It looks sharp as can be. The reeding almost looks serated and the denticles are crisp as well. I'd say proof. But on this date it probably doesn't make a huge difference either way - BU or PF. Looks to be at least choice 63. Possibly up to 65. Nice look. No rub on the knee and lack of luster blazing under that toning sort of tells me it's a proof. For that to be a business strike there should be a very obvious cartwheel effect in that high a grade. If there isn't one, probably a proof.
I would guess business strike, and it's AU55 or so. Looking through the Heritage archives, I noticed that this date does seem to come with proof-like surfaces in business strike format.
One good view of the edge and rim is all it should take to make a very educated guess on this coin. I'd say some Philly coins of this date came PL as long as they were early coins off the die. As far as it being doctored or recolored, you'd have to see it in person to be sure. I'm not convinced it couldn't be 100% ok as is. Seated coins tone in all sorts of unusual and natural patterns. I think the toning is attractive as photographed...but that's just me.
I have no idea but I sure know that before I shell out the amount of money that will sell for somebody is going to pay PCGS to assign a grade to it. Or I will pass on the bidding for it.
Comments
Looks to be at least choice 63. Possibly up to 65. Nice look.
No rub on the knee and lack of luster blazing under that toning sort of tells me it's a proof. For that to be a business strike there should be a very obvious cartwheel effect in that high a grade. If there isn't one, probably a proof.
roadrunner
Looks like toned over mirrors rather than luster. A different picture angle not trying to bring up the colors would help.
I'd guess proof.
From what I can see, that's one ugly coin (especially the obverse)
<< <i>From what I can see, that's one ugly coin (especially the obverse)
?????????
Not that anyone asked, but I'd own it.
K S
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>You guys are funny. Without referencing the die varieties, there's no way to tell if this is proof from the photo. >>
I did, looks like a B.1-A. Not being funny, rather having fun guessing. Lighten up!
<< <i>You guys are funny. Without referencing the die varieties, there's no way to tell if this is proof from the photo. >>
I got a fifty-fifty chance of being wrong, so I'll go with a business strike.
roadrunner