| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 1,187 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
612 Posts |
I apologize for the lack of clarity in these images, but they are the best I can do under the circumstances. I am considering this coin that I do not own, the pictures are not mine, the coin is a common year but can have some value in the higher grades and that's why I'm asking. I see a finger print on lower obverse ...... how much does that detract in value/grade ...... other than that, the coin looks pretty good. So help please.   Staff edit - Continued discussion: Update To ....... "Need Help Grading This 1899 O Morgan" |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18712 Posts |
tough giving an accurate grade with blurry photos. Since the 99(O) are typically sharp and bold the strike on this one appear to be AVG- due to the hair around the ear and eagle breast. its difficult to determine if luster is broken across the cheek and what if any chatter exists there. it doesn't look like much. I'm going with broken luster and a fairly clean cheek. I don't see any glaring issues except on the reverse below "OF" there is a hit but cannot determine how deep it is. it may make MS64 but due to the weaker strike, broken luster and finger print I'm in at MS63
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Too much flashback to see the field surfaces clearly.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
612 Posts |
Panzaldi ......... thanks Quote:
it may make MS64 but due to the weaker strike, broken luster and finger print I'm in at MS63 I think I might be able to pick this up in the low $40ish ....... and if it grades 63 that would be a decent buy, but it's a gamble that might be worth taking. I've enlarged and sharpened the pictures over and over but there's only so much sharpening and clarifying you can do to a picture that starts out blurry. The hit you see under the OF doesn't look like much even under the highest enlargement. If it only grades 63 it would be a fair buy, but if 64 it would be a great buy, and a 65 or 66 and it would be a fantastic buy. And just possibly acetone would do something for the detracting finger print that might help bump it up as well. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
612 Posts |
Coinfrog ........... I just played with the pictures some more, clarified and darkened some so the fields have less flash. Don't know if that helps much but once again, that's the best I can do with what I have to work with.   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5684 Posts |
The fingerprint is distracting and will affect value, and there's no way acetone will improve that. The marks on the cheek look to be more than luster breaks to me, and there are too many hot spots that may be hiding other hits. I would assume MS-63 at best.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
612 Posts |
Well thanks guys for the opinions. Auction has ended at ebay and I picked it up for $34.45 and about 4 bucks shipping, better than I hoped ........ and now we'll see if the fuzzy pictures hid blemishes that couldn't be seen or if the fuzzy pictures hid a gem. It's paid for and I'll update this post with clear pictures of the coin once I get it in around a weeks time. https://www.ebay.com/itm/1899-o-mor...epIHzjI%253D |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4471 Posts |
You made a nice buy.
Here is my rule of thumb: none distracting finger prints are fine on circulated coins. A circulated coin is being handled, so I no issue with a finger print as the finger print is part of the circulation process. On uncirculated coins I want the coin to look mint state, so the finger print is distracting.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
Fingerprint is distracting, but it's dripping with luster and very clean. Easily MS-63, assuming photos aren't missing anything, good shot at 64.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
Very clean fields and cheek, fingerprint isn't ideal but not that distracting IMO.
Solid 64 from me, easy 65 if that print werent there.
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,187 |
|
Posted 04/20/2020 11:12 am
