Recently, someone at Pinnacle, whose name will not be revealed at this time, bought this coin (in an NGC MS64 holder). Three other people at the company don't like it. What do you think of its appearance?
I'll start with "interesting" Mark - a lot would depend on the brilliance beneath the toning - what's the deal with the blank spot above the eagle's wing?
Color for color's sake doesn't do it for me personally Mark. On some coins the coloring accentuates the flaws or even gives the illusion some exist that don't -- I don't like those types. And the peel-away look of the reverse really turns me off. Toning seems to divide collectors by personal preference more than any other attribute.
As a toned-coin novice, my opinion should probably be low-weighted (but I do know what I like when I see it ).
The coloring is pleasing, but the pattern is mottled and distracts from the coloring. The coin itself is a marvelous coin, and what I can see through all the toning looks very nice. I would think of this as a low-end tone, if only because of the way it strikes the eye on first glance.
That said, had I the money to afford such a thing, I would probably enjoy it much more up close.
Oh, sorry you asked about the coin. I was looking at lanlords picture.
The coin is trying to be pretty, but something is holding it back. The outline around the body and staff gives the impression of a 4 year old's crayon art - I think the light spot on the reverse is interesting.
Overall I like it, but it's not a WOW coin.
If you don't like the coin enough you can always sell it to me for $500. PM me if you'd take it.
I like the burgundy color on the back and just too dark in most places to really like it. The front, well this isn`t best choice of words, but it looks like someone got sick on it. I would pass on it and see what else is in stock.
Mark I've seen a few of these.While I'm no expert,I'll say Rev is MS64.Obv doesn't appear to be.The toneing appears natural.I'm not a fan of that toneing though.Looking closely at the Obv,it just doesn't show the detail the way a MS64 should.IMHO
An interesting original album toned piece, but it looks like not all of the elements came together here. That base spot on the reverse is distracting and it is too mottled for me to pay a premium. Gray sheet ask would seem an appropriate amount for the grade. I won't comment on if it clears a 64 since an image is tough and too much could be hid by the toning. Given NGC's penchant to upgrde a point for toning, they may have bumped a technical 63 to a 64 for that toning (which would be a mistake IMO)
Tom
NOTE: No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Type collector since 1981 Current focus 1855 date type set
mark. there is something about the color, on the back that just doesnt look right, by the wing. kinda hard to judge any luster from the scan. and there appears to be hairlines in the feild on the obverse. for some reason it almost looks as if it has been cleaned and now is retoing. ms64? not for me.
I find it hard to believe that anyone could not like an uncirculated Seated Half Dollar I still prefer blast white, but I would not kick it out of my collection.
Coinguy 1: I saw this coin on your website this afternoon. I thought is was spectacular with unique toning. It is one of the most unusual MS64 liberty half dollar pieces you will ever see. I showed it to my wife and she was blown away as well. The coin is a steal at your offering price. At least, that's the way it looks from the scan.
i have seen this coin in person and examined it for three hours last week please see my comments on this coin which i posted on the ngc coin boards
i think it was a long post and i do not want to rewrite it on here
a really nice original coin
also i posted some new thoughrs on this coin in the ngc forums on this coin 3 am sunday morning that is quite long winded but it is i think really informative and good........lol also some other comments about a really controversial subject you might want to go take a look and comment yourself! it would be great to hear waht others think! i love it!!!!!!! this is waht these forums are all about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! coins but it seems some have forgeten that on here........lol
Michael -- read your comments on the NGC forum. As usual very inciteful, plus you had the advantage of examining it in person which made your thoughts even more interesting.
There are two ways to answer Mark's question "what do you think of its appearance". One is a simple reaction to its look without considering the series, date and originality. The other would incude those considerations. For a long time collector like yourself who truly appreciates rare original toning on 19th century coins, it's impossible to have "simple" reactions like I have. Your taste for beauty and authenticity have melded together through the years, as they would for any fully evolved connoisseur in any field.
Many on both threads thought the strike was weak or the coin had wear -- from the image -- but you confirmed it has few contact marks and is cleaner than any 65 you've seen holdered. You also noted that this is what original toning looks like on prooflike surfaces. Those are actually the reasons I don't care for the appearance. The prooflike fields seem to provide a less adhesive surface for the skin that developed, creating the illusion of contact where it separates and actually peeled away in some areas. The depth of the skin also creates the illusion of a soft strike. I find these qualities distracting, but that may say more about me than the coin.
To some degree it's a matter of taste and the fact that I come to the table with a copper guy's perspective on beauty. Maybe if I walked a few thousand miles in Michael's and Mark's shoes I would cherish a coin like this the way it deserves. Sometimes I feel like I've only made it around the block.
Thanks for all of the feedback, everyone. By the way, this coin is NOT currently in the "Eastern Collection"
For those of you who did not look on the NGC board, here is the Pinnacle website description written by the person who bought the coin and liked it, that person being yours truly. :
"Ok, maybe you can help me out here, a little bit. Apparently, I like this coin a lot more than some other "Pinnacle people". The prooflike surfaces, the gorgeous, deep multicolored toning on the obverse, along with the deep rose-colored reverse with hints of green and turquoise did me in. Just 12 graded higher by NGC. Buy it quickly and prove me right! Save my job, please?"
This is part of what I posted on the other board:
"I posted the images because I thought it was a great example of the subjectivity involved in coins. I think it's very pretty, if not beautiful (I am always afraid of over-using terms like beautiful, PQ, high-end etc - you should hear me on the phone with clients - a few of them constantly try to pry those words out of me and rarely succeed! One of them posts to this board, as a matter of fact).
However, three different people at Pinnacle independently concluded that they didn't like the coin. Perhaps it's darker than the images if you don't tilt it just right under the light and maybe because of that it will be harder to sell than a lighter coin. I'm not trying to say that I'm right and that they are wrong, merely that I was surprised that I was in the minority and it reminded me of how subjective this can all be."
Frank - the area under the eagle's wing that you mentioned is where it didn't tone. I see that on a lot of coins - sometimes they just don't tone evenly and/or completely.
Bill - there is no * designation on the holder.
stman - funny guy! I purposefully asked for opinions of the "appearance" of the coin and not the grade because I don't think people can grade accurately from images.
Paul - you did a nice job of pointing out the subjectivity involved here.
Don - the obverse is somewhat weak but not enough to make me dislike the coin.
Thanks again to everyone who responded. Maybe I'll try to find some other coins to post in the future, if I think they can serve as good examples of various issues that people like to discuss on the board.
I had been watching this thread and others member's replies trying to get a clue as to what was "wrong" with it. I know you didn't post it because of the splotchy tone on obv rim & white spot, which was the only possible "problem" I could see. Since your brother dealers didn't "tilt it just right under the light" maybe they don't know how to appreciate toning?
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
I've got another question. If you have to tilt the coin to see the beautiful colors, is the true color the somewhat gray drab look the coin has when your not tilting it or the beautiful colors when you do?
Dog, the interesting thing is, they do appreciate toning - they just don't like this particular coin.
I didn't post it to try to drum up support for my liking it (contrary to what was indicated in my web site description, I have no fear of losing my job over it ), but rather, because it really is a great example of how subjective "eye appeal" can be.
agentjim007 the same thing can be said for luster because you have to wiggle the coin to see it. People who aren't into tone just see the drab coloer like you said and people that are know to wiggle the coin. Both colors are true colors, just from a different angle.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
When I was buying coins for a shop I always said " If I like it someone else will also". Its good for your shop Mark that you like coins the others don't. If you all like just the same coins you would be passing on coins someone else would love to own.
<< <i>If you have to tilt the coin to see the beautiful colors, is the true color the somewhat gray drab look the coin has when your not tilting it or the beautiful colors when you do? >>
Jim:
For me it's what makes the coin interesting. If you look at the coin pictured below, to some it may look too darkly toned. However, what I found fascinating about it, is that when you catch it in the right light by tilting it, the blue rim toning becomes irridescent, almost neon-like, and all sorts of different colors appear. In addition, you can see that the coin has a prooflike obverse, which sets off the devices really well. The coin didn't command a premium when I bought it, and it probably never will, but I found it interesting for my budding collection of these beauties.
You really don't have to wiggle a coin to see luster, just to cartwheel it. When I see a coin on ebay with awesome color and buy it and find I have to hold it just a certain way to see that color I am a little dissapointed. There are many toned coins that show the color more easily than others.
To me, the "true color" is that which you see when you tilt the coin so that the light hits it just right and maybe that color is a bit darker than shown in the images - I can't remember for sure. However, if you don't tilt it so that the light hits it, it doesn't look nearly as pretty.
As a retailer of coins, we usually prefer to purchase and then offer for sale, coins that don't need to be tilted and rotated properly to fully appreciate them. You'd be surprised (or maybe you wouldn't) at how many people don't want a coin if it doesn't IMMEDIATELY hit them just right.
I agree with you coinguy1 because I like it too but if I could get it a little lighter toned at the same price I would go for the one that is a little lighter. It sounds like your brother dealers are more concerned about making $$ from the saleability of it rather than the coin itself but that's cool with me, it's their job to make $$ for the company.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
As usual, I'm late with my comments, but here they are nonetheless:
I like nice originals as well as the next, but, in this case, this coin just doesn't offer the contrast I would normally expect, kinda' along the lines of how one who desires DCAMs would feel about a brilliant proof.
Definitely not "qualified" to speak to originality or not, but, something about this coins raises my skepticism, Maybe it's just that although there is some variety in color, generally, it comes off as monochromatic.
Sorry about the late reply. I have to say that I agree with your partners. Spend it!! The toning isn't bad but I don't like the coin at all. It looks worn and AU to me. Now I know you will say it's poor strike or cabinet wear or whatever. Whatever, it detracts.
thanks mark feld for posting this coin! and thanks!! everyone!! for the responses to his thread!!
shylock paul!! as usual you ARE a good mAN AND have really astute well meaning posts that i always learn from!! thanks!!
for me this is what coin collecting is all about~!! this to me is what THIS COIN FORUM IS ALL ABOUT
coins is a personal thing and even after all the "bad" things that happen with coins to many collectors/dealers they still come back for the "love" of coins and this hobby where there is always something
new to learn find and discover!!!!!!!
i love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
also it is really hard to evaulate a coin by a scan i was lucky to have had this coin in hand to view sight seen at my leisure
i hope that threads like this continue and i hope mark feld casn post more on here!! thanks for being on here mark
Comments
A little too much for my taste personally.
I don't care for the bare spot on the reverse tho.
Frank
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Every time I see your posts now I have to do a double-take - thanks!
Greg
As a toned-coin novice, my opinion should probably be low-weighted (but I do know what I like when I see it
The coloring is pleasing, but the pattern is mottled and distracts from the coloring. The coin itself is a marvelous coin, and what I can see through all the toning looks very nice. I would think of this as a low-end tone, if only because of the way it strikes the eye on first glance.
That said, had I the money to afford such a thing, I would probably enjoy it much more up close.
I think that's hot - really beautiful.
Oh, sorry you asked about the coin. I was looking at lanlords picture.
The coin is trying to be pretty, but something is holding it back. The outline around the body and staff gives the impression of a 4 year old's crayon art - I think the light spot on the reverse is interesting.
Overall I like it, but it's not a WOW coin.
If you don't like the coin enough you can always sell it to me for $500.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
I've seen a few of these.While I'm no expert,I'll say Rev is MS64.Obv doesn't appear to be.The toneing appears natural.I'm not a fan of that toneing though.Looking closely at the Obv,it just doesn't show the detail the way a MS64 should.IMHO
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
The Coin is OK but some of your Mercs are Killer compared to this coin.
Ken
NOTE: No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Type collector since 1981
Current focus 1855 date type set
Lanlord - Please take the picture of my girlfriend off your signature NOW if you don't mind!
Tom
the coin has a very flat obverse strike...
I would probably grade it as "strictly uncirculated" if i was lookin' through 10x at Liberty from a few inches away... it's not "choice" in my book...
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
i think it was a long post and i do not want to rewrite it on here
a really nice original coin
also i posted some new thoughrs on this coin in the ngc forums on this coin 3 am sunday morning that is quite long winded but it is i think really informative and good........lol also some other comments about a really controversial subject you might want to go take a look and comment yourself! it would be great to hear waht others think! i love it!!!!!!! this is waht these forums are all about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! coins but it seems some have forgeten that on here........lol
sincerely michael
There are two ways to answer Mark's question "what do you think of its appearance". One is a simple reaction to its look without considering the series, date and originality. The other would incude those considerations. For a long time collector like yourself who truly appreciates rare original toning on 19th century coins, it's impossible to have "simple" reactions like I have. Your taste for beauty and authenticity have melded together through the years, as they would for any fully evolved connoisseur in any field.
Many on both threads thought the strike was weak or the coin had wear -- from the image -- but you confirmed it has few contact marks and is cleaner than any 65 you've seen holdered. You also noted that this is what original toning looks like on prooflike surfaces. Those are actually the reasons I don't care for the appearance. The prooflike fields seem to provide a less adhesive surface for the skin that developed, creating the illusion of contact where it separates and actually peeled away in some areas. The depth of the skin also creates the illusion of a soft strike. I find these qualities distracting, but that may say more about me than the coin.
To some degree it's a matter of taste and the fact that I come to the table with a copper guy's perspective on beauty. Maybe if I walked a few thousand miles in Michael's and Mark's shoes I would cherish a coin like this the way it deserves. Sometimes I feel like I've only made it around the block.
For those of you who did not look on the NGC board, here is the Pinnacle website description written by the person who bought the coin and liked it, that person being yours truly.
"Ok, maybe you can help me out here, a little bit. Apparently, I like this coin a lot more than some other "Pinnacle people". The prooflike surfaces, the gorgeous, deep multicolored toning on the obverse, along with the deep rose-colored reverse with hints of green and turquoise did me in. Just 12 graded higher by NGC. Buy it quickly and prove me right! Save my job, please?"
This is part of what I posted on the other board:
"I posted the images because I thought it was a great example of the subjectivity involved in coins. I think it's very pretty, if not beautiful (I am always afraid of over-using terms like beautiful, PQ, high-end etc - you should hear me on the phone with clients - a few of them constantly try to pry those words out of me and rarely succeed! One of them posts to this board, as a matter of fact).
However, three different people at Pinnacle independently concluded that they didn't like the coin. Perhaps it's darker than the images if you don't tilt it just right under the light and maybe because of that it will be harder to sell than a lighter coin. I'm not trying to say that I'm right and that they are wrong, merely that I was surprised that I was in the minority and it reminded me of how subjective this can all be."
Frank - the area under the eagle's wing that you mentioned is where it didn't tone. I see that on a lot of coins - sometimes they just don't tone evenly and/or completely.
Bill - there is no * designation on the holder.
stman - funny guy! I purposefully asked for opinions of the "appearance" of the coin and not the grade because I don't think people can grade accurately from images.
Paul - you did a nice job of pointing out the subjectivity involved here.
Don - the obverse is somewhat weak but not enough to make me dislike the coin.
Thanks again to everyone who responded. Maybe I'll try to find some other coins to post in the future, if I think they can serve as good examples of various issues that people like to discuss on the board.
Frank
I know you didn't post it because of the splotchy tone on obv rim & white spot, which was the only possible "problem" I could see.
Since your brother dealers didn't "tilt it just right under the light" maybe they don't know how to appreciate toning?
"The silver is mine and the gold is mine,' declares the LORD GOD Almighty."
I didn't post it to try to drum up support for my liking it (contrary to what was indicated in my web site description, I have no fear of losing my job over it
People who aren't into tone just see the drab coloer like you said and people that are know to wiggle the coin. Both colors are true colors, just from a different angle.
Its good for your shop Mark that you like coins the others don't. If you all like just the same coins you would be passing on coins someone else would love to own.
<< <i>If you have to tilt the coin to see the beautiful colors, is the true color the somewhat gray drab look the coin has when your not tilting it or the beautiful colors when you do? >>
Jim:
For me it's what makes the coin interesting. If you look at the coin pictured below, to some it may look too darkly toned. However, what I found fascinating about it, is that when you catch it in the right light by tilting it, the blue rim toning becomes irridescent, almost neon-like, and all sorts of different colors appear. In addition, you can see that the coin has a prooflike obverse, which sets off the devices really well. The coin didn't command a premium when I bought it, and it probably never will, but I found it interesting for my budding collection of these beauties.
Frank
To me, the "true color" is that which you see when you tilt the coin so that the light hits it just right and maybe that color is a bit darker than shown in the images - I can't remember for sure. However, if you don't tilt it so that the light hits it, it doesn't look nearly as pretty.
As a retailer of coins, we usually prefer to purchase and then offer for sale, coins that don't need to be tilted and rotated properly to fully appreciate them. You'd be surprised (or maybe you wouldn't) at how many people don't want a coin if it doesn't IMMEDIATELY hit them just right.
It sounds like your brother dealers are more concerned about making $$ from the saleability of it rather than the coin itself but that's cool with me, it's their job to make $$ for the company.
As usual, I'm late with my comments, but here they are nonetheless:
I like nice originals as well as the next, but, in this case, this coin just doesn't offer the contrast I would normally expect, kinda' along the lines of how one who desires DCAMs would feel about a brilliant proof.
Definitely not "qualified" to speak to originality or not, but, something about this coins raises my skepticism, Maybe it's just that although there is some variety in color, generally, it comes off as monochromatic.
And there is a novice point of view.
Sorry about the late reply. I have to say that I agree with your partners. Spend it!! The toning isn't bad but I don't like the coin at all. It looks worn and AU to me. Now I know you will say it's poor strike or cabinet wear or whatever. Whatever, it detracts.
Greg
thanks mark feld for posting this coin! and thanks!! everyone!! for the responses to his thread!!
shylock paul!! as usual you ARE a good mAN AND have really astute well meaning posts that i always learn from!! thanks!!
for me this is what coin collecting is all about~!! this to me is what THIS COIN FORUM IS ALL ABOUT
coins is a personal thing and even after all the "bad" things that happen with coins to many collectors/dealers they still come back for the "love" of coins and this hobby where there is always something
new to learn find and discover!!!!!!!
i love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
also it is really hard to evaulate a coin by a scan i was lucky to have had this coin in hand to view sight seen at my leisure
i hope that threads like this continue and i hope mark feld casn post more on here!! thanks for being on here mark
we need more like you!!!!!!!!!!!!
sincerely michael