I guessed 53, but I can see it, and appreciate it as a 55, and I almost changed my guess last night.
I like the luster and the surfaces. The color seems to be original (enough) and is attractive (I think).
As for the grade, this DM/DS is from a notoriously fatigued late state die. This can trick both the eye and the mind.
There's rub, but it's not that much. There's a good amount of luster too, from what I can tell.
As a CBH guy that collects in this grade, I have a couple of weird statements that my friends have heard me say.
It's a "53 55", or a "55 58" (coins that got the better label grade), or a "55 53", "58 55" or "53 50" (coins that appear better than the label grade), etc. This is usually to say ... what it looks like first, and what the label says second. Often this will affect how I view pricing, as there are can be significant variances in one grade point in the AU spectrum.
This can be done for any grade, of course, but I'm not sure I can say it with any repeatability for any other grades (if I can even do it for AU's).
Of course, we are working off of images too.
I'm not sure, in-hand, if any of those comments would apply. But based on my on waffling last night, and a lot of the replies, it seems like maybe a lot of people here would call her a 53 55 adopting my jargon. Absolutely nothing wrong with that in my mind. Still a very nice coin.
Thanks for sharing.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
@pursuitofliberty said:
I guessed 53, but I can see it, and appreciate it as a 55, and I almost changed my guess last night.
I like the luster and the surfaces. The color seems to be original (enough) and is attractive (I think).
As for the grade, this DM/DS is from a notoriously fatigued late state die. This can trick both the eye and the mind.
There's rub, but it's not that much. There's a good amount of luster too, from what I can tell.
As a CBH guy that collects in this grade, I have a couple of weird statements that my friends have heard me say.
It's a "53 55", or a "55 58" (coins that got the better label grade), or a "55 53", "58 55" or "53 50" (coins that appear better than the label grade), etc. This is usually to say ... what it looks like first, and what the label says second. Often this will affect how I view pricing, as there are can be significant variances in one grade point in the AU spectrum.
This can be done for any grade, of course, but I'm not sure I can say it with any repeatability for any other grades (if I can even do it for AU's).
Of course, we are working off of images too.
I'm not sure, in-hand, if any of those comments would apply. But based on my on waffling last night, and a lot of the replies, it seems like maybe a lot of people here would call her a 53 55 adopting my jargon. Absolutely nothing wrong with that in my mind. Still a very nice coin.
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for taking the time to share the analysis, Todd- much appreciated.
@ARCO said:
Gorgeous Bust Half. Glad you like it. It is a 55. I love your pics. You definitely caught the luster which I just couldn't do.
Thanks, ARCO! It’s sweet, reminds me of one of my other favorites- I really like when the toning creates a slightly “high-relief” vibe.
Comments
I'm late to the game but love the look! 53-55 was my initial impression...
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
55 is very solid to me! Great coin!
My YouTube Channel
55-58 leaning 58 was my thought. Nice example.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
I guessed 53, but I can see it, and appreciate it as a 55, and I almost changed my guess last night.
I like the luster and the surfaces. The color seems to be original (enough) and is attractive (I think).
As for the grade, this DM/DS is from a notoriously fatigued late state die. This can trick both the eye and the mind.
There's rub, but it's not that much. There's a good amount of luster too, from what I can tell.
As a CBH guy that collects in this grade, I have a couple of weird statements that my friends have heard me say.
It's a "53 55", or a "55 58" (coins that got the better label grade), or a "55 53", "58 55" or "53 50" (coins that appear better than the label grade), etc. This is usually to say ... what it looks like first, and what the label says second. Often this will affect how I view pricing, as there are can be significant variances in one grade point in the AU spectrum.
This can be done for any grade, of course, but I'm not sure I can say it with any repeatability for any other grades (if I can even do it for AU's).
Of course, we are working off of images too.
I'm not sure, in-hand, if any of those comments would apply. But based on my on waffling last night, and a lot of the replies, it seems like maybe a lot of people here would call her a 53 55 adopting my jargon. Absolutely nothing wrong with that in my mind. Still a very nice coin.
Thanks for sharing.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Gorgeous Bust Half. Glad you like it. It is a 55. I love your pics. You definitely caught the luster which I just couldn't do.
I'm late, but I would have guessed 53.
Young Numismatist
Thanks for taking the time to share the analysis, Todd- much appreciated.
Thanks, ARCO! It’s sweet, reminds me of one of my other favorites- I really like when the toning creates a slightly “high-relief” vibe.
mmmm ... lovely '26 too! Great looking pair!! Excellent selections.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242