Which 32-D Quarter do you like better? And Why?

rlawsha · April 30, 2004 7:21AM

Image #1:

Image #2:

rlawsha · April 30, 2004 7:22AM

Assuming both are in PCGS holders and have the same grade

mgoodm3 · April 30, 2004 7:24AM

Lighting's a bit harsh, but the second has a bit cleaner fields.

ClausUrch · April 30, 2004 8:28AM

The first has more luster but more "hits" while the second has a weak strike or could be AU...hard to tell from the pics. I'll go with the first.

Boom · April 30, 2004 9:10AM

There is no hiding anything from a scanner unlike digital cameras, especially a scanner cranked up

to extreme sharpness and 600 resolution. Every time I sell coins like on my sig line, that's what I

boost my scanner up to. Believe me, if a coin passes a scanner tast under those conditions

you really have something. Scanners are brutally honest and will make even the most pristeen coins

look bad. Both of these coins are gorgeous in real life. Tough call! Flip a coin!

haletj · April 30, 2004 10:23AM

Are these your two new ms64 32-d quarters boom?

Boom · April 30, 2004 12:34PM

Sorry for the late reply but the answer is yes. They do not look like these high powered scans at all.

I suppose next time I can tone down on the sharpness and the resolution. The first one is an all natural, undipped White beauty and the second is equally as beautiful, if not more but not as White.

The reason it appears as one poster says "weaker struck" is because of the White natural toning that covers the details. I don't have the balls to try to dip a $7000 coin. If I was confident and could remove this natural White cloudiness off of it you would see that it is truly the better of the two.

Recall around Christmas when I won my first PCGS 63? That's it! If I had it in the hands of a Master such as manofcoins or Bobzap they could maybe get a 5 out of it whereas the top one will never be better than it is right now.

rainbowroosie · April 30, 2004 12:37PM

Assuming they are both UNC, I like the second one. The two little dots on the first one are in a very bad place -- immediately the nicks catch your eye....

oreville · April 30, 2004 2:20PM

I do not see any stacking rub on these coins yet I "see" one small flat spot in the hair curl of GW in the first coin and two larger flat spots in the second coin. That does not make sense to me since there should be other evidence of wear or major luster break. I see none. That is why I always have trouble with scans.

The first coin seems to have lovely luster with the usual bag marks and the second coin looks cleaner.

I am having difficulty assigning a grade to either coin although my eye likes the first coin more despite the bagmarks on the first coin.