I think another lesson to learn from this is to examine the coin under a halogen light, if possible, as hairlines can be difficult to see under harsh fluorescent light at coin shows. I have read stories of buyers going under tables to look at coins so that the only light source is the halogen.
@logger7 said:
Without the hairlines it would probably be a superb gem. At least a couple graders and a finalizer look at every coin like this from what I've heard.
The coin has noticeable contact marks in addition to the hairlines.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
From what I can see, my first thought was that this must be a fake slab, as no professional grader would ever call this coin a 64+, not even on his worst day.
TomT-1794
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
@7Jaguars said:
Here’s a PCGS 64, which may have been on the other side of grading results:
By “other side”, do you mean conservatively graded? If so, the coin’s luster looks subdued and the overall appearance looks less than “gemmy”.
Sadly, I think you missed my point which essentially related to relativity (LOL) - that is relative to the OP coin, this coin is a ?? lesser coin grade wise according to the TPG. I would also respond that since we were talking about marks or hairlines on the surface of the coin primarily, then I am not sure you addressed my point -that this would be an example of a lesser graded coin with evidently substantially less marks/hairlines, etc. than the OP coin.
As an editorial, the coin I posted has lovely soft, nearly pearlescent lustre & quite striking in hand if you will excuse the pun.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@logger7 said:
Without the hairlines it would probably be a superb gem. At least a couple graders and a finalizer look at every coin like this from what I've heard.
You mean several graders look at coins that may are not so easy to grade> @logger7 said:
Without the hairlines it would probably be a superb gem. At least a couple graders and a finalizer look at every coin like this from what I've heard.
Yeah if the luster was stronger and it didn't have all the hairlines it'd be a pretty solid Barber.
@BigMoose said:
From what I can see, my first thought was that this must be a fake slab, as no professional grader would ever call this coin a 64+, not even on his worst day.
I'm certain it's not a counterfeit slab. I was really worried about that when I noticed the hairlines. It's just a considerable mistake from a grader.
@7Jaguars said:
Here’s a PCGS 64, which may have been on the other side of grading results:
By “other side”, do you mean conservatively graded? If so, the coin’s luster looks subdued and the overall appearance looks less than “gemmy”.
Sadly, I think you missed my point which essentially related to relativity (LOL) - that is relative to the OP coin, this coin is a ?? lesser coin grade wise according to the TPG. I would also respond that since we were talking about marks or hairlines on the surface of the coin primarily, then I am not sure you addressed my point -that this would be an example of a lesser graded coin with evidently substantially less marks/hairlines, etc. than the OP coin.
As an editorial, the coin I posted has lovely soft, nearly pearlescent lustre & quite striking in hand if you will excuse the pun.
I don't think I missed your point.
The OP's coin looks over-graded, with noticeable hairlines and contact marks. Yours looks accurately graded, so it's not at all surprising that it exhibits cleaner surfaces.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm thinking I'll just sell the coin and take a bit of a loss. Next time I'll go for a blast white Barber quarter with nice luster. I'll settle for a good looking MS63 if I can't find a 64 that I really like.
Just some final commentary- take my observations for what they are worth:
-This is not a bad coin. It just was graded optimistically.
-The price spread between grades at this level (62-64) is simply not that significant.
-Consider developing expectations for the coins you seek at various grade levels and appreciate the differences.
-It is okay to use a stronger loupe to help distinguish characteristics such as hairlines, cabinet friction and die polish lines. I use a stronger loupe- not to grade coins- just to have a better mental image of the coin I am considering. I want to know where and what the issues might be that will effect how I value the coin.
-Blast white Barbers is not the answer - it is part of the problem.
-Patience is a virtue. Timing matters with special coins that are rarely offered.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@MFeld said:
I certainly might feel differently if I were to see the coin in hand. But based on the pictures and video…
No to it having been whizzed or wiped and no to die-polish lines, as well.
Regardless of what PCGS saw when assessing it, based on the hairlines and marks, in a “Guess The Grade” (GTG) thread, I would have gone with MS63. And these days, I’m not especially surprised when I examine coins in hand and grade them a point or more below the assigned grade. That doesn’t mean I’m correct, only that I disagree. And when I do disagree, far more times than not, my number’s lower than the one on the grading label.
Right On @MFeld isn't that why John Albanese stepped in ?
@MFeld said:
I certainly might feel differently if I were to see the coin in hand. But based on the pictures and video…
No to it having been whizzed or wiped and no to die-polish lines, as well.
Regardless of what PCGS saw when assessing it, based on the hairlines and marks, in a “Guess The Grade” (GTG) thread, I would have gone with MS63. And these days, I’m not especially surprised when I examine coins in hand and grade them a point or more below the assigned grade. That doesn’t mean I’m correct, only that I disagree. And when I do disagree, far more times than not, my number’s lower than the one on the grading label.
Right On @MFeld isn't that why John Albanese stepped in ?
I think gradeflation was a major consideration in the formation of CAC.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Barberian said:
It's hairlined from a loose wiping. How else did those bright scratches get on a coin that's been out of circulation for a hundred years?
While hairlines can be (but aren’t necessarily) a result of wiping, scratches typically aren’t.
... Unless you live where there's dust in the air. A wipe never leaves a scratch from a loose bit of sand?
This is an actual problem for me where I live (fine sand) - I don't "wipe" coins but I have to be vigilant about fine particles of sand getting into flips, Air-tite containers and Danscos. I also see what I consider to be wiped coins all the time in TPG holders, some with CAC stickers. I've wiped coins myself as a kid and learned then not to do it.
@MrEureka said:
One more thing. Those aren't so much hairlines as scratches and marks from banging around with other coins, and perhaps sliding around in a desk drawer or envelope over many years. I would bet that the coin has never even been dipped, much less cleaned or wiped. Looks like a nice fresh coin, even if the grade may be a bit of a stretch.
deferring to you, wouldn't sliding around constitute wear?
Second post first. Sliding around CAN cause some rub (wear) depending on the surface, the hardness of the coin, and the force put on the coin from its own weight or added pressure. That is what we may be seeing ont the tops of the leaves in the head.
First post; Coins are tough. You don't scratch them that badly with sand or dirty rags! Something harder than silver alloy made the scratches. The hairlines are a different thing and according to the ANA Grading Guide a coin grading 64 can have hairlines. TPGS 64's can have hairlines. When they are very close and in the same direction the coin may be cleaned. To OP's coin does not look cleaned.
One member posted this: "...-It is okay to use a stronger loupe to help distinguish characteristics such as hairlines, cabinet friction and die polish lines. I use a stronger loupe- not to grade coins- just to have a better mental image of the coin I am considering. I want to know where and what the issues might be that will effect how I value the coin.
What a thoughtful comment! This reads like a perfect definition of coin grading. It is also why I use a hand lens rather than my eyes alone to look a a coin I'm buying.
@Barberian said:
It's hairlined from a loose wiping. How else did those bright scratches get on a coin that's been out of circulation for a hundred years?
While hairlines can be (but aren’t necessarily) a result of wiping, scratches typically aren’t.
... Unless you live where there's dust in the air. A wipe never leaves a scratch from a loose bit of sand?
This is an actual problem for me where I live (fine sand) - I don't "wipe" coins but I have to be vigilant about fine particles of sand getting into flips, Air-tite containers and Danscos. I also see what I consider to be wiped coins all the time in TPG holders, some with CAC stickers. I've wiped coins myself as a kid and learned then not to do it.
@MrEureka said:
One more thing. Those aren't so much hairlines as scratches and marks from banging around with other coins, and perhaps sliding around in a desk drawer or envelope over many years. I would bet that the coin has never even been dipped, much less cleaned or wiped. Looks like a nice fresh coin, even if the grade may be a bit of a stretch.
deferring to you, wouldn't sliding around constitute wear?
Second post first. Sliding around CAN cause some rub (wear) depending on the surface, the hardness of the coin, and the force put on the coin from its own weight or added pressure. That is what we may be seeing ont the tops of the leaves in the head.
First post; Coins are tough. You don't scratch them that badly with sand or dirty rags! Something harder than silver alloy made the scratches. The hairlines are a different thing and according to the ANA Grading Guide a coin grading 64 can have hairlines. TPGS 64's can have hairlines. When they are very close and in the same direction the coin may be cleaned. To OP's coin does not look cleaned.
Grab some sandpaper and a silver half dollar and see who wins the hardness battle. I'll bet you don't live in a sandy environment with three cats and 3 dogs. The cats like to roll in my fine white sand on limerock driveway, come in the house and then hop up on me and my desk. I vacuum the house at least weekly, and each time I get a wad of fur and a cupful of sand from my vacuum cleaner. I have about 4-5 coins with fine, bright scratches from very fine sand in Air-tite capsules. It was disappointing to discover it, how something so tiny could roll around and do conspicuous damage on the surface. I now try to reduce fine sand in my workspace and keep it out of my flips, Air-tites, and what-not with plastic bags, and storage containers. And keep the cats off the tables.
I don't wipe coins with anything because I don't like hairlines at all. I don't purchase MS64 or PR64 coins because they have hairlines and would avoid many MS65 and PR65 coins if they have hairlines.
LOL, Sand paper is not the same as sand particles. You are continuing an old wives tale. Unfortunately, our discussion is worthless w/o images and I can't take them. I'll repeat what I wrote. SAND OF ANY KIND DOES NOT MAKE THE DEEP SCRATCHES SEEN ON THE OP's COIN without intentionally grinding it in AND THAT STILL SHOULD NOT MAKE THOSE SCRATCHES! Sand paper will. We are not dealing with Proofs. I have hairlined a modern proof with the jewelers brush I use on my Large cents. I quickly learned to use one of those old time photo brushes with a rubber bulb to remove dust from proofs with air.
@Married2Coins said:
LOL, Sand paper is not the same as sand particles.
So, it's the paper that does the scratching not the sand?
I know what I've seen in my case. Granted, I live in Sandland. I don't wipe coins so I cannot say how sand might affect surfaces when wiped aside from their leaving fine scratches on coin surfaces. They can do a number on coins in an Air-tite, though. Fine bright scratches on coins with dark patinas. Not good.
I'm glad you're at least entertained, your remarks don't change my reality, though.
I’m not entirely offended by the hairlines and marks on that coin. I’m sure the grade is that because of good luster, it appears to have good luster from what I can see.
However, the others are right, if the coin is bothering you now it’s just gonna continue. I’ve learned this many times over.
Your best bet is to sell it and find one that you really like.
@Married2Coins said:
LOL, Sand paper is not the same as sand particles.
So, it's the paper that does the scratching not the sand?
I know what I've seen in my case. Granted, I live in Sandland. I don't wipe coins so I cannot say how sand might affect surfaces when wiped aside from their leaving fine scratches on coin surfaces. They can do a number on coins in an Air-tite, though. Fine bright scratches on coins with dark patinas. Not good.
I'm glad you're at least entertained, your remarks don't change my reality, though.
I'm from Missouri and the only reality I believe in comes from actual proof through experiments. For example, a long time ago I read someone say that coins do not get scratched from the plastic slides in coin folders. This sounded nuts as everyone else was saying that is what caused the parallel scratches (slide marks) into their surfaces. I could not make scratches appear by trying to do it. When I finally threw some grit onto the coin, I finally was able to make a few very fine hairlines. To do it, I had to also push the coin practically out of the hole so the slide hardly moved. Old myths die hard. I've never scratched one of my coins putting them in a hard plastic flip either. I've never scratched a coin placing it in or taking it out of an Air-tite either.
I will agree that the old gray surfaces of vintage coins are very susceptible to hairlines from mishandling and due to the contrast between the surface and a bright hairline they are very easy to see.
I'm from Missouri as well and my sense of reality stems from being an observant naturalist. I don't experiment much, but when I did, I put scratches on a choice, gun barrel black 1826 half with only a Kim-wipe. No more coin experiments or wiping for me.
I agree with you about slide marks. At least I haven't seen any with my Dansco coins, but I try to avoid slides sliding across surfaces by pushing coins well into their slots before moving slides.
Imagine my alarm at seeing a fine bright scratch wandering haphazardly over a coin's dark surface a few millimeters, then focusing down and seeing a speck of sand perhaps 100-200 um in diameter that's causing the problem. Then seeing the same thing on two or three other coins with tiny sand grains the culprit. I handle coins in Air-tites quite a lot. They're a bit slippery to handle and have fallen on the carpeted floor a few times, which explains the sand movement. The beach sand combined with three sand-rolling cats that like to hop up on my table and schmooze was creating a sand problem.
I haven't photographed these coins since they became scratched. They are fine hairline-like scratches, but unlike hairlines, the sand grain can roll around and scratch a small area on a dark coin and make itself quite noticeable. If I handed you these coins, it would be the first flaw you would notice.
@Barberian said:
I'm from Missouri as well and my sense of reality stems from being an observant naturalist. I don't experiment much, but when I did, I put scratches on a choice, gun barrel black 1826 half with only a Kim-wipe. No more coin experiments or wiping for me.
I agree with you about slide marks. At least I haven't seen any with my Dansco coins, but I try to avoid slides sliding across surfaces by pushing coins well into their slots before moving slides.
Imagine my alarm at seeing a fine bright scratch wandering haphazardly over a coin's dark surface a few millimeters, then focusing down and seeing a speck of sand perhaps 100-200 um in diameter that's causing the problem. Then seeing the same thing on two or three other coins with tiny sand grains the culprit. I handle coins in Air-tites quite a lot. They're a bit slippery to handle and have fallen on the carpeted floor a few times, which explains the sand movement. The beach sand combined with three sand-rolling cats that like to hop up on my table and schmooze was creating a sand problem.
I haven't photographed these coins since they became scratched. They are fine hairline-like scratches, but unlike hairlines, the sand grain can roll around and scratch a small area on a dark coin and make itself quite noticeable. If I handed you these coins, it would be the first flaw you would notice.
I shall have to take your word for the sand inside the Air-tight it because anything is possible and you say you saw the sand particles. My Air-tites' only touch the edge of the coin so there is plenty of room for any grit not to be pressed into the coin when held by the edge. Additionally, I'll bet I can pour fine sand on a MS coin without any noticeable effect. I wish I had some fine beach sand to pour on a Proof quarter to prove you are right.
I do know all about leaving a hairline on the finish of a gun because of grit on a cleaning rag.
Pouring this fine sand on an MS coin wouldn't leave a mark. I don't know what it would do to a proof surface. Wedge that sand into a tight space subject to compression and movement if poorly handled and that tiny sand grain can scratch an ugly bright spot on a dark coin near the rim.
And the cat is sharpening her claws on the rug again...
@asheland said:
I’m not entirely offended by the hairlines and marks on that coin. I’m sure the grade is that because of good luster, it appears to have good luster from what I can see.
However, the others are right, if the coin is bothering you now it’s just gonna continue. I’ve learned this many times over.
Your best bet is to sell it and find one that you really like.
It actually doesn't have very good luster compared to most barber quarters. My camera didn't pick up the coin very well.
I have to say I certainly don't think that sand particles would've been the cause of this. I don't live in a state with sand desert or beaches.
Comments
I think another lesson to learn from this is to examine the coin under a halogen light, if possible, as hairlines can be difficult to see under harsh fluorescent light at coin shows. I have read stories of buyers going under tables to look at coins so that the only light source is the halogen.
Without the hairlines it would probably be a superb gem. At least a couple graders and a finalizer look at every coin like this from what I've heard.
By “other side”, do you mean conservatively graded? If so, the coin’s luster looks subdued and the overall appearance looks less than “gemmy”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The coin has noticeable contact marks in addition to the hairlines.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
From what I can see, my first thought was that this must be a fake slab, as no professional grader would ever call this coin a 64+, not even on his worst day.
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
Sadly, I think you missed my point which essentially related to relativity (LOL) - that is relative to the OP coin, this coin is a ?? lesser coin grade wise according to the TPG. I would also respond that since we were talking about marks or hairlines on the surface of the coin primarily, then I am not sure you addressed my point -that this would be an example of a lesser graded coin with evidently substantially less marks/hairlines, etc. than the OP coin.
As an editorial, the coin I posted has lovely soft, nearly pearlescent lustre & quite striking in hand if you will excuse the pun.
Well, just Love coins, period.
You mean several graders look at coins that may are not so easy to grade> @logger7 said:
Yeah if the luster was stronger and it didn't have all the hairlines it'd be a pretty solid Barber.
I'm certain it's not a counterfeit slab. I was really worried about that when I noticed the hairlines. It's just a considerable mistake from a grader.
I don't think I missed your point.
The OP's coin looks over-graded, with noticeable hairlines and contact marks. Yours looks accurately graded, so it's not at all surprising that it exhibits cleaner surfaces.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm thinking I'll just sell the coin and take a bit of a loss. Next time I'll go for a blast white Barber quarter with nice luster. I'll settle for a good looking MS63 if I can't find a 64 that I really like.
blast white? better know what an over-dipped coin looks like
Just some final commentary- take my observations for what they are worth:
-This is not a bad coin. It just was graded optimistically.
-The price spread between grades at this level (62-64) is simply not that significant.
-Consider developing expectations for the coins you seek at various grade levels and appreciate the differences.
-It is okay to use a stronger loupe to help distinguish characteristics such as hairlines, cabinet friction and die polish lines. I use a stronger loupe- not to grade coins- just to have a better mental image of the coin I am considering. I want to know where and what the issues might be that will effect how I value the coin.
-Blast white Barbers is not the answer - it is part of the problem.
-Patience is a virtue. Timing matters with special coins that are rarely offered.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Right On @MFeld isn't that why John Albanese stepped in ?
Pretty coin, at the right price. MS64+ money probably wasn’t the right price.
I think gradeflation was a major consideration in the formation of CAC.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree, I think I'll trade or sell for another Barber I enjoy more.
It's around $200. I know that's nothing for many collectors, but that's still nearly 1/3 of the price I got it for.
This is what I mean by blast white. I guess I misspoke, I should've just said not toned.
Based on those photos, your current coin is as good as the 64 and nearly the equal of the 65.
Second post first. Sliding around CAN cause some rub (wear) depending on the surface, the hardness of the coin, and the force put on the coin from its own weight or added pressure. That is what we may be seeing ont the tops of the leaves in the head.
First post; Coins are tough. You don't scratch them that badly with sand or dirty rags! Something harder than silver alloy made the scratches. The hairlines are a different thing and according to the ANA Grading Guide a coin grading 64 can have hairlines. TPGS 64's can have hairlines. When they are very close and in the same direction the coin may be cleaned. To OP's coin does not look cleaned.
One member posted this: "...-It is okay to use a stronger loupe to help distinguish characteristics such as hairlines, cabinet friction and die polish lines. I use a stronger loupe- not to grade coins- just to have a better mental image of the coin I am considering. I want to know where and what the issues might be that will effect how I value the coin.
What a thoughtful comment! This reads like a perfect definition of coin grading. It is also why I use a hand lens rather than my eyes alone to look a a coin I'm buying.
Grab some sandpaper and a silver half dollar and see who wins the hardness battle. I'll bet you don't live in a sandy environment with three cats and 3 dogs. The cats like to roll in my fine white sand on limerock driveway, come in the house and then hop up on me and my desk. I vacuum the house at least weekly, and each time I get a wad of fur and a cupful of sand from my vacuum cleaner. I have about 4-5 coins with fine, bright scratches from very fine sand in Air-tite capsules. It was disappointing to discover it, how something so tiny could roll around and do conspicuous damage on the surface. I now try to reduce fine sand in my workspace and keep it out of my flips, Air-tites, and what-not with plastic bags, and storage containers. And keep the cats off the tables.
I don't wipe coins with anything because I don't like hairlines at all. I don't purchase MS64 or PR64 coins because they have hairlines and would avoid many MS65 and PR65 coins if they have hairlines.
LOL, Sand paper is not the same as sand particles. You are continuing an old wives tale. Unfortunately, our discussion is worthless w/o images and I can't take them. I'll repeat what I wrote. SAND OF ANY KIND DOES NOT MAKE THE DEEP SCRATCHES SEEN ON THE OP's COIN without intentionally grinding it in AND THAT STILL SHOULD NOT MAKE THOSE SCRATCHES! Sand paper will. We are not dealing with Proofs. I have hairlined a modern proof with the jewelers brush I use on my Large cents. I quickly learned to use one of those old time photo brushes with a rubber bulb to remove dust from proofs with air.
So, it's the paper that does the scratching not the sand?
I know what I've seen in my case. Granted, I live in Sandland. I don't wipe coins so I cannot say how sand might affect surfaces when wiped aside from their leaving fine scratches on coin surfaces. They can do a number on coins in an Air-tite, though. Fine bright scratches on coins with dark patinas. Not good.
I'm glad you're at least entertained, your remarks don't change my reality, though.
I’m not entirely offended by the hairlines and marks on that coin. I’m sure the grade is that because of good luster, it appears to have good luster from what I can see.
However, the others are right, if the coin is bothering you now it’s just gonna continue. I’ve learned this many times over.
Your best bet is to sell it and find one that you really like.
My YouTube Channel
I'm from Missouri and the only reality I believe in comes from actual proof through experiments. For example, a long time ago I read someone say that coins do not get scratched from the plastic slides in coin folders. This sounded nuts as everyone else was saying that is what caused the parallel scratches (slide marks) into their surfaces. I could not make scratches appear by trying to do it. When I finally threw some grit onto the coin, I finally was able to make a few very fine hairlines. To do it, I had to also push the coin practically out of the hole so the slide hardly moved. Old myths die hard. I've never scratched one of my coins putting them in a hard plastic flip either. I've never scratched a coin placing it in or taking it out of an Air-tite either.
I will agree that the old gray surfaces of vintage coins are very susceptible to hairlines from mishandling and due to the contrast between the surface and a bright hairline they are very easy to see.
I'm from Missouri as well and my sense of reality stems from being an observant naturalist. I don't experiment much, but when I did, I put scratches on a choice, gun barrel black 1826 half with only a Kim-wipe. No more coin experiments or wiping for me.
I agree with you about slide marks. At least I haven't seen any with my Dansco coins, but I try to avoid slides sliding across surfaces by pushing coins well into their slots before moving slides.
Imagine my alarm at seeing a fine bright scratch wandering haphazardly over a coin's dark surface a few millimeters, then focusing down and seeing a speck of sand perhaps 100-200 um in diameter that's causing the problem. Then seeing the same thing on two or three other coins with tiny sand grains the culprit. I handle coins in Air-tites quite a lot. They're a bit slippery to handle and have fallen on the carpeted floor a few times, which explains the sand movement. The beach sand combined with three sand-rolling cats that like to hop up on my table and schmooze was creating a sand problem.
I haven't photographed these coins since they became scratched. They are fine hairline-like scratches, but unlike hairlines, the sand grain can roll around and scratch a small area on a dark coin and make itself quite noticeable. If I handed you these coins, it would be the first flaw you would notice.
I shall have to take your word for the sand inside the Air-tight it because anything is possible and you say you saw the sand particles. My Air-tites' only touch the edge of the coin so there is plenty of room for any grit not to be pressed into the coin when held by the edge. Additionally, I'll bet I can pour fine sand on a MS coin without any noticeable effect. I wish I had some fine beach sand to pour on a Proof quarter to prove you are right.
I do know all about leaving a hairline on the finish of a gun because of grit on a cleaning rag.
Pouring this fine sand on an MS coin wouldn't leave a mark. I don't know what it would do to a proof surface. Wedge that sand into a tight space subject to compression and movement if poorly handled and that tiny sand grain can scratch an ugly bright spot on a dark coin near the rim.
And the cat is sharpening her claws on the rug again...
It actually doesn't have very good luster compared to most barber quarters. My camera didn't pick up the coin very well.
I have to say I certainly don't think that sand particles would've been the cause of this. I don't live in a state with sand desert or beaches.