| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 2,701 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Another common date Morgan. Just wondering what folks would grade this one as  Thanks!   |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
As you all know I am not a good grader...MS66? John1  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36643 Posts |
I'm seeing lots of marks and photos that are not crystal clear. My first impression was AU but blowing the photo up what I thought was dirt is tone. Solid MS-63 with a chance at 64.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Right, thinking the obverse pic flatters the coin somewhat, so I'll say 64. Very nice though!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18645 Posts |
i have it really close to MS64
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
11880 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1475 Posts |
Going the by pictures, (are they little fuzzy? or are my eyes fuzzing), MS65 Very nice  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
The "suggestions" of chatter up and down both obverse fields in this pic are what concern me. You don't see that on the reverse. BadDog, can you give us another obverse shot from a different angle?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
...can you give us another obverse shot from a different angle? Do you mean rotating the coin or tilting the coin? If it's tilting the coin, then I've never tried that and it may take some practice to get a reasonable shot but I can give it a try. I suspect that tilting the coin will mess with the focus (part of the coin will be in focus and part of it will not be) as the depth of field isn't that great when taking these macro shots. Different lighting might work better. Changing the lighting dramatically affects the photo and can make the same coin look totally different. In fact, if I take more photos, then I'm sure the coin will look somewhat different as I'm always messing with lighting and I don't remember the exact setup I used for these shots  Don't want to turn this topic into something more suitable for the photography forum though |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2125 Posts |
MS63 reverse MS62 Obverse. MS-62 overall.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Here's another photo of the obverse. Different lighting and the coin rotated differently when the picture was taken (and then re-oriented and cropped). Since the grading opinions ranged from MS62-66, I will say that in hand I thought the coin was a solid 63+ and maybe a 64. I don't think it would make 65 and 66 is out of the question.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
484 Posts |
Probably UNC but not by much looks AU58. No pizzazz to it, subdued luster. Might look better in hand, I guess.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
484 Posts |
It's an AU58+....a slider UNC that dealers would sell as a MS63.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
For the benefit of smalldawg59, the amount of luster shown in a macro coin photograph depends upon the amount of diffuse light that is used to take the photograph. The more diffuse the light, the less the luster is shown. This photograph was taken with totally diffuse light to try and bring out the areas that coinfrog wanted to see. Rest assured that there are no problems with the coin's luster  Edited by BadDog
09/20/2018 12:55 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18645 Posts |
after reviewing the new photos I amend my initial grade to AU58. just goes to show you how just a little lighting can affect the grading by photos
|
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 2,701 |
Posted 09/19/2018 3:54 pm
