Anybody here snag this beauty off ebay?

AUandAG

GSA, $1,300

Steven59

Never saw it - That's a Beauty.

johnny9434

I missed it as well, nice coin 🪙 👍

RobertScotLover

Impressive

Manifest_Destiny

Awesome coin

blu62vette

A friend of mine got it. I look forward to the full report on how it looks.

AUandAG

@blu62vette said:
A friend of mine got it. I look forward to the full report on how it looks.

Get your camera on it Todd and lets see it again! I'll be it's a $3,500 coin.

bob
vegas baby!

joeykoins

Can you tell I like it?

Walkerlover

What grade do you guys think it will receive in PCGS?

AUandAG

@Walkerlover said:
What grade do you guys think it will receive in PCGS?

I hope it's sent to NGC. 66+ or 67 is my WAG

bob
vegas baby!

Meltdown

I wish I would have seen it so I could have been 2nd runner up on the bidding. I'll bet the top bid was nuclear.

Extremeengineer

@Meltdown said:
I wish I would have seen it so I could have been 2nd runner up on the bidding. I'll bet the top bid was nuclear.

I'm assuming the OP's comments above images indicates it went for $1,300. I don't consider that close to nuclear, or even close to where I'd have expected this to go if it was close to a 66+ or 67. This looks like judicious use of contrast and exposure in Photoshop, and it looks very dipped to my untrained eye. The loss of detail on the leaves, and the hair, I'd have topped out well before 1300. But then I don't know what I'm doing yet lol

AUandAG

@Meltdown said:
I wish I would have seen it so I could have been 2nd runner up on the bidding. I'll bet the top bid was nuclear.

As we know, from a recent GTG on a Morgan, pics can be deceiving. I was in up to $650 and then just watched.
bob
vegas baby!

Meltdown

@Extremeengineer said:

@Meltdown said:
I wish I would have seen it so I could have been 2nd runner up on the bidding. I'll bet the top bid was nuclear.

I'm assuming the OP's comments above images indicates it went for $1,300. I don't consider that close to nuclear, or even close to where I'd have expected this to go if it was close to a 66+ or 67. This looks like judicious use of contrast and exposure in Photoshop, and it looks very dipped to my untrained eye. The loss of detail on the leaves, and the hair, I'd have topped out well before 1300. But then I don't know what I'm doing yet lol

You could be right. $1300 based on those photos, if legit seems to be a bargain. That's probably where I would have topped out, I'm only guessing but I bet the actual number the top bidder had in there was much higher... again, based on those images.

skier07

The coin sold for 66 money. What’s the likelihood it will grade 66+ or higher? I don’t know. It’s very difficult to tell from pictures especially if they were taken to make the coin look better.

Extremeengineer

@Meltdown said:
You could be right. $1300 based on those photos, if legit seems to be a bargain. That's probably where I would have topped out, I'm only guessing but I bet the actual number the top bidder had in there was much higher... again, based on those images.

Based on those images this was no deal, it's a 64 coin.

Pic credit to @mattniss from the current favorite Morgan thread of his 66+. This coin is at best heavily photoshopped, and at worst cleaned, or dipped heavily, and then also photoshopped. Hope there was a return policy on the listing.

AUandAG

@Extremeengineer said:

@Meltdown said:
I wish I would have seen it so I could have been 2nd runner up on the bidding. I'll bet the top bid was nuclear.

I'm assuming the OP's comments above images indicates it went for $1,300. I don't consider that close to nuclear, or even close to where I'd have expected this to go if it was close to a 66+ or 67. This looks like judicious use of contrast and exposure in Photoshop, and it looks very dipped to my untrained eye. The loss of detail on the leaves, and the hair, I'd have topped out well before 1300. But then I don't know what I'm doing yet lol

Dipped? Uh, it's a GSA dollar.
Not likely.
bob

Extremeengineer

@AUandAG said:
Dipped? Uh, it's a GSA dollar.
Not likely.
bob

Like everyone else, I'm just going by the pics. Based on my comparison above you don't think it has that appearance? It's likely that it is so heavily photoshopped that it just looks that way, but none the less, it looks that way.

MsMorrisine

stunner

Joe_360

The gray-sheet has the MS66 GSA at $1,620. I would have to see the coin in-hand to purchase...

U1chicago

I’m guessing the photos are optimistic. It’s not dipped but some marks could be hidden. If this was a 65 or better, the seller would have almost certainly sent it in for grading (especially if there was a chance for a 66+ or 67).

lilolme

I thought the photos looked 'hot' for lack of a better term.

Looking at the photos here are some observations. The obverse and reverse have similar luster patterns. That is from just below 3 o/c to almost 6 o/c and just past 6 o/c to almost 9 o/c. At the top it is similar but not as wide. At first I thought the 'color' in the fields at 3 o/c and 9 o/c plus / minus was reflection. However, I believe it is a 3rd light of different temperature or colored.

Looking at the top of the holder again the obverse and reverse photos are similar. A photo setup and coin simply flipped over. Appears to be white glare in the upper left and right (lights at 2 o/c and 10 o/c and would match luster pattern) and light on the coin rim edge. But the middle of the case has a glare that is similar to the color on the coin. A light at 12 o/c would produce a luster beam from 3 o/c to 9 o/c which matches along with the color.

Lights are probably not high above but lower and why some of the coin appears brighter / hotter at the top. Also the black holder / insert is lighter at the top than bottom. Much of this is guess work of course.

I tried to turn down the 'hotness' but keep the coin color. I turned the black insert maybe a little to black so might have over done it. Did get some of that 3rd light color 'dimmed' down. It is all guess work. However, this is the result.

jmlanzaf

And this is why TPGS's and CAC exist. [In case anyone forgot. ]

braddick

@jmlanzaf said:
And this is why TPGS and CAC exist. [In case anyone forgot. ]

Parentheses and Brackets

Parentheses and brackets must never be used interchangeably.

Parentheses
Rule 1. Use parentheses to enclose information that clarifies or is used as an aside.

Example: He finally answered (after taking five minutes to think) that he did not understand the question.

If material in parentheses ends a sentence, the period goes after the parentheses.

Example: He gave me a nice bonus ($500).

Commas could have been used in the first example; a colon could have been used in the second example. The use of parentheses indicates that the writer considered the information less important—almost an afterthought.
Rule 2a. Periods go inside parentheses only if an entire sentence is inside the parentheses.

Example: Please read the analysis. (You'll be amazed.)

This is a rule with a lot of wiggle room. An entire sentence in parentheses is often acceptable without an enclosed period:

Example: Please read the analysis (you'll be amazed).
Rule 2b. Take care to punctuate correctly when punctuation is required both inside and outside parentheses.

Example: You are late (aren't you?).

Note the question mark within the parentheses. The period after the parentheses is necessary to bring the entire sentence to a close.
Rule 3. Parentheses, despite appearances, are not part of the subject.

Example: Joe (and his trusty mutt) was always welcome.

If this seems awkward, try rewriting the sentence:

Example: Joe (accompanied by his trusty mutt) was always welcome.
Rule 4. Commas are more likely to follow parentheses than precede them.

Incorrect: When he got home, (it was already dark outside) he fixed dinner.
Correct: When he got home (it was already dark outside), he fixed dinner.
Brackets
Brackets are far less common than parentheses, and they are only used in special cases. Brackets (like single quotation marks) are used exclusively within quoted material.

Rule 1. Brackets are interruptions. When we see them, we know they've been added by someone else. They are used to explain or comment on the quotation.

Examples:
"Four score and seven [today we'd say eighty-seven] years ago..."
"Bill shook hands with [his son] Al."
Rule 2. When quoting something that has a spelling or grammar mistake or confusingly presents material, insert the term sic in italics and enclose it in nonitalic (unless the surrounding text is italic) brackets.

Sic ("thus" in Latin) is shorthand for, "This is exactly what the original material says."

Example: She wrote, "I would rather die than [sic] be seen wearing the same outfit as my sister."

The [sic] indicates that then was mistakenly used instead of than.
Rule 3. In formal writing, brackets are often used to maintain the integrity of both a quotation and the sentences others use.

Example: "[T]he better angels of our nature" gave a powerful ending to Lincoln's first inaugural address.

Lincoln's memorable phrase came midsentence, so the word the was not originally capitalized.

airplanenut

The photos look off to me. There's something about their softness and the sheen of the coin that has almost a polished look to it that leads me to not trust them. Is the coin as clean as it appears? Maybe, but a coin like that should speak for itself, and that makes me suspicious when the photo looks tweaked.

Extremeengineer

@blu62vette said:
A friend of mine got it. I look forward to the full report on how it looks.

Well, one of the few times we’ll hopefully get an honest assessment of what it really looks like. It’s obvious to me the photos are doctored, this isn’t a lighting thing, they are manipulated after the fact.

As was pointed out, were this truly a >66 coin, the seller would have been foolish to not have it graded, show true images and sell for more than it went for. Much cheaper to fake the pics and look for a foolish buyer🤷‍♂️

opportunity

I really wish I had an eye for Morgans. I need to work on that. I think part of my reluctance to dabble is to do with me being terrible at grading them, especially from pics

MFeld

@opportunity said:
I really wish I had an eye for Morgans. I need to work on that. I think part of my reluctance to dabble is to do with me being terrible at grading them, especially from pics

As a group, Morgan dollars are probably among the easiest coin types to grade. I suspect that you could catch on fast if you tried.

lilolme

So I tried some different light combinations and I kind of duplicated that color across the coin from 3 o/c to 9 o/c. This one is more narrow but similar look. I believe that it is due to a different temperature of the bulb as that is what caused this one with a halogen bulb at 12 o/c mixed with two 5000 bulbs (white balance for).

AUandAG

@lilolme said:
So I tried some different light combinations and I kind of duplicated that color across the coin from 3 o/c to 9 o/c. This one is more narrow but similar look. I believe that it is due to a different temperature of the bulb as that is what caused this one with a halogen bulb at 12 o/c mixed with two 5000 bulbs (white balance for).

???? that is not the coin being discussed. We are discussing a GSA 1882cc.

bob
vegas baby!

Pizzaman

@AUandAG said:
GSA, $1,300

What a nice coin. Nice clash. Nice little cracks. It's got personality.

jmlanzaf

@lilolme said:
So I tried some different light combinations and I kind of duplicated that color across the coin from 3 o/c to 9 o/c. This one is more narrow but similar look. I believe that it is due to a different temperature of the bulb as that is what caused this one with a halogen bulb at 12 o/c mixed with two 5000 bulbs (white balance for).

That's amazing. You made the CC disappear!!!

lilolme

@AUandAG said:

???? that is not the coin being discussed. We are discussing a GSA 1882cc.

bob
vegas baby!

Correct.
As my post states I was trying different light bulb combinations and I was able to duplicate the color in the OP coin from 2 or 3 o/c to 9 o/c. The OP coin has a kind of brownish-gold color in that area on both the obverse and reverse photos. Initially thought a reflection but it appeared there was a 3rd light. I then tried to duplicate it and basically did. So I believe that color on the OP photo is a 3rd light in the 12 o/c position that is a different temperature and therefore producing that color. No photoshop stuff going on there I think.

To me the photo looks good but just running 'hot' (bright or whatever the best term is). Just turning the exposure down makes it look better.

Edit: From post below, yes marks can and may be photoshopped. I was looking at the luster and color and trying to figure it out. There were posts about dipping and other (but it is a GSA) so that is what got me wondering about the luster stuff. Also even a good photo can not show many contact marks as has been demonstrated many times.

JeffersonFrog

I don't think it's Photoshopped. 5 minute Photoshopping:

braddick

^
And I added a couple of minutes more to make it totally ridiculous!

lilolme

@braddick said:
^
And I added a couple of minutes more to make it totally ridiculous!

.
Are you sure you spent all of a couple minutes doing that damage?

It will be interesting to hear the results if / when posted later.

Extremeengineer

@lilolme said:
Are you sure you spent all of a couple minutes doing that damage?

It will be interesting to hear the results if / when posted later.

I have no doubt that there are a decent number of ebay coin sellers that have a couple of sets of actions to make their coins look better. So seconds and not minutes of work. Looks pretty obvious to my 30 years of Photoshop that this isn't lighting. Looks to me like the incandescence you think is there are two arms holding the camera, as you know flesh tones mirror incandescence frequently. Either way looks like a Photoshop hack job and a photographer not using a light tent for even diffused lighting. The big question is will we hear, and more importantly see, what this coin truly looks like.

AUandAG

This is exactly why my bidding stopped at $650. I can't trust photos for the most part. At least without a return privilege.
bob
vegas baby!

Manifest_Destiny

There's always a return privilege. Just file a SNAD claim and you get postage reimbursed also.

lilolme

@Extremeengineer said:

@lilolme said:
Are you sure you spent all of a couple minutes doing that damage?

It will be interesting to hear the results if / when posted later.

I have no doubt that there are a decent number of ebay coin sellers that have a couple of sets of actions to make their coins look better. So seconds and not minutes of work. Looks pretty obvious to my 30 years of Photoshop that this isn't lighting. Looks to me like the incandescence you think is there are two arms holding the camera, as you know flesh tones mirror incandescence frequently. Either way looks like a Photoshop hack job and a photographer not using a light tent for even diffused lighting. The big question is will we hear, and more importantly see, what this coin truly looks like.

.
Yes there could be some post photo enhancement on the luster color (again I am not talking about contact marks that could be rubbed out or not). However, you only used one item - "Looks to me like the incandescence you think is there are two arms holding the camera," and not any of the others. So from previous post to support what I think are two lights, one left and one right I mentioned the similar luster patterns on obverse and reverse and the direction the luster is in. This points to two lights. Also on the rim of the coin at about 2 o/c and 10 o/c there is some light (reflection) which indicates the two lights left and right.

That color on the coin bothered me as it is not normal. I was thinking glare or some 'work' on it. However, the holder has what appears to be a similar colored glare at the top at 12 o/c. A light at 12 o/c would produce luster across the coin from about 3 o/c to 9 o/c where the color on the coin is. This is seen on both obverse and reverse. So I thought is this a 3rd light that is a colored one or different temperature. I cropped out what I was noticing below.

I then did some test photos and using 5000k lights left and right and setting the white balance to them. When taking the photo I added a halogen light at 12 o/c. While to a more narrow degree my picture produced a similar colored luster in the photo from about 3 o/c to 9 o/c or similar to the OP. I therefore think this color on the OP coin, obverse and reverse, can be a 3rd light with a different temperature similar to what I produced.

Now why do this? I noticed from replies that many did not appear to notice this colored luster. So does this 'help' the image in some way if it goes unnoticed? Again I saw it and thought 'that is not normal' (and why I looked at it more) but not all noticed it apparently. As I have stated the OP photos appear to be 'hot'. I would have no idea if that is in the photo (exposure or other) or turned up post processing. And I agree as I mentioned that it will be interesting to hear the results.

blu62vette

My buddy has it in hand and says it is amazing. He is not a Morgan dummy so I am sure this is going to end top in a high grade holder.

Coin is high grade and semi PL.

MFeld

@blu62vette said:
My buddy has it in hand and says it is amazing. He is not a Morgan dummy so I am sure this is going to end top in a high grade holder.

Coin is high grade and semi PL.

Todd, what’s the guess? 66+ or 67?

lilolme

@blu62vette said:
My buddy has it in hand and says it is amazing. He is not a Morgan dummy so I am sure this is going to end top in a high grade holder.

Coin is high grade and semi PL.

Glad to hear this.

AUandAG

@blu62vette Okay, what's the buddy's guess on grade???

bob
vegas baby!

Extremeengineer

DelawareDoons

Dirty secret, GSA's are graded tighter in gem grades than raw. There's a decent business in popping out 65-66 GSA's and making 6s and 7s.

Looks like a lock 7 if its cracked out, all day. If I had seen the listing I probably woulda pushed the bidding a little bit more.

ChrisH821

I'm late to the party but I don't see anything that has me concerned about the seller pictures.
People do sell nice raw coins sometimes. I've managed to pick up quite a few of them on eBay over the years.

Pizzaman

@blu62vette said:
My buddy has it in hand and says it is amazing. He is not a Morgan dummy so I am sure this is going to end top in a high grade holder.

Coin is high grade and semi PL.

That is a die clash on the reverse?

AUandAG

@Pizzaman said:

@blu62vette said:
My buddy has it in hand and says it is amazing. He is not a Morgan dummy so I am sure this is going to end top in a high grade holder.

Coin is high grade and semi PL.

That is a die clash on the reverse?

Yes, it does have a common clashed reverse.
bob
vegas baby!

ChrisH821

@AUandAG said:

@Pizzaman said:

@blu62vette said:
My buddy has it in hand and says it is amazing. He is not a Morgan dummy so I am sure this is going to end top in a high grade holder.

Coin is high grade and semi PL.

That is a die clash on the reverse?

Yes, it does have a common clashed reverse.
bob
vegas baby!

Yes, these two "marks" are from the dies contacting and do not impact the grade.

Morgan13

Beautiful coin!
I hope we get to see the buyers images soon. If he has it in hand then let's get them posted.
I want to see it.