Attempting to "grade" the OP's coin is rather pointless - quality is extremely high - but assigning a "grade" to the piece without direct examination is just a guess.
Attempting to "grade" the OP's coin is rather pointless - quality is extremely high - but assigning a "grade" to the piece without direct examination is just a guess.
@tradedollarnut said:
Same grade - who likes which one better and why?
>
For me, the 69 as the luster comes through better, at least from the photos. Also, the head on the 59 is subdued by toning and sort of an anti focal point. I can really feel the contrast on the devices/ fields and frost on 69 and therefore I’m more attracted to the 69. I don’t know the values or any population history off hand and I’m typically drawn to toning, but side by side, my pick is the 69.
@tradedollarnut said:
Same grade - who likes which one better and why?
>
For me, the 69 as the luster comes through better, at least from the photos. Also, the head on the 59 is subdued by toning and sort of an anti focal point. I can really feel the contrast on the devices/ fields and frost on 69 and therefore I’m more attracted to the 69. I don’t know the values or any population history off hand and I’m typically drawn to toning, but side by side, my pick is the 69.
Me thinks you are a bit too picky. "the head on the 59 is subdued but toning", holy crap are you serious. This isn't a painting, this is a real life coin, minted by a coin press and its workers in 1859 , never entered circulation and preserved in tissue for over 100 years and you are critiquing as if it is a Rembrandt. WOW LOL!
It’s my side by side choice. Take one away and I would like either of them. Chill bro.
I guess because I would never buy these I don’t get a say.
@tradedollarnut said:
Same grade - who likes which one better and why?
I like the 1869 better (by a full point). The 1859 appears to have a lot more going on at the areas of Liberty's thighs, in particular. I doubt that I’m just seeing toning, there.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I prefer the 1869 as an example of a mint Seated dollar. It has creamy, original luster and mint frost on the devices. The obverse stars are more fully struck. The minimal toning in the fields isn't going to hide hairlines or abrasions.
I normally prefer a toned coin but the '59 toning looks splotchy not evenly distributed...to me the '69 is a little too "bright" in the centers...the fields are beautiful...so overall my preference is the '69...
@tradedollarnut said:
Same grade - who likes which one better and why?
TDN: My choice on a one to one-irregardless to price-for a Seated dollar added to my collection would be the 1859 you pictured/ It appears to be original and beautiful along without a spot as the 1869 has. Spot aside, the 1859 has much more eye appeal imho.
@Realone said:
Jesus h. C, I will take both and feel better that I did. I cannot split hairs, like choosing a blonde over a brunette....yeah I know that is sexist but couldn't think of a more appropriate analogy.
What fun would it be if it were a super-easy call?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,162 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Much more pleasing to the eye.
Looks like a high end 66! Absolutely beautiful.
Even stronger than an @insider2 65+, that's a @RogerB 64 if I ever saw one !!!!!!
Attempting to "grade" the OP's coin is rather pointless - quality is extremely high - but assigning a "grade" to the piece without direct examination is just a guess.
Looks to be at least 60 to me
Ray Charles wearing nitrile gloves would happily buy that in an Accu-Grade MS64 slab
Let’s just say it has two hairlines priced at -$50k apiece
What is that mark on the reverse above DOL?
My Early Large Cents
Planchet flake or small strike through
Based on forum trends I would say these must be common.
Same grade - who likes which one better and why?
>
For me, the 69 as the luster comes through better, at least from the photos. Also, the head on the 59 is subdued by toning and sort of an anti focal point. I can really feel the contrast on the devices/ fields and frost on 69 and therefore I’m more attracted to the 69. I don’t know the values or any population history off hand and I’m typically drawn to toning, but side by side, my pick is the 69.
It’s my side by side choice. Take one away and I would like either of them. Chill bro.
I guess because I would never buy these I don’t get a say.
Hate the 59, LOVE the 69. Someone is too emotionally attached to the 59. But what do I know?
I bought the 69 after one good go round of viewing it
I like the 1869 better (by a full point). The 1859 appears to have a lot more going on at the areas of Liberty's thighs, in particular. I doubt that I’m just seeing toning, there.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
As much as I go googoo over a nicely toned coin, I do prefer the one with the two hairlines, the "69.
Beautiful,beautiful coin!
The '69 seems to have amazing, shimmering luster, the 59 is just too dark for me.
I prefer the 1869 as an example of a mint Seated dollar. It has creamy, original luster and mint frost on the devices. The obverse stars are more fully struck. The minimal toning in the fields isn't going to hide hairlines or abrasions.
I normally prefer a toned coin but the '59 toning looks splotchy not evenly distributed...to me the '69 is a little too "bright" in the centers...the fields are beautiful...so overall my preference is the '69...
TDN: My choice on a one to one-irregardless to price-for a Seated dollar added to my collection would be the 1859 you pictured/ It appears to be original and beautiful along without a spot as the 1869 has. Spot aside, the 1859 has much more eye appeal imho.
I prefer the '69 due to luster and apparent detail - by that I mean, the details are not obscured by tarnish, which is ugly on the '59. Cheers, RickO
That 1869 is splendid!
My YouTube Channel
Can't tell. The first pic to my eye is one stop over exposed and hides some detail. The second pic does not appear to have this issue.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Arguing over these two coins is like arguing over which prime cut of filet mignon has the best pattern of marbling.
I wouldn't kick either one of them out of the house, assuming they'd even take up residence with me.
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Thanks for the giveaway on the least liked!
The 1869 has much better eye appeal, very attractive surfaces, more "coruscating luster," as it were... or at least is more photogenic.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
What fun would it be if it were a super-easy call?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Two beautiful examples of mint state seated dollars, each uniquely struck and preserved for us to enjoy.
The 59 is the rarer date in my opinion.
Both finest known. 1869 by the + and 1859 by a grade and the +