Does the Signature 1889S PCGS MS66DMPL JACK LEE have a PCGS Signature Fingerprint ??
fantasiize
Posts: 667
I was doing some early morning searching and saw this one in the featured category.
Is that a signature fingerprint on the reverse ?
Not sure if this has been previously discussed, but wanted to get your visual opinion.
Is that a signature fingerprint on the reverse ?
Not sure if this has been previously discussed, but wanted to get your visual opinion.
My eBay Items
I love Ike dollars and all other dollar series !!!
I also love Major Circulation Strike Type Sets, clad Washingtons ('65 to '98) and key date coins !!!!!
If ignorance is bliss, shouldn't we have more happy people ??
I love Ike dollars and all other dollar series !!!
I also love Major Circulation Strike Type Sets, clad Washingtons ('65 to '98) and key date coins !!!!!
If ignorance is bliss, shouldn't we have more happy people ??
0
Comments
The coin has been in this sate since we first purchased it in 1998. Up until this year, it had been held by a very caring collector. So the toning or even the FP (assuming it is) hasn't changed. Also, this coin really is a 66+. This is why looking at an image does not tell the whole story.
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
Heck, imagine one of Eliasberg Dollars having prints from: Eliasberg, Jack Lee, AND David Hall. Whats that worth? Someone should check the 89CC!
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
I only say the above for two reasons, one, because it's true, and two, maybe Legend will give me a great price on my next purchase from them.
dragon
1884 Trade Dollar NGC PF66
Why when on a "Rare" coin it's no big deal but god forbid it ends up on a forum member's Lincoln 2002 PR69 all heck breaks loose?
This is not one to stare at for periods.
Aside from the fact that all heck breaks loose over fresh prints, not decades old prints, it's because the rare coin is desirable even with the print and because you can't just go out and find another without the print so allowances are made. Neither is the case with the proof Lincoln...
To me a fingerprint means a coin has been mishandled. It's a distracting feature just like bag marks or wear that impairs an otherwise pristine condition coin. True to my grumpy old tech grading self I don't hold prints against the grade but they do hurt the appeal, especially if the coin is toned which just seems to highlite the print.
To see a really great coin printed is just a damn shame.
<< <i>True to my grumpy old tech grading self I don't hold prints against the grade >>
Boy I must be a novice.....I cannot see how that coin would grade 66 with what the fingerprints do to the eye appeal. Technically I guess. I wonder if it would get a 66 if it came from the "paigowjohnny crappy Morgan collection" instead of provenanced to Jack Lee
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
I'm really disappointed to see a $16,000+ coin, with such detracting features, being sold at auction with NO mention of the finger prints, nothing, in the auction description.
Am I the only Member that feels those detracting features should be mentioned in the auction description?
these coins do exist. Most coins get destroyed once the dealers get their hands on them. The 89-s is a nice coin, but a bit too much money
for the date in my opinion. I get a lot of 55 coins, but not to many BU anymore. Last roll I bought came from Don Harris in Great Falls Montana.
As an old timer I sure wonder where a lot of these coins went?
Rusty
A fingerprint on any coin means that it has been mishandled. And it's UGLY!
In the section under MS66 and Eye Appeal they say "any negative factors must be compensated for in another area." Well it looks well struck and relatively mark free, so there you have it. Prooflike qualities are also scarce for this model so that automatically makes this coin better than most 89-S.
Interesting enough they further say under the ms66 section that a dipped coin must be fresh in appearance and not looked cleaned. I'm not saying the coin has been dipped, just pointing out how PCGS fells about dipping and the 66 grade.
I may not agree with all that but I'm just showing you guys how PCGS sees the coin.
DCAMFranklin if I were selling a $16,000 I wouldn't want to jump up and say hey all you potential buyers look at the hugh fingerprint. The picture does speak for itself however. A salesman can't point out the negative because their job is to sell sell sell. The collectors job is to be aware and evaluate the coin using their own brain.
Having scanned a lot of Morgs I can tell you guys the fingerprints probably are not as noticable in real life and the luster comes blasting through lots better than the dull blah scan makes it look. It probably just looks like a nice Morg with fingerprints on it. I still say GRRRR!!!
I love Ike dollars and all other dollar series !!!
I also love Major Circulation Strike Type Sets, clad Washingtons ('65 to '98) and key date coins !!!!!
If ignorance is bliss, shouldn't we have more happy people ??
Perhaps I should have waited for a better one?
Nonetheless, if the coin makes you happier than the $400k in your account, you have met/exceeded your personal objective.
I love Ike dollars and all other dollar series !!!
I also love Major Circulation Strike Type Sets, clad Washingtons ('65 to '98) and key date coins !!!!!
If ignorance is bliss, shouldn't we have more happy people ??
My $400k and then some was spent on an oceanfront condo in Lahaina, HI.
Even with the BEST equipment, imaging will remain a probelm for anyone! Lustre is VERY trucky to capture right.
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
The point I was trying to make about the 1884 wasn't that it was expensive, but that I love it even with the fingerprint on the reverse. And let's not forget that things are often more defined in an image than they are in real life!
It's not just this case with Laura. There have been plenty of similar situations with other Members in the past.
When I wrote the description did not merit discussion, because it actually appears stronger on the image then the coin.
Net result, if the potential buyer sees the image (which they can't miss), they WILL see the FP. Should I have described it, probably so. Again, you really have to see the coin to see understand what I am saying.
If you check other descriptions I write, I ABSOLUTELY describe EVERY ding, discoloration, spot, FP, or minor problem when in my eyes I feel they should be mentioned. To defend myself even further, MANY people will vouch that I WILL screen a coin if they call and tell them is high end, low end, average, or whatever. I do NOT try to sell inferior coins as quality (like so many dealers do). Please do NOT think this coin is an example of how I covertly describe coins-on ebay or anywhere else.
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
Laura, I find the coins you offer to be fabulous!
PS - I really do believe there is another partial at 10:00 and another partial at 7:00. Take a look.
dipping a coin is doctoring it
K S
DIPPING DOES NOT MOVE METAL OR STRIP THE SURFACES! Coin doctoring (which encompasses scraping, polisheing, or messing w/powerful chemicals) does! Dippingis only meant to remove a light film. Bad news, BOTH PCGS AND NGC will DIP coins to remove PVC or unsightly FP's.
Anyway, the chances of you knowing what is out there that has been dipped is slim. Do really believe coins are pure white from the 1800's? How about coins that were dipped and gorgeously retoned? If you are so appalled by dipping, I'm amazed that you have EVER bought a coin!
Anyway, at least I am honest about my intentions.
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
Look at me coming to the defense of Legend, as though they need ME, but
DCAMFranklin,
I don't see how the non-mention of the fingerprint SO OBVIOUS in the photo is being construed as an "incomplete auction description" that everyone in the forum needs to harangue Laura about. It simply isn't the same as a problem not visible being omitted, and I hardly think Laura gets any special consideration from collectors in this forum for ANY perceived missteps. I agree that on some occasions, forum members are spared some of the unpleasantness garnered on non-members, but most of the time the motives either way are clear. In this case, what would you have us do? How well can one argue that a defect is not mentioned in the verbage but very evident in the accompanying image?
Here is the signature Jack Lee 1889s MS66DMPL Morgan dollar, graded by Bob Jones in 1988 - spectacular luster and toning, a true DMPL coin. Includes both a full index finger, and an even rarer partial middle finger! In the Fingerprint Registry, this combination is a pop 7, with only one coin graded with more Bob Jones prints!
"I probably shouldn't have said that..."
"Run away! Run away! "
ZAP!
Unfortunately instead of a coin forum many have tried to turn it into a oneupmanship forum. Karl I also find it hard to believe that you would be appalled at anything.
CG
now 1 thing i'll admit, if legend is claiming they wanna dip that coin in acetone, or something that is nonreactive w/ the metal, that's a whole different issue. then, i say go for it. but it sounds suspiciously like the coin will come out BLAST WHITE, which means the metal WAS displaced, which means the coin has been inherently damaged, or at least lowered to the level of any of a billion other BLAST WHITE ultra-maximum deep-mirror cameo super-duper prooflike morgans.
what the heck is wrong w/ a coin that has a bit of character? why this reckless pursuit of clinical, surgicial, antiseptic, immaculately-conceived purified blast-white mentality???
i just don't think there can ever be too many un-messed-with pre-1900 coins in existence. obviously, i'm in an extraordinarily tiny minority
K S
<< <i>Laura- I in no way stated, nor implied, that you sell inferior coins. And I don't want you to feel that I think you purposefully hide detracting marks, tone spots, whatever on a regular basis. I do not. However, I do believe that the fingerprints should have been mentioned, just like anyother detracting feature of a coin. Most importantly, I have found many sellers, who do not post to this Forum, held up to ridicule, with abandon, for the same mistake. What is appropriate for one should be equally appropriate for all.
Laura, I find the coins you offer to be fabulous!
PS - I really do believe there is another partial at 10:00 and another partial at 7:00. Take a look.
Poor IrishMike, still suffering from your comprehension and retention problem, I see. Since you didn't get this information, I thought I would include it, above, for your benefit. Russ' name never appeared in any of my posts to this thread. Where you get all the drivel you posted, I'll never know. No one else here understands, as well. There is nothing to "see through". I have never made a secret of how I feel. As stated above, I have found many sellers, who do not post to this Forum, held up to ridicule, with abandon, for the same mistake. What is appropriate for one should be equally appropriate for all. You don't believe in some form of fairness doctrine, fine. I don't give a darn. I don't like the double standard administered by some Members of this Forum. But you just don't get it. Well, you do qualify for the Dumber part.
This is all academic anyway since the fingerprints aren't toning, and are probably etched into the surface.
I'm not sure why this is an ultra-maximum deep mirror PL coin since to me it looks like the mirrors are pretty well mucked up. Perhaps it's just the photograph.
<< <i>This is all academic anyway since the fingerprints aren't toning, and are probably etched into the surface. >>
Silver and Clad Coinage.
Fingers have body oils and salts on them, and when an object is touched a print is left behind containing those oils and salts. The oil contains salts, and the salts are suspended in the body oil. The body salts are very corrosive to metal, and will etch into metal over a relatively short period of time. Most know how corroded metal becomes around salt water. The corrosion was mainly caused by the sea salt. Well, body salts are very corrosive.
Once a coin gets a fingerprint, it doesn't take long for the salts to start etching into the metal surface of a coin. How much the print will etch the coin depends on a number of factors. The most visible to the naked eye fingerprinted coins have a higher volume of body oils and high concentration of salts. The heavy print will more aggressively etch into the coin's surface as it contains a higher concentration of salts than a light printed coin would have. The longer a print is left on a coin, the more the metal under the fingerprint will be etched by the salts.
A coin with a very recent heavy fingerprint (say a week or so old), may still be cleanable (dipped), and all traces of the print would either fade almost completely away, or remain as a light colored fingerprint after dipping. That light colored fingerprint seen after dipping tells you that the metal surface of the coin has already been permanently damaged (lightly or very strongly) by the corrosive effects of the salts.
Coins that have a light or white colored fingerprint indicates that the coin has previously been dipped, the body oils and salts removed in the process. Unfortunately, the light colored fingerprint left behind is just the corrosion caused by the salts, and the damage is permanent. Also, the longer the print stays on the coin, the more time the salts have to etch deeper into the surface of the coin (and beyond). Storing a printed coin in sunlight and/or heat will accelerate the corrosion of the coin's surface (and below that).
Coins that have very light fingerprints, have much less salts from the fingers, and will not corrode as fast or deep as a heavy printed coin. With the light printed coin, catch it as fresh as possible and with a proper dip, the faint print can be successfully removed - before the salts have a chance to eat away at the coin's surface. However, even a lightly fingerprinted coin may not be restorable if the light print has been on the coin for some time, and/or if it was stored in sunlight and/or heat. The corrosion worsens as time goes by.
Summary:
If you have expensive coins with fingerprints, consider the following:
1. Very visible heavy fingerprint - unless the print is under a week old, and the coin has been properly stored, trying to remove an older print will succeed in removing the dark fingerprint, leaving behind an etched into the metal light colored fingerprint in its place. An original print on a coin is unattractive to some, but the light color of the etched metal (fingerprint shaped) dipped coin is a heavy eye-appeal hit for the coin. The darker fingerprints look much better on a printed coin than the light colored prints you end up with after dipping the coin. A good rule is to not try and dip old, heavy fingerprints from your coins, because the end result will not be favorable.
2. Freshly fingerprinted coins can be successfully dipped if the dip is done soon after the print was applied. Immediately upon printing a coin, dip it lightly. The goal is to get the salts and oils holding the salts off the coin before the salts can begin to etch the metal of the coin. If a print develops some time after you have the coin, then that's a bit late to try and remove the print. The darkening or development of the fingerprint is caused by the salts etching the metal, so permanent damage has already started. Remove the darkened fingerprint, and you will still see a lighter etched version of the now removed fingerprint. That is permanent damage.
3. Catch a lightly printed coin early enough, and there is a reasonable chance the fingerprint could successfully be removed, leaving behind little damage or no perceptible damage - depending on which factors above need to be considered.
4. Practice trying to remove fingerprints off inexpensive coins you might have. If you don't have enough or any printed coins, then literally grab a few new silver or clad coins, then fingerprint them yourself. Clean one right after you print it (acetone will remove the fresh print). You should observe no damage from the fingerprint. Let the other coins you printed stand uncleaned for increasingly longer periods of time before trying to remove the fingerprint. You will arrive at a point where removing the fingerprint will leave you with a damaged coin and a light colored print - instead of the darker one.
OR,
Just send the printed coin to a professional conservation service (like NCS), and get their opinion on if they could get rid of all traces of the fingerprint. They should be able to remove the print better than most of us, but if the metal under the print has been etched, then it will have an outline of a fingerprint permanently.
BTW, hands washed well with soap and water just before touching a coin will leave very little oil and salts on the coin. The skin will remain dry for a period of time before the oils (carrying the salts) start to secrete again, and transfers a fingerprint to the coin. Don't wash your hands well with soap and water, and the build up of oil/salts happens at an accelerated rate, and transfer too well to the coin. When your hands sweat, that also causes the oils and salts to transfer to the coin when touched.
A fresh fingerprint will be very difficult to detect on the coin. The oils and salts are transparent and not easily spotted unless you know what and how to look. Using magnification, angle the coin around a light, and study the coins surface for a clear (in color) fingerprint oil deposit. That coin should clean with no damage from the print. When the print starts to develop (darken), some damage has already been done to the coin. When the print is very dark then the coin might not be conservable.
The above are guidelines, with a few specifics thrown in for clarity. Removing fingerprints from coins is a much more difficult thing to do than might be expected.
Jim
K S
I would also have to agree with Paigowjohnny and Dorkkarl. FIngerprints give me the creeps. To me fingerprints always detract from the eye appeal of a coin. That coin looks too cloudy and milky to have deep mirrors, unless it's the picture that causing that look.
Glad to see I'm not alone.
CG
I think a new breed of collector will develop out of the booming coin market. This new collector will not accept fingerprints, artifical toning, ugly mint set toning (FBL Franklins), Quotes like "Even though it's in an MS 66 holder we think it's an MS 66.875" (and price it according to their estimate). I think there are bucket loads of tripe like this being passed on to collectors as acceptable because there are so many new uninformed collectors out there. Unfortunately in the near future I think there will be quite a few collectors left holding a "mint bag" of overgraded and overpriced coinage. That's just my unedgeumacated opinion.