OK, Let's Grade This Colorful Bust Half **Grade Posted With My Thoughts**

stman

Has much nicer original color (deeper, richer) in person, and luster is a lot flashier as well. What you think about what appears to be reed marks on the obverse, how did this happen? Also, while you're guessing the grade if you can attribute the Overton variety please do so.

Dark line behind Liberty's head is a shadow from a scratch on the holder.

airplanenut

Pretty coin!

JrGMan2004

<< <i>Pretty coin! >>

OKbustchaser

EF 45 and appears to be a late die state of O-101 (might be 114. Doing this at work without book. Will check when get home.)

Jim

airplanenut

Oh, I'll say at least AU50

OKbustchaser

Actually, looking at it again, I think it is 114.

Jim

dorkkarl

vf-30 net.

that is not nice toning, imo.

K S

stman

Reverse color actually looks like the reverse of my 1827 in person. The original coin posted has nice cartwheel luster. Well the 1827 does also.

clackamas

Nice luster, Looks like very little wear on the obv, a little on the rev, so I will say AU55.

rhedden

PCGS AU-50, unless it's cleaned or AT (you can never tell from a picture). It's an AU-55 to 58 for detail by PCGS standards, but I'd guess they'd knock it down to 50 because of the reed marks. I do like the toning, and I think it's particularly nice, in fact.

FrattLaw

I'm going with cleaned and retoned. IMO the color seems off. Kinda splotchy but it could be the pic.

XF-45?????

Michael

oldcameoproofsguy

I'd say a 45 to 50. It's tough to grade from the scan.

oldcameoproofsguy

The 1827 is beautiful!

Baley

I like it as a 50, would go 55 but for those reed marks.

perhaps it spent some time in a bag with some 1837 and later coins?

stman

<< <i>perhaps it spent some time in a bag with some 1837 and later coins? >>



Ahh, I figured and hoped someone like Baley would catch my question. This is a lettered edge coin so I wonder how the reed marks got there. Good answer Baley.

mgoodm3

au50

ms70

<< <i>I'm going with cleaned and retoned. IMO the color seems off. Kinda splotchy but it could be the pic.

XF-45?????

Michael >>



My guess too. I just didn't want to be the first to say it!

K6AZ

Hey, I think I see the remnants of a print!

Catch22

53 with a bump for eye appeal to 55.

rainbowroosie

AU if the color is real.

coinlieutenant

AU55 but if it is in a NGC holder they 58'd because of eye appeal.

BigD5

I'd say au/53 with suspect color, but probably ok. Maybe helped along a bit by some coin color doctor somewhere.

MFH

OBV=AU55
REV=AU50
Net =AU53

IMHO

stman

Heh, Hi folks, just wanted to mention I can say without any reservation the toning (color) is very original. I understand the image isn't the greatest. When I tilt this to NOT show the color it looks just like my other stone original Bust halves. Hey maybe they are all AT? Nice old crust, crunchy look to it. As mentioned before, the reverse (although it doesn't look like it in the image) looks very close to the 1827 I posted which I believe is Wayte Raymond toning. No hairlines whatsoever, and I would expect it to have some in in this grade range. I have a very good eye IMO for hairlines. IMO this piece has never been cleaned and re-toned naturally or otherwise. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

I'll post the grade after a while. Thanks for all the replies so far.

LincolnCentMan

AU53

David

BigD5

It's that purply/blue color that makes you go hmmmm......

Not the "normal" color usually found bust halves. Again, probably still good color, and slabbable/market acceptable, by all means.

Would I buy the coin? For sure.

coinguy1

I think AU55 should be the absolute minimum grade and I would not be at all surprised if the coin is graded as high as MS63. I'm not seeing any obvious wear and the coin appears to have full luster. Why are you guys being so tough on this one????

Baley

alright, if those images were tilted to show the color, and the luster is "crunchy," then change my answer to AU55 to 58 range, forgive the baggies a little, and write off the left (facing) wing weakness to strike and not wear (the obv looks nearly fully struck).

and let's see a normal pictures or scans (as opposed to "3 degree" color angle)

stman

Coinguy1 says....

<< <i>Why are you guys being so tough on this one???? >>

I say... because they don't like me.

OKbustchaser

Home now and looking at it on a decent monitor. It does appear to be 114. Also, I want to up my grade guess to the 58-62 range. What looked like rub in the obverse field at work now looks much more like simply a toning break. ( I still think it's AU, but the type that all the grading companies seem to bump.)

Jim

stman

Hi folks and thanks for playing. My take on this coin is first like I mentioned earlier I don't believe there is any question to the coins originality. The coin has luster of an uncirculated coin. Only broken by a slight bit of rub/wear on the curls above the forehead. A bit of friction on the curls above the ear and lower curls,. I don't see anything in the cheek or the fields.

Reverse.... The eagles right wing (left looking at the image) is a bit weakly struck but does indeed have some light rub/wear. As well as the eagles talon, and arrow feathers it is holding.

That said, I believe the coin is as close to au58 as can be. Perhaps knock it down a bit for the possible reed marks and au55. But with color and luster such as this that's a tough one. Thanks for all your replies this has been fun with all the different opinions. I'll try and get some better images later.

L@@K Old Holder!!!!

Placid

AU55

dorkkarl

sorry, but pcgs screwed up on that grade.

but after gold & early copper, the services do their worst grading work on bust material.

however, if YOU LIKE the coin, then what everyone else thinks doesn't matter, & you should crack it out!

K S

roadrunner

While this coin does have some light rub on the wingtip and the top of the eagle's head, it appears to have most of its luster intact. I can see a luster swirl line in front of Liberty's face. The typical wear on the hair curl high point near the ear is very minimal. My gut feel before you posted the grade was MS62-63. PCGS and NGC grade 64's all day long with the same rubbing on the high points. Many of their 65's have the same rub but the fields will be very smooth and clear. The rubbing on the wing tip does blend a bit into the upper wing feathers so that is probably why this is just AU58.

Technically, under strict ANA standards this is an AU coin. But under today's looser standards, there's nothing I see that should keep this less than a 58 imo.

Note: An assigned grade by PCGS or NGC of MS62-64 does not mean the coin has no wear or friction, or even full luster. Far from it.
It just means the coin is worth "x" based on the price guides. Whether technically UNC or not is NEVER answered by the TPG's on bust coinage. I'd call 95% of their MS bust halves technically AU. But value-wise they can range from $300-$5000 in AU to MS64.


roadrunner

dorkkarl

in terms of wear alone, pcgs got it right - au-ish. however, the obverse has damage, which for me takes it down to xf, plus the color imo is awful, which knocks it again.

that's my recipe for net vf-30.

what i find disturbing is seeming inconsistency w/ pcgs grading. i've seen better coins referenced here on the forum that they bodybagged for cleaning/whatever reason, & the damage on this coin plus the whacky toning is deemed acceptable.

of course, since it IS IN a pcgs slab, a lot of plastic-blinded readers will think i'm babbling since, gee, pcgs could never be inconsistent.

K S

CarlWohlforth

DK: Do you ever sell coins? I'm thinking I'd pay over sheet for anything you have graded

Baley

DK: Do you ever sell coins? I'm thinking I'd pay over sheet for anything you have graded

dorkkarl never even posts pictures of coins, but I'd like to see what he considers a nice coin (he brags about having nice coins but never shows any) anyway stman said the colors in the pic are kinda wrong and the coin looks good in hand, and I've seen tweaked images where color was emphasized (my coin on the NGC site for example, i didn't do it, they did). grading from an image is tough, yes the bagmarks are distracting but I love crunchy luster on a bust coin so if this one has it then still strong AU coin imo,.

dorkkarl

hey baley, when someone posts a nice coin on the forum , i think i'm right up there with a "congrats" or whatever.

but the subject coin of this thread is not a nice coin, in my worthless opinion.

oh, & i DON'T brag about my collection, do i???

K S

Baley

well, maybe brag is the wrong word, but you often imply or state you know what's nice and have some nice coins and don't need slabs;
just trying to cajole you into showing us some of those early Federal coins and other good stuff .

Also, if you think the subject coin nets VF, I'd like to see some of your other conservatively graded pieces.

dorkkarl

baley, i try to avoid bust halves w/ damage & funny toning like that, so as not to need to "net" them down.

for the most part, i like bust halves w/ plain, good old-fashioned normal boring grey color.

K S

BillJones

Sorry, but going by the colors that I see in the scan, which could be all wrong, I think that the toning is AT, and that the coin is a retoned AU-50 at best.

Myqqy

Heh, Hi folks, just wanted to mention I can say without any reservation the toning (color) is very original.

Stman, I'm not trying to stir up trouble, but I wonder how you can say without reservation that a coin has never been tweaked when it's 170-180 years old?? I'll trust that it looks better in hand, but the color really does look unnatural (to me anyway).... anyhoo, carry on......

stman

Hi, I have said what I believe from experience of owning Bust Half's and looking at many in person. No matter how many times I mention that the color looks a bit different in person, folks just don't want to take my word for it. That's fine with me and no problem. No we can never say for certain but can only take an educated guess just like a regular MD. I kinda regret posting this. NOT due to the opinions being given, but no matter how many times I say the color is different in person (and I can't get a decent image of it) my observation seems to be no good with some of you folks. I respect the opinions from the folks that have experience with these... thanks for all of your opinions.

UPDATE It just so happens I returned the coin. NOT because I feel the color is bad. And NOT because of what some call damage because of some possible reed marks. Heck we see reed marks on Morgans all the time. I am returning the coin due to the untoned area at about 12:00 on the obverse. And no I don't feel that's where it was held to AT the coin. It is distracting to me.

Myqqy

my observation seems to be no good with some of you folks.

Stman, I hope that my comment wasn't taken to be confrontational or dismissive. I'll take your word that the color looks good in hand, even though it looks a little wonky on my monitor. I probably naturally gravitate towards bust halves that have more subdued colors.....

dorkkarl

<< <i>what some call damage because of some possible reed marks. Heck we see reed marks on Morgans all the time >>

dude, if this were a MORGAN DOLLAR, then it wouldn't be damage, but how would a coin that DOESN'T EVEN HAVE a reeded edge show heavy reed marks??? that's why i called it "damage". it was caused by rough contact w/ something other than another coin (bust halves didn't really circulated w/ reeded-edge coins). if it were a morgan, or frankie, or other large coin that actually has a reeded edge , then it wouldn't be damage.

personally, i think you did the right thing returning that coin, & despite how it must hurt to be told that pcgs screwed up this time, they did. you will find a nicer coin, pcgs or not, i am sure.

K S

marcmoish

this half truly looks AU-58 for eye appeal and all - had I not read the results and all I would have said AU-58 (55 plus notch for EA) - I believe PCGS correctly graded this bust - the toning looks natural to me too - what shocks me even more is seeing Mark mention that he'd grade it minimum 55 and way up to MS-63 - huh? that to me is a wicked eye-opener imho either some of us are missing something or the majority of us that correctly opined at 53-58 are all off - which I truly doubt in this case.




Marc