| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 2,066 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1222 Posts |
Here's a toned coin to try your grading skills on. Is this an old cleaning that's retoned? There's another interesting point for this post that I'll explain at some later point. Cheers, Bill   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
5585 Posts |
I'd go AU. I see no wear at all on the shoulder, mustache, ear or crown band, but the leaf tips on the reverse show slight wear. I like the coin!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
5394 Posts |
AU55 details , Group 2 Toning ( Questionable Colour) ,
probably due to improper dipping and washing off the dip residue .
Pretty sharp and still pleasing coin .
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Agree AU details (questionable color).
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
Beard, mustache and eyebrow detail on the King all there, a full eight pearls on the crown band. All of the regalia detail on the chest is there. That has to force it to be at least high AU.
Thinning of the patina on the tips of the leaves on the reverse not necessarily enough to be declared as wear.
A small scratch below the tip of the King's beard, couple of tiny parallel hits on the '50'.
There may be other other hairlines and very tiny dings hiding below the patina, but it would be unfair to say that they actually exist - hand held with a 10x loupe needed to prove either way.
AU-58, but could as high as MS62 or 3, but patina makes it hard to decide.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3733 Posts |
i am in the low ms camp, looks like someone tried to dip off old black toning, improperly .
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
821 Posts |
AU also. Looks like it may have been inside something that burned  ? |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1505 Posts |
looks to me as if it has some environmental issues,
EF 45
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
It's a 'problem'coin, with cleaning and other surface issues.
That said, based on the amount of wear alone (or lack thereof) it looks like a mint state coin.
But it can't be described as mint state because of the surface issues.
I would net grade it as AU50.
Edited by doubleeagle59
02/19/2021 5:59 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
It follows that any (low) mint state coin with very unsightly patination may not get an MS grade.
Opens up a 'can of worms' for debate in a new thread.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
1222 Posts |
I referred in my original post I would reveal something later. While the results surprised me in some ways in others I'm not surprised. I showed this coin in a post 4 years ago on this forum (link below), after the discussion I decided to experiment and placed it in the envelope shown below this is where it resided for the last four years. It would seem it has got better grade estimates this time around then the first so I'm assuming it did work to a point meaning it's still a problem coin but toned more people are more tolerant of the problem. I'm thinking some will like it before better so what's your vote before or after? And is this considered artificial toning done in this manor? http://goccf.com/t/255058&SearchTerms=1916Envelope used below  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5585 Posts |
I think that the manila envelope added the unsightly bark areas. I like the coin better now that it's not washed out. The difference that I see here is the reason I don't collect silver, nor do I collect UNC coins. I like the history that any coin has after being handled for a long time. I like AU and XF+ coins, just for the history each contains. I like your experiment. I should do it with large cents.
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 2,066 |
|
Posted 02/18/2021 2:25 pm
