I had the coin in hand I'd know for sure. Besides, even AU coins can have a few marks. So that's my opinion. Photos don't always do justice to coins. As an example, anyone care to guess what this ICCS sleeved dollar grades at?  Or how about this dollar?  Edited by KurtS
03/23/2008 01:48 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
868 Posts |
Hey guy's Here is my 1945  Edited by andre1621
03/23/2008 09:28 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
868 Posts |
Hi Kurt
My guess is top one F to VF
Bottom is XF40
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Kurt,
The top one F-VF (1948) Wow that would be nice!
The bottom is MS-64 (1939)
Marc
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Just for fun here are the full holders and their ICCS grades: I guess that shows it's tough to guess by pics alone, which is why a holder helps--and a description of the coin   Andre, good guess on my '45. And, judging by your pic, mint luster isn't totally absent on your coin, is it? I think I see some between lettering. Edited by KurtS
03/23/2008 12:25 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2408 Posts |
Ah!! Well I fell in that trap head first didn't I... MS-65!! My assumption was 1948 simply because of rarity I matched with F-VF (who would pay for grading a 1949 graded at VF?). On the second my assumption was that it was '39 (frosty...). Your point is well taken; pictures can be made so that coins look very bad or better, and these are perfect examples.
Marc
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
868 Posts |
Hi Kurt and Marc Here are two coins from the same year one is graded and the other not graded how would you grade the two of them.   Edited by andre1621
03/23/2008 2:03 pm
|
|
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 |
| |
Replies: 37 / Views: 12,759 |
First Page
Posted 03/23/2008 08:53 am
