EXCEPT, this scratch was on the planchet (planchet stria) and was not struck out.
That's really interesting! @Insider2, how does one tell the difference between PMD and a pre-striking scratch on the planchet? Thanks!
The higher the magnification the better but 10 -15X works if you know what you are looking for. Fluorescent light is recommended along with incandescent 75-100W. When a surface is scratched, while it is "fresh" the interior of the scratch will be shiny and there may be a tiny ridge of displaced metal at the sides. Oxidation and wear will remove these clues. Then you need to look into the interior of the mark. The interior of a planchet flaw will have an original planchet surface and color. Additionally, the ends of a flaw will usually become more narrow until they finally disappear. The way the mark affects the raised relief - up to, under, or over must also be taken into account.
Folks who get accustomed to viewing coins using high magnification can often tell what they are looking at on a coin with only their naked eyes while the experts around them using 10X magnification are arguing about what they are seeing! It is very comical to watch them usually reach the correct answer after several minutes of debate.
@Sonorandesertrat said:
Yea, I stared that that pair of images, and did not see it either. Do I need new glasses or some stem cells for my brain?
I also don't see it.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@Sonorandesertrat said:
Yea, I stared that that pair of images, and did not see it either. Do I need new glasses or some stem cells for my brain?
I see some strike weakness and rub on the reverse but no scratch. The position of the coin to the light source can make them disappear. That's why you should tip the coin back and forth while rotating it at the same time.
Insider2, I learned that lesson years ago. I bought a ChAU Seated dollar that had wonderful mint bloom on the reverse, from a dealer in Utah. The coin was raw and slabs were a novelty. Of course, when I actually sat down to look carefully at the coin a few days later, I saw a very thin obverse scratch that almost bisected the coin. I dumped it.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
You should consult for dealers who post their inventories, with good pics, on the internet. Some of the things I have seen were blatantly worked on. Or just tell them to post crappy pics?
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
Scratches bother me and they are Post mint damage.
When I was looking for one; I saw a lovely, original 1935 S Walker in PCGS 65 + but I passed due to a tiny Staple scratch on the Eagle's leg on the reverse.
It was tiny and, sometimes, I wonder if I should have bought it, anyway, as no coin is perfect.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
@Sonorandesertrat said:
Yea, I stared that that pair of images, and did not see it either. Do I need new glasses or some stem cells for my brain?
I also don't see it.
Well now I don't feel so bad...
Upper cheek to temple. Undoubtedly from a staple.
Okay. Now I see it. Some sellers take pics of the coins they are selling with the lighting angled in such a way as to minimize the visibility of any defects on the coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@CoinscratchFever said:
Did someone say scratch? I'm guessing that any ms70 coin will not have these up to a magnification of 30x anyway.
I thought PCGS defined MS70 as having no visible defects under 5X magnification.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@Sonorandesertrat said:
Yea, I stared that that pair of images, and did not see it either. Do I need new glasses or some stem cells for my brain?
I also don't see it.
Well now I don't feel so bad...
Upper cheek to temple. Undoubtedly from a staple.
If it is the horizontal mark w/ a concave curve that starts at the lower left of the eye - it's no staple scratch. Too wide. That looks like a scratch.
A scratch is a scratch. I hate them, but I own a few coins affected by them. Most market makers don’t like them but you should judge every coin and make the gut wrenching decision to pull the trigger or not.
Scratches can be created when produced but if they are not seen in normal review for grading they don’t count for Grading purposes. To do so would be to change the standard that has been established. So all coins have scratches unseen as the polish process created them.
If I had viewed this Morgan in hand; I would not have a lesson to share.
Auction pictures did not show scratch between the two "8's" in date. You can only see the scratch when tilted at the right angle.
With the naked eye it looks like a die crack. Under magnification; it's a scratch. Unfortunately scratches, even if on a planchet before struck, lack the eloquence of a good ole die crack...
@PocketArt said:
If I had viewed this Morgan in hand; I would not have a lesson to share.
Auction pictures did not show scratch between the two "8's" in date. You can only see the scratch when tilted at the right angle.
With the naked eye it looks like a die crack. Under magnification; it's a scratch. Unfortunately scratches, even if on a planchet before struck, lack the eloquence of a good ole die crack...
That’s a raised line not a scratch on coin. It is not a scratch
@PocketArt said:
If I had viewed this Morgan in hand; I would not have a lesson to share.
Auction pictures did not show scratch between the two "8's" in date. You can only see the scratch when tilted at the right angle.
With the naked eye it looks like a die crack. Under magnification; it's a scratch. Unfortunately scratches, even if on a planchet before struck, lack the eloquence of a good ole die crack...
That’s a raised line not a scratch on coin. It is not a scratch
@PocketArt said:
If I had viewed this Morgan in hand; I would not have a lesson to share.
Auction pictures did not show scratch between the two "8's" in date. You can only see the scratch when tilted at the right angle.
With the naked eye it looks like a die crack. Under magnification; it's a scratch. Unfortunately scratches, even if on a planchet before struck, lack the eloquence of a good ole die crack...
You are in luck, I'm 99% sure that is a "Struck-thru-lint" mark, not a scratch. Note the dull interior surface and the smooth "soft" edges of the line. Think about this. How would someone put an even scratch in the field BETWEEN two raised numerals w/o affecting the sides of the 8's?
@PocketArt said:
If I had viewed this Morgan in hand; I would not have a lesson to share.
Auction pictures did not show scratch between the two "8's" in date. You can only see the scratch when tilted at the right angle.
With the naked eye it looks like a die crack. Under magnification; it's a scratch. Unfortunately scratches, even if on a planchet before struck, lack the eloquence of a good ole die crack...
You are in luck, I'm 99% sure that is a "Struck-thru-lint" mark, not a scratch. Note the dull interior surface and the smooth "soft" edges of the line. Think about this. How would someone put an even scratch in the field BETWEEN two raised numerals w/o affecting the sides of the 8's?
I agree that the Morgan left the press this way..@Kathy suggested thread too in private email. I thought perhaps a gouge on planchet that was still apparent after struck.
What us may think may still be a slim minority to the other greater % who still see a scratch... It's a VAM-22, far date bar wing, and scratch is in a focal area...graded MS64 old ANACS.
@PocketArt said:
If I had viewed this Morgan in hand; I would not have a lesson to share.
Auction pictures did not show scratch between the two "8's" in date. You can only see the scratch when tilted at the right angle.
With the naked eye it looks like a die crack. Under magnification; it's a scratch. Unfortunately scratches, even if on a planchet before struck, lack the eloquence of a good ole die crack...
That’s a raised line not a scratch on coin. It is not a scratch
No. I promise you it's not.
It's clear from the shadow that the line between the 8's is incuse. But there is a ridge along the top of each '8' which is clearly raised. Not sure I recall seeing that before, but I don't look at a ton of Morgans.
I voted other. It appears to me as a Bag Mark. I expect to see these marks on many series of coins, and this dime is no different. It might keep it down 1 point if graded. A small Nick like this does not bother me unless I was looking for Full Split Bands, which this one does not have.
On BS&T Now: Nothing. Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up! Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
A scratch on a coin YOU are selling, regardless of size, is a bargaining chip for the buyer. A scratch will always be a liability when selling a coin. THAT is why I avoid coins with scratches.
@Outhaul said:
A scratch on a coin YOU are selling, regardless of size, is a bargaining chip for the buyer. A scratch will always be a liability when selling a coin. THAT is why I avoid coins with scratches.
Just my eversohumble opinion.
Cheers
Bob
Generally true but if a scratch is really small on a circulated coin and you try to use it as a bargaining chip you risk losing credibility with the seller and he may not take you seriously. Most dealers don't want anything to do with unreasonable problem buyers.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@Texast said:
I voted other. It appears to me as a Bag Mark. I expect to see these marks on many series of coins, and this dime is no different. It might keep it down 1 point if graded. A small Nick like this does not bother me unless I was looking for Full Split Bands, which this one does not have.
"Bag Marks" are NOT very thin, long, marks that CUT INTO the surface of this dime.
@Outhaul said:
A scratch on a coin YOU are selling, regardless of size, is a bargaining chip for the buyer. A scratch will always be a liability when selling a coin. THAT is why I avoid coins with scratches.
Just my eversohumble opinion.
Cheers
Bob
Generally true but if a scratch is really small on a circulated coin and you try to used it as a bargaining chip you risk losing credibility with the seller and he may not take you seriously. Most dealers don't want anything to do with unreasonable problem buyers.
I've noticed that buyers have extremely good eyesight while sellers appear to be blind. Most folks coming up to the grading table for an opinion on their coins also appear to be blind!
Luckily, in most cases, poor eyesight can be corrected with a hand lens and some knowledge.
@crazyhounddog said:
I’m going to play Mr. Obvious and say yes😊
If you have anymore difficult questions feel more than free to hit me up for the answers.
Good day
I appreciate your response. I am sure that for collectors that are looking for, and can afford, the "perfect specimens" there are higher standards they can shoot for. If someone sets their bar at 20x, someone else can shoot for 30x. I would guess that for personal pleasure that makes sense. Insurance may differ though on the replacement value if they use the established standards?
@Outhaul said:
A scratch on a coin YOU are selling, regardless of size, is a bargaining chip for the buyer. A scratch will always be a liability when selling a coin. THAT is why I avoid coins with scratches.
Just my eversohumble opinion.
Cheers
Bob
Generally true but if a scratch is really small on a circulated coin and you try to used it as a bargaining chip you risk losing credibility with the seller and he may not take you seriously. Most dealers don't want anything to do with unreasonable problem buyers.
I've noticed that buyers have extremely good eyesight while sellers appear to be blind. Most folks coming up to the grading table for an opinion on their coins also appear to be blind!
Luckily, in most cases, poor eyesight can be corrected with a hand lens and some knowledge.
And those same blind sellers suddenly get eagle-like vision when buying.
@Texast said:
I voted other. It appears to me as a Bag Mark. I expect to see these marks on many series of coins, and this dime is no different. It might keep it down 1 point if graded. A small Nick like this does not bother me unless I was looking for Full Split Bands, which this one does not have.
"Bag Marks" are NOT very thin, long, marks that CUT INTO the surface of this dime.
I'm looking at the lower bands, the mark there could definitely be a bag mark, as far as the scratch above that if there were a coin with a sharp piece of metal attached dragging across the coin could cause this. It's all speculation so each opinion on what caused this could be valid.
On BS&T Now: Nothing. Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up! Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
@isaiah58 said:
If the grading system goes by 5x magnification, then the coin in the original picture passes doesn't it? There must be a reason for the standard?
There is a perfectly good reason for a 5X standard. Can you think of what it could be?
@Texast said: "I'm looking at the lower bands, the mark there could definitely be a bag mark, as far as the scratch above that if there were a coin with a sharp piece of metal attached dragging across the coin could cause this. It's all speculation so each opinion on what caused this could be valid.
Actually, this is not true. In many cases, some opinions are - well, not valid at all. When I read such statements from any long time member here it makes me wonder what they have been doing all those years.
_The mark on the lower bands is part of the deep, long scratch on the coin. It happens to be placed in such a position that most folks viewing the coin would not see it. That is why it is a good coin to discuss. I encourage folks to look over their coins closely. They can use their eyes alone or ANY POWER OF MAGNIFICATION they wish. I don't choose to let a SUGGESTED STANDARD limit what I can see on a coin. I really don't care what anyone else does. Really.
@Insider2 said: @Texast said: "I'm looking at the lower bands, the mark there could definitely be a bag mark, as far as the scratch above that if there were a coin with a sharp piece of metal attached dragging across the coin could cause this. It's all speculation so each opinion on what caused this could be valid.
Actually, this is not true. In many cases, some opinions are - well, not valid at all. When I read such statements from any long time member here it makes me wonder what they have been doing all those years.
_The mark on the lower bands is part of the deep, long scratch on the coin. It happens to be placed in such a position that most folks viewing the coin would not see it. That is why it is a good coin to discuss. I encourage folks to look over their coins closely. They can use their eyes alone or ANY POWER OF MAGNIFICATION they wish. I don't choose to let a SUGGESTED STANDARD limit what I can see on a coin. I really don't care what anyone else does. Really.
You take things to literally, then you find some reason for a personal attack, I'm not sure why you do this.
On BS&T Now: Nothing. Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up! Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
@isaiah58 said:
If the grading system goes by 5x magnification, then the coin in the original picture passes doesn't it? There must be a reason for the standard?
There is a perfectly good reason for a 5X standard. Can you think of what it could be?
After you guess I'll give you a clue.
My guess is that no perfect coins exist. To allow for reasonable expectations based on the striking process, 5x goes reasonably enough beyond what anyone can see without magnification. Hopefully there was a consensus to the standard.
This discussion has not incorporated luster or toning, which are subjective I believe and not addressed as damage if natural?
Comments
It sounds like you shouldn't say "I never return coins".
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That's really interesting! @Insider2, how does one tell the difference between PMD and a pre-striking scratch on the planchet? Thanks!
Roseanne Barrett I - CAC Morgan Dollar Basic Set, Circulation Strikes (Retired)
Roseanne Barrett - CAC Basic Seated Liberty Type Set, Circulation Strikes
If the coin is comparable to your coin and I like the coin I'll purchase it.
The higher the magnification the better but 10 -15X works if you know what you are looking for. Fluorescent light is recommended along with incandescent 75-100W. When a surface is scratched, while it is "fresh" the interior of the scratch will be shiny and there may be a tiny ridge of displaced metal at the sides. Oxidation and wear will remove these clues. Then you need to look into the interior of the mark. The interior of a planchet flaw will have an original planchet surface and color. Additionally, the ends of a flaw will usually become more narrow until they finally disappear. The way the mark affects the raised relief - up to, under, or over must also be taken into account.
Folks who get accustomed to viewing coins using high magnification can often tell what they are looking at on a coin with only their naked eyes while the experts around them using 10X magnification are arguing about what they are seeing! It is very comical to watch them usually reach the correct answer after several minutes of debate.
I accidentally bought this scratched coin, I somehow didn't see it in the picture.
Collector, occasional seller
Thanks for that explanation @Insider2 !
Roseanne Barrett I - CAC Morgan Dollar Basic Set, Circulation Strikes (Retired)
Roseanne Barrett - CAC Basic Seated Liberty Type Set, Circulation Strikes
I don't either.
Yea, I stared that that pair of images, and did not see it either. Do I need new glasses or some stem cells for my brain?
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
I also don't see it.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I see some strike weakness and rub on the reverse but no scratch. The position of the coin to the light source can make them disappear. That's why you should tip the coin back and forth while rotating it at the same time.
Insider2, I learned that lesson years ago. I bought a ChAU Seated dollar that had wonderful mint bloom on the reverse, from a dealer in Utah. The coin was raw and slabs were a novelty. Of course, when I actually sat down to look carefully at the coin a few days later, I saw a very thin obverse scratch that almost bisected the coin. I dumped it.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Temporary HIJACK ALERT
Do these large hairline scratches bother you?
How about this scrape
as I turn the coin in the light?
I think I would find the scrape more annoying.
Perhaps just let that one tone. Toning can hide lots of flaws and even sins.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
LOL, not from my SIX eyes!
You should consult for dealers who post their inventories, with good pics, on the internet. Some of the things I have seen were blatantly worked on. Or just tell them to post crappy pics?
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Scratches bother me and they are Post mint damage.
When I was looking for one; I saw a lovely, original 1935 S Walker in PCGS 65 + but I passed due to a tiny Staple scratch on the Eagle's leg on the reverse.
It was tiny and, sometimes, I wonder if I should have bought it, anyway, as no coin is perfect.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Well now I don't feel so bad...
Upper cheek to temple. Undoubtedly from a staple.
Collector, occasional seller
Time for vino. Perhaps that will improve my vision.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Okay. Now I see it. Some sellers take pics of the coins they are selling with the lighting angled in such a way as to minimize the visibility of any defects on the coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Did someone say scratch?
I'm guessing that any ms70 coin will not have these up to a magnification of 30x anyway.
I thought PCGS defined MS70 as having no visible defects under 5X magnification.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
That is good to know and I'm using a 16 hmmm.
If it is the horizontal mark w/ a concave curve that starts at the lower left of the eye - it's no staple scratch. Too wide. That looks like a scratch.
I feel like those would be fine on an MS62 or below. Anything higher and they would bother me a lot.
Collector, occasional seller
"If a coin is scratched but not obvious, is it still scratched?"
If a coin is counterfeit but not obvious, is it still counterfeit?
A scratch is a scratch. I hate them, but I own a few coins affected by them. Most market makers don’t like them but you should judge every coin and make the gut wrenching decision to pull the trigger or not.
Scratches can be created when produced but if they are not seen in normal review for grading they don’t count for Grading purposes. To do so would be to change the standard that has been established. So all coins have scratches unseen as the polish process created them.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
If I had viewed this Morgan in hand; I would not have a lesson to share.
Auction pictures did not show scratch between the two "8's" in date. You can only see the scratch when tilted at the right angle.
With the naked eye it looks like a die crack. Under magnification; it's a scratch. Unfortunately scratches, even if on a planchet before struck, lack the eloquence of a good ole die crack...
That’s a raised line not a scratch on coin. It is not a scratch
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
The minor scratch on the reverse body of Buff is minor one point deduct. Still a very very high grade
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
No. I promise you it's not.
You are in luck, I'm 99% sure that is a "Struck-thru-lint" mark, not a scratch. Note the dull interior surface and the smooth "soft" edges of the line. Think about this. How would someone put an even scratch in the field BETWEEN two raised numerals w/o affecting the sides of the 8's?
I agree that the Morgan left the press this way..@Kathy suggested thread too in private email. I thought perhaps a gouge on planchet that was still apparent after struck.
What us may think may still be a slim minority to the other greater % who still see a scratch...
It's a VAM-22, far date bar wing, and scratch is in a focal area...graded MS64 old ANACS.
The scratch is on the obverse
Collector, occasional seller
It's clear from the shadow that the line between the 8's is incuse. But there is a ridge along the top of each '8' which is clearly raised. Not sure I recall seeing that before, but I don't look at a ton of Morgans.
I voted other. It appears to me as a Bag Mark. I expect to see these marks on many series of coins, and this dime is no different. It might keep it down 1 point if graded. A small Nick like this does not bother me unless I was looking for Full Split Bands, which this one does not have.
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
A scratch on a coin YOU are selling, regardless of size, is a bargaining chip for the buyer. A scratch will always be a liability when selling a coin. THAT is why I avoid coins with scratches.
Just my eversohumble opinion.
Cheers
Bob
Generally true but if a scratch is really small on a circulated coin and you try to use it as a bargaining chip you risk losing credibility with the seller and he may not take you seriously. Most dealers don't want anything to do with unreasonable problem buyers.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
"Bag Marks" are NOT very thin, long, marks that CUT INTO the surface of this dime.
I've noticed that buyers have extremely good eyesight while sellers appear to be blind. Most folks coming up to the grading table for an opinion on their coins also appear to be blind!
Luckily, in most cases, poor eyesight can be corrected with a hand lens and some knowledge.
If the grading system goes by 5x magnification, then the coin in the original picture passes doesn't it? There must be a reason for the standard?
I’m going to play Mr. Obvious and say yes😊
If you have anymore difficult questions feel more than free to hit me up for the answers.
Good day
I appreciate your response. I am sure that for collectors that are looking for, and can afford, the "perfect specimens" there are higher standards they can shoot for. If someone sets their bar at 20x, someone else can shoot for 30x. I would guess that for personal pleasure that makes sense. Insurance may differ though on the replacement value if they use the established standards?
And those same blind sellers suddenly get eagle-like vision when buying.
Cheers
Bob
I'm looking at the lower bands, the mark there could definitely be a bag mark, as far as the scratch above that if there were a coin with a sharp piece of metal attached dragging across the coin could cause this. It's all speculation so each opinion on what caused this could be valid.
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
There is a perfectly good reason for a 5X standard. Can you think of what it could be?
After you guess I'll give you a clue.
@Texast said: "I'm looking at the lower bands, the mark there could definitely be a bag mark, as far as the scratch above that if there were a coin with a sharp piece of metal attached dragging across the coin could cause this. It's all speculation so each opinion on what caused this could be valid.
Actually, this is not true. In many cases, some opinions are - well, not valid at all.
When I read such statements from any long time member here it makes me wonder what they have been doing all those years.
_The mark on the lower bands is part of the deep, long scratch on the coin. It happens to be placed in such a position that most folks viewing the coin would not see it. That is why it is a good coin to discuss. I encourage folks to look over their coins closely. They can use their eyes alone or ANY POWER OF MAGNIFICATION they wish. I don't choose to let a SUGGESTED STANDARD limit what I can see on a coin. I really don't care what anyone else does. Really.
You take things to literally, then you find some reason for a personal attack, I'm not sure why you do this.
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
What if it's struck through a thread or wire and only looks like a scratch ?
My guess is that no perfect coins exist. To allow for reasonable expectations based on the striking process, 5x goes reasonably enough beyond what anyone can see without magnification. Hopefully there was a consensus to the standard.
This discussion has not incorporated luster or toning, which are subjective I believe and not addressed as damage if natural?