Grading Proof Indian Head Cents

BigD5

For my own knowledge, how much do the mirrors factor into grading proof IHC's? I've seen plenty of these, and like them, especially with some color. I do have a tendency to overgrade these coins. I mean, if you look at the coin and it has no spots, or major distracting marks/hairlines etc. you would think, or I would think, the coin would slab higher than pf/63!! The only thing I think I may be overlooking is the depth of the mirrors.
It's not hairlines, I can find those without a problem, usually. The coins' just seem TOO nice for such a lowly grade.



In the shameless plug dept., I will have 3 certified pf/IHC's listed on Ebay tonight after 10:45 or so.

BigE

Darrin, all I know is that the mirrors should be clear and smooth, just like your plug. TTT--------------BigE

BigD5

How much do the mirrors effect the grade though? More than the strike and amount of marks/hits?

BillJones

It really depends upon the year. I think that all of the coins from say 1879 or 1880 to the end of the series should have good to great mirrors, very minor or no spotting, few or no hairlines or marks, and lots of eye appeal to be graded PR-64 or better.

When you go back into the 1870s some of the Proofs were very poorly made, and some years are generally quite bad. The year 1870 immediately comes to mind. I had a customer who needed that date to finish his Indian set. All of his coins were Mint State, but I found an 1870 in Proof that fit right in with his collection, and it cost him a few hundred dollars less. The detail on it was sharper than normal, but the luster was very dull. It looked like an original coin, so he added it to his set. I had another customer who did the same thing with the 1877 and saved a fair amount of money.

When you get back to the copper-nickel coins, I've found that the really nice ones are bright and attractive. In recent years, it seems though that many of those have gone into collections and what is on the market is not nearly as nice. It also seems that the grading has gotten loser, and that poorer coins are getting into better (PR-64 and 65) holders.

shylock

Excellent question, being MS oriented I have a tough time grading these too. A guess would be mirrors play the same role as lustre does on MS IHs. Even more so since strike plays less of a role on these, giving all the other attributes a little more weight. It's a two edged sword because the deeper the mirrors, the more obvious every minute fleck, stain, lint mark and hairline appears. I also have a tough time judging cameo on the bronze issues. Many I see in CAM holders look borderline from what I'm use to seeing on other series, and the services seem to be very forgiving with the lower relief reverse (particularly the ONE CENT).

If you don't mind using Adobe Acrobat there are two good articles about IH proofs in the Longacre's Ledger Archive of the Fly-In Club site (the first two articles listed). Both were contributed by Ron Sirna, a long time collector of these, and the date-by-date analysis includes comments from Rick Snow in italics. Snow mentions that 1870s are known for heavy criss-cross die polishing marks which give them the dull look Bill Jones mentions.

BigD5

Thank you for the comments Bill and shylock. That's exactly it Shylock, I collect mostly mint state pieces and have only recently been dabbling in proofs. I'm not hooked, by any means, but do find them a little more than intriguing. Especially some of the toned pieces I've been able to look at. Some very attractive coins, and the prices are almost comically low.
Thank you for the article, I'll get to reading that now.