| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 4,591 |
|
Valued Member
United States
407 Posts |
Disregarding, for the moment, the fact that I'm slightly photographically challenged, I would be interested to know any thoughts you might have on this beauty from my collection. You may grade it, critique it, analyze it, but please-don't sneeze on it! Thanks, Steve   |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
420 Posts |
that is a beauty ! maybe 1 day i'll have a single one like that- most of mine are almost planchets again  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1388 Posts |
considering you claim to be photography challenged, Nice Pic! Beautiful Coin too...  |
|
Valued Member
United States
321 Posts |
 65! |
|
Valued Member
United States
321 Posts |
Quite gold in color. It doesn't happen to be one of the gold planchet Indian cents does it? |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
AU/unc whizzed IMO. I don't mean to be a downer, but the surfaces look grainy and 'off'. Maybe the pic but somehow I doubt it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1490 Posts |
 The surfaces and color appears off to me as well. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Quote:
AU/unc whizzed IMO. I don't mean to be a downer, but the surfaces look grainy and 'off'. Maybe the pic but somehow I doubt it. I also agree that the surfaces are not original. It looks way to flat and even, stripped of luster. My guess would be way overdipped or polished, may even be coated by something(recolored). On the positive side, it does appear to have MS details or nearly so(high AU). Edited by johnny54321
07/14/2010 8:37 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
407 Posts |
Alright you crazy people!
Thanks for your thoughts. The person I got this from, and one or two others, indicated that they had come out of an old album and had been dipped at some point. Hence the loss of "mint luster". I got them pretty cheap, and wanted them for the higher grade state. There is little to no wear, a few nicks, but the color in the pic is "fairly" representative of the color in hand, more goldish than red.
In the balance, I love looking at them, even with the color, because all the detail is sharp. Although the pic shows the granularity of surface much more than in hand, remember the pic is like ten times larger than the coin! You don't see it as much in hand.
Thanks for your evaluation, and absolute refusal to pull any punches!
Steve
|
|
Valued Member
United States
420 Posts |
Steve, the great part is where you say you got it cheap - I have never been so lucky as to hold one with that much detail in hand for me, having one like that , even cleaned, it shows the intricate details enjoy your Indian |
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
Steve, nice coin but why it was dipped, which was my evaluation as well, is in question. I see carbon spotting on the reverse as a possible scenario or, some PVC damage from the album it was stored in. Please elaborate on this. Can you explain the gold color in your photos?
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
United States
407 Posts |
I know. But "why" it was dipped I don't know. There are a couple of small carbon spots on both of them, and they came to me that way. The color, as I explained above, is the way they came - my presumption being from the dipping. They are both more gold than red, but the fact that numbnutz forgot to set the white balance before he took the pictures gives it a bit more gold than it actually appears in hand. But not signifcantly so. I think I paid about $25 for it, so I was happy with it. I remember the sellers pictures not showing it quite as gold colored. Hey, live and learn.
Steve
|
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
The white balance setting explains much Steve. Like I said, it's a nice looking coin! Live and learn is right, and, as long as your happy with the coin, that's all that should matter. This would make a nice addition into any IHC album. Heck, if you want to part with it ever, look me up :-) swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
United States
420 Posts |
any book you read on coin cleaning cautions that copper will NEVER show original color again- silver and gold , yeah you may get away with it ... I still love the details.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
407 Posts |
Vermont, I was also taking some pics of my 1916 Merc and when I realized the colors were coming out funny I set the WB and took some additional of that one but just stuck with the IHC ones because I'd already put it away and figured what I got was close enough. The other that I got from the same seller is an '03 that came from the same album and looks pretty much the same. However, it has a weird stuck-thru lookin' business on the reverse. I gotta try and take some pics of it and see what you guys think of what is on the reverse. I'll do that soon. I also have an '02 from someone else that has decent luster and doesn't look like it's been dipped. I also got a '63 from someone else that has nice luster and moderate toning and looks really nice. Of course it cost a bit more than the others. True enough, if I had paid more than I did for the '04 and '03 I might have been a little perturbed, but for around $25 apiece I don't feel like complaining. Who knows, maybe they are those IHC's that got stamped on gold planchets!  Steve |
|
Valued Member
United States
407 Posts |
Hey Greg, I know they'd been dipped when I bid on them, but they looked so nice and they were going so cheap I couldn't resist. Although they look "different" I still like them. They be so nice and shiney! And I can read everything on them! If they were something I wanted to make money on I'd have been more selective, and of course had to spend more money. As they say, I like them and that's all that matters. Aside from the others I mentioned above, I've also got and '09 I got from my dealer long ago that's MS, and RB. It's pretty nice too. I paid about $35 for that one. IHC's are a really good looking coin. You should bite the bullet and grab one that's not the next thing to a raw planchet!  Steve |
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 4,591 |
Posted 07/14/2010 07:42 am
