Even with the scratchy looking fields, I am sticking with PR62 as my grade because I am reasonably sure that they are quite a bit looser with the proofs than the common circulation strikes. I wouldn't judge it to be a 62 if I was buying it, though.
If you have rendered a grading opinion but not included your reasoning......we all stand to learn more if we can see what goes into each other's thinking/assessments.......don't just throw numbers at us.......let us know how you got there!
Looks like it has been heavily cleaned or rubbed although I think the flat spot above the ear is due to a weak strike. I would give it an MS64 cleaned net AU details
<< <i>If you have rendered a grading opinion but not included your reasoning......we all stand to learn more if we can see what goes into each other's thinking/assessments.......don't just throw numbers at us.......let us know how you got there! >>
I see what appears to be some hairlining, and the strike over the ear looks pretty crummy (but I'm not convinced it's wear). That's offset by pretty decent surfaces (other than the hairlining and a few scuffs on the left obverse field) and nice color. Weighing it all, adding the merits and demerits, I settled on PR-63.
<< <i>If you have rendered a grading opinion but not included your reasoning......we all stand to learn more if we can see what goes into each other's thinking/assessments.......don't just throw numbers at us.......let us know how you got there! >>
Can 't explain it, Mark. Sometimes you just know, .
Ok, OK, the way I came up with "Dusty Grey PR-63" was...
1. The fields looked like deep mirrors, not just proof-like.
2. I own a Morgan that is flat and grey, but when you tilt it, it explodes into color. It looks a bit like the coin in question. (Alas, it's not a proof)!
I believe that the initial set of images gave the impression that the coin could have been a PR65 or a PR66. And, I was TRYING to capture the coin's appearance accurately.
I believe accuracy would require both of your pics for a coin such as this. It is very different in appearance at an angle vs. straighton. In my own buying I have figured this out. i have one coin that I bought with only an angled shot that is beautiful, but straight on is dark and not as appealing. I now prefer lighter toned proofs for just that reason.
Doug, I grade the coin a solid, very pretty PR63, and nice enough for me to have bought it. I don't usually like PR63 Morgan Dollars enough to buy them.
The initial set of images portrays the color (though not the depth of the reflectivity) fairly accurately and unless the coin is tilted just so, the hairlines are barely visible.
Great thread Mark- It's up to your usual standards. I sat this one out because of my lack of experience with proof Morgans, and I would have been led by some other members opinions whose opinions I value, and therefor I would be cheating. I learned from this thread and for that- I thank you.
Comments
<< <i>sorry, but the coin is overgraded.
K S >>
Is it?
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>If you have rendered a grading opinion but not included your reasoning......we all stand to learn more if we can see what goes into each other's thinking/assessments.......don't just throw numbers at us.......let us know how you got there!
I see what appears to be some hairlining, and the strike over the ear looks pretty crummy (but I'm not convinced it's wear). That's offset by pretty decent surfaces (other than the hairlining and a few scuffs on the left obverse field) and nice color. Weighing it all, adding the merits and demerits, I settled on PR-63.
09/07/2006
<< <i>If you have rendered a grading opinion but not included your reasoning......we all stand to learn more if we can see what goes into each other's thinking/assessments.......don't just throw numbers at us.......let us know how you got there!
Can 't explain it, Mark. Sometimes you just know,
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
1. The fields looked like deep mirrors, not just proof-like.
2. I own a Morgan that is flat and grey, but when you tilt it, it explodes into color. It looks a bit like the coin in question. (Alas, it's not a proof)!
3. I read everyones posts first and cheated.
I believe that the initial set of images gave the impression that the coin could have been a PR65 or a PR66. And, I was TRYING to capture the coin's appearance accurately.
Generous by PCGS!
Mark what would you grade the coin and why?
The initial set of images portrays the color (though not the depth of the reflectivity) fairly accurately and unless the coin is tilted just so, the hairlines are barely visible.
Thanks! A "coin in the hand" opinion is always the most valuable. From the pics I still can't see a 3, but as always pictures can lie.
By the way, thanks for the thread. It reminded me of why I come to the boards!
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
K S