Options
Tonal pair
SkyMan
Posts: 9,493 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here are a tonal pair of Battle Creek coins.
I always find it interesting to see what a scan picks up in a coin. The dark streak on the 1885 obverse extending from the nose to the ear is not nearly as pronounced as the image makes it appear, and seems to be a minor rub of some sort. The 1885 (BC 1, lot 1274, MS 64*), like a lot of '85 BC's, has a semi-prooflike surface so it really projects the toning.
The reverse is an 1887 MS 63* (BC 4, lot 908). I'd say the reverse of the coin is easily a 65, probably a 66.
I always find it interesting to see what a scan picks up in a coin. The dark streak on the 1885 obverse extending from the nose to the ear is not nearly as pronounced as the image makes it appear, and seems to be a minor rub of some sort. The 1885 (BC 1, lot 1274, MS 64*), like a lot of '85 BC's, has a semi-prooflike surface so it really projects the toning.
The reverse is an 1887 MS 63* (BC 4, lot 908). I'd say the reverse of the coin is easily a 65, probably a 66.
0
Comments
<< <i>Gotta love those Battle Creek Morgans! >>
Some of the nicest coins in the hobby, let alone the nicest Morgans.
(let me guess, Island coins?)
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
Robertpr, the coins are by Laura D. To each their own, I like her work. While her images are a little bit juiced up, the BC colors are so OTT that her images are actually a pretty good representation of what the coins look like. Just a heads up, the rest of my BC stuff has also been imaged by her, so if these images hurt your eyes you might want to miss looking at the rest of the images I post...
Have a good one folks!
U.S. Type Set
<< <i>What would really be cool would be a Black Beauty from BC. >>
I got one!!!
Hey that's a cool one you just posted stman. It's obviously undergraded, well struck, booming luster, vibrant toning, no brainer NT, famous pedigree, I see some textile on the face, no marks, no fingerprints and very PQ, lock 5 for sure. It’s worth moon $$.
<< <i>Glad you guys like them. Thank you for the nice comments!
Robertpr, the coins are by Laura D. To each their own, I like her work. While her images are a little bit juiced up, the BC colors are so OTT that her images are actually a pretty good representation of what the coins look like. Just a heads up, the rest of my BC stuff has also been imaged by her, so if these images hurt your eyes you might want to miss looking at the rest of the images I post...
Have a good one folks![/q
What is OTT?
Oh, and I should have put a smiley face at the end of the sentence "...images I post...", as it was meant to be lighthearted, so here's one now.
Hey, while we're at it, what does ROFL mean?
EDITED TO ADD: Pretty coin stman!
U.S. Type Set
abrasions to the obverse, especially the cheek.
U.S. Type Set
<< <i>Pretty pair--and the reverse actualy could go 67/68--just a question of those all important
abrasions to the obverse, especially the cheek.
Thanks Morgannut2! The obverse is your basic 63, not great, not bad, right in the middle of the grade.
U.S. Type Set
<< <i>OTT = Over the top
Oh, and I should have put a smiley face at the end of the sentence "...images I post...", as it was meant to be lighthearted, so here's one now.
Hey, while we're at it, what does ROFL mean?
EDITED TO ADD: Pretty coin stman!
Thanks