Grades back from our Host-

coinkat

Express was delivered in 15 days- I would like to thank the PCGS staff for making this possible

As for the grades- your thoughts are welcome

coinkat

hopefully this is the larger image

WilliamF

World coins are not a big part of my collection, I don't even know where to start as far as grading goes but I'll give them a shot
For the Crown: I'm not sure if I'm seeing wear or a soft strike but the luster makes me lean towards MS, I'll say 62.
For the 5 pound piece, I'm going to go liberal and say MS64 PL, it's a beauty regardless of the grade!

Rexford

58 on the Crown - light wear on the high points.
62 on the £5 - I was trying to get to 63, but couldn’t make it. It’s got some visible hairlines, and the bright yellow color gives off an unnatural/processed look and makes me think there are more hairlines on the coin that are not visible in the photos.

tcollects

@Rexford said:
58 on the Crown - light wear on the high points.
62 on the £5 - I was trying to get to 63, but couldn’t make it. It’s got some visible hairlines, and the bright yellow color gives off an unnatural/processed look and makes me think there are more hairlines on the coin that are not visible in the photos.

so critical!

Rexford

@tcollects said:

@Rexford said:
58 on the Crown - light wear on the high points.
62 on the £5 - I was trying to get to 63, but couldn’t make it. It’s got some visible hairlines, and the bright yellow color gives off an unnatural/processed look and makes me think there are more hairlines on the coin that are not visible in the photos.

so critical!

I didn’t mean to sound negative, they’re both very nice coins. The Crown has great surfaces and a very wholesome look to it, and AU58 is a solid grade for the type. The issues I see on the £5 are slight and more technical than anything, and overall it still looks attractive and lustrous based on the photos. The qualities that I listed previously were just the qualities that kept me down from higher grades.

bidask

@tcollects said:

@Rexford said:
58 on the Crown - light wear on the high points.
62 on the £5 - I was trying to get to 63, but couldn’t make it. It’s got some visible hairlines, and the bright yellow color gives off an unnatural/processed look and makes me think there are more hairlines on the coin that are not visible in the photos.

so critical!

The OP asked for thoughts 😁

coinkat

There are so many things to write at the moment-

1. Great turn around by our host on this submission;
2. Great images from our host that have been shared for discussion to help frame what collectors have questions about- and that means everyone;
3. There are no right/wrong opinions and this is about a shared experience to help all of us to be better numismatists; and
4. I have a thick skin so please write what you think.

I thought of waiting before sharing my thoughts but it seems now is a reasonable time to insure this stays on the course for which it was intended.

First- the 1750 Crown. These are struck in a high relief and the reverse for 1750 and 51 are different in that they have more refined characteristics-

The reverse is attractive but the obverse displays central weakness and did not get any benefit because the surfaces were not helpful for an MS grade. Grades are opinions- some opinions are better than others- PCGS graded this a 58 which is fair, safe and reasonable.

The 1887 5 pound coin should create an interesting discussion. Rexford pointed out hairlines... And there are hairlines that are more pronounced because there are semi PL surfaces that fall short of a PL designation. So the real questions are magnification and the power loupe one uses - let's include a microscope as I use one- And I favor power so I really understand and appreciate what is required to make a decision that is right for me... I am the one buying the coin...right? And you are the one buying the coin you choose to buy. So this goes full circle back to what one is willing to tolerate in terms of surface quality. In this instance, we have a flashy coin- the appearance in hand is above average- but hairlines under magnification create an issue that limits a grade. And that is how it is. This one graded 62- it missed a PL designation- but it still has this look that sets it apart from something one would immediately write as processed.

The grades are fair. Please keep in mind that I post my results to share what is possible as well as what can be learned from the submission process.

7Jaguars

Personally I do not agree with the characterization of the "hairlines". Please enlighten me on how they go from the field up on to the devices - I do not see this. I think I see some very small ones on the cheek of Vicky that are not connected to those in the fields. I find it a pleasing strike and even though not my series or obviously my coin feel a bit better about it at 63 but not quite up to PL & not far from 64. I'll pass on the crown there is a bit of roughness in surface that would push me to 55/58.

coinkat

@7Jaguars

I see where you are going with this in terms of die polish. And in my review of the coin there clearly is die polish in the fields and much of what you wrote I agree with. The reality in all of this is the unprotected fields are a magnet to display imperfections. I so happen to like this coin but at the same time I want what is the best opinion as to the grade. Could this be a 63? Given the semi PL look and if there was the right look by graders/finalizers to separate hairlines for die polish, I see 63 as possible and even probable given the look. I like the coin even though I would much rather have an 1893 vailed head example.

7Jaguars

OK, I will give you the gold CAC on this at that grade. Seriously, from photos alone 63 looks like a minimum and what I would stick it at (I'd be a bit miffed if it were my coin).

coinkat

I appreciate the vote of confidence… sort of makes one wonder what this one would grade across the street. It is not going there.

Rexford

@7Jaguars said:
Personally I do not agree with the characterization of the "hairlines". Please enlighten me on how they go from the field up on to the devices - I do not see this. I think I see some very small ones on the cheek of Vicky that are not connected to those in the fields. I find it a pleasing strike and even though not my series or obviously my coin feel a bit better about it at 63 but not quite up to PL & not far from 64. I'll pass on the crown there is a bit of roughness in surface that would push me to 55/58.

The vertical lines are die polish. The horizontal lines are hairlines. There is also a touch of friction that prevents a choice grade.

7Jaguars

I will respectfully disagree with that platitude: most of the horizontal lines disappear as they intersect the device, particularly on the obverse.

Rexford

@7Jaguars said:
I will respectfully disagree with that platitude: most of the horizontal lines disappear as they intersect the device, particularly on the obverse.

That doesn’t matter. Even if they don’t disappear, it likely wouldn’t be visible on the devices in the photos, but it’s clear from the way they reflect light and lie on top of the haze that they are incuse. They also visibly fade away as they approach the devices, as along the whole of the back of the portrait, as hairlines often do - die lines, on the other hand, continue right up against the side of the devices, as with the vertical lines (near VICTORIA, for example). They’re textbook hairlines and I am 100% positive about that.

7Jaguars

Mmmm, very good, well to be fair unless you have held the coin in hand much of what you say would be entirely speculative. And I will remind you that die polish lines evolve through strike progression and therefore may also diminish as they approach devices though this is not my particular argument in this case. Of this I am absolutely positive. Unfortunately you are unable to explain just how the putative hairlines manage to find their way between lettering/punctuation such as between the colons, and in fact do abut the edge of devices such as the right side of Victoria's veil (which then magically disappear and not seen continuing into or above the devices). Also there is clear toning superficial to these "hairlines" such as seen pointedly in several locations prominently as they approach the rear of her veil and in fact pointedly demonstrate that they are NOT on top of the haze in these instances. So, no I do not agree and am as certain of my point as you are, complete with textbook.

Rexford

@7Jaguars said:
Mmmm, very good, well to be fair unless you have held the coin in hand much of what you say would be entirely speculative. And I will remind you that die polish lines evolve through strike progression and therefore may also diminish as they approach devices though this is not my particular argument in this case. Of this I am absolutely positive. Unfortunately you are unable to explain just how the putative hairlines manage to find their way between lettering/punctuation such as between the colons, and in fact do abut the edge of devices such as the right side of Victoria's veil (which then magically disappear and not seen continuing into or above the devices). Also there is clear toning superficial to these "hairlines" such as seen pointedly in several locations prominently as they approach the rear of her veil and in fact pointedly demonstrate that they are NOT on top of the haze in these instances. So, no I do not agree and am as certain of my point as you are, complete with textbook.

Respectfully, I think you must be reading the wrong textbook.

7Jaguars

Respectfully, you don't know who you are talking to or about, so leave it at that. I was playing back on your self-anointment in case you didn't get that, insults generally not becoming of a gentleman.

Rexford

@7Jaguars said:
Respectfully, you don't know who you are talking to or about, so leave it at that. I was playing back on your self-anointment in case you didn't get that, insults generally not becoming of a gentleman.

Same to you, Mr. “Platitude”. Interesting statements from someone so consistently and insistently incorrect about the very objective and uncontroversial difference between hairlines and die polish! But I surrender - the grading services must be getting it wrong every time. You’re the expert, after all!

bidask

@coinkat said:
@7Jaguars

I see where you are going with this in terms of die polish. And in my review of the coin there clearly is die polish in the fields and much of what you wrote I agree with. The reality in all of this is the unprotected fields are a magnet to display imperfections. I so happen to like this coin but at the same time I want what is the best opinion as to the grade. Could this be a 63? Given the semi PL look and if there was the right look by graders/finalizers to separate hairlines for die polish, I see 63 as possible and even probable given the look. I like the coin even though I would much rather have an 1893 vailed head example.

@coinkat first you stated it has hairlines …….now are you saying that upon reviewing the coin again based
on @j7jaguars comments that you don’t think they are hairlines but die polish ?

You have a good numismatic eye 😊

Does it have hairlines or not ?😉

coinkat

Hairlines and die polish can and often do exist on the same same coin. And that is what we have here. Yes- there are hairlines and Yes... there is significant die polish.

I have looked at this coin under both available settings on my microscope as well as the normal power loupe I use which is 16x. As I previously wrote... I am the one buying the coin...right? I use magnification so I am aware of the surfaces of the coin and whether I can tolerate them. Everyone should develop their own threshold of what they are willing to accept and not accept. That was part of the point of sharing the image.

At the outset I should have made it clear that there are bold die polishing lines as well as some hairlines present. I thought the image was clear enough that both could be identified and to some degree distinguished. In my mind, there was never a question that the presence of surface imperfections- which is what hairlines are- would limit the grade especially with the appearance of flashy surfaces. And that turns full circle back to what is tolerated. My pre-submission opinion was lock 62 with a shot at 63. A PL designation was more of a Hail Mary. PCGS graded it 62. We pay for opinions either in those coins we buy that are graded or with those coins that we choose to submit.

A post sharing images such as these really needs to remain within the educational framework in which it was intended.