Proof Barber Half with slide marks

VicPortland

I just purchased a 1902 Proof Barber Half (PR64 CAM). The mirrors on this coin are really great and the coin has very nice peripheral toning and no spots. The only thing I am unsure about is the slide marks on Liberty's cheek and neck. Are these typical for PR64 coins? Without them, I think this coin would be a 65 or 66 no problem.


Any opinions/input appreciated.

coinfreak499

Those marks on the cheeks look to harsh even to grade 64 cam. Are you shure that those aren't on the holder?

lordmarcovan

I've seen some hairlines on 63's. Those slidemarks seem a tad harsh for a 64, but I would expect some hairlining.

That is still a nice looking coin. I can't make out the contrast too well in that picture, though.


Here is a crummy scan of a PCGS PR63 CAM I used to own.




The reverse was DCAM. My old icon picture of it does it more justice.

VicPortland

They are not on the holder. This coin is so reflective that any disturbance looks magnified. If I tilt the coin toward me, the slide marks disappear. If I tilt the coin away from me, I can see em.

VicPortland

The mirrors are super deep. The 'white' you see in the right field is a reflection from the white sweatshirt I was wearing when I took the photo.

lordmarcovan

<< <i>This coin is so reflective that any disturbance looks magnified. If I tilt the coin toward me, the slide marks disappear. If I tilt the coin away from me, I can see em >>



I know exactly what you mean. I had some marks like that on mine, though not as severe, perhaps. I would have said 63 at best on your coin, but I'm not looking at it in person.

And a few hairlines like that don't really bother me on old proofs, when you consider how prone they were to cabinet friction and so on.

cohodk

Without them, I think this coin would be a 65 or 66 no problem.

Please take no offense but these type of statements always crack me up. Of course every coin would grade higher if it didnt have noticeable marks.

The slide marks on that coin look quite severe and IMO would grade no higher than 62 and if you were to show it to a dealer he would probably offer at least 10% back of 60 bid.

VicPortland

No offense taken. What I meant is that there are no other distractions (that I can see) to account for the present grade. From the inputs I have gotten thus far, it seems that the present distractions (slide marks) are enought to drop this coin to 62 or 63 in your opinions.

CarlWohlforth

This Barber half has slide marks and graded 62. The slide marks are worse than what shows up in the photo, they would show more with the light at a different angle.



Here is the holder the set came from. There are plastic slides on both sides. I think many sets were stored in holders like this so many proofs received slide marks.

CarlWohlforth

OK, I found a photo of my 1907 Half that really show the slide marks to the fullest.



Mine is nice because it is part of a matched set but looks to be properly graded at 62, IMO.

lordmarcovan

Wow, Carl. Cool set!

I love that dime.

Say, did you ever hear from that West Palm Beach guy again? I emailed him but didn't hear back.

cohodk

That is a great looking set!!!!

Baley

Please take no offense but these type of statements always crack me up. Of course every coin would grade higher if it didnt have noticeable marks.

LoL, it's so true. Hey, my 1801 half dollar would grade MS70, if only it didn't have 64 points worth of wear!

Vic, the vertical mark on the neck, is that on the holder or the coin? I've got to think, holder.

VicPortland

Vertical line is on the coin. That is probably the deepest mark on the coin. The other lines are really shallow. Still, for a PR64, I think they are just too visible.

This one is going back.

BigD5

64 seems a bit generous on your coin with those slide marks. I like it more in the 63 range when they have marks like that. 62's and lower are really beat up, your coin seems ok, except for those slide marks. Again, I like that coin as a 63, as opposed to the 64 they gave it. This is simply from the picture.