Still showing traces of luster on an F-15 Draped Bust Half?

TennesseeDave

This arrived today and I was presently surprised to see some interesting clashing on the rev. under the word of, and still traces of luster in several protected areas.I really don't know if the coin is above average for the grade,average or just made it.What do you think?

STONE

I think a 15 for detail suits it fine.

The coin presented is a little too light in color for my taste for the grade it shows.

gecko109

I have an '06 DBH in a PCGS VF30 that also shows luster. You really dont see a whole lot of mint luster on coins lower than EF45.

291fifth

The luster is an illusion. The coin has been cleaned and has retoned over a long period of time, probably in an album.

doh

<< <i>The luster is an illusion. The coin has been cleaned and has retoned over a long period of time, probably in an album. >>


Unfotunately for Dave, I agree. It's still a very nice coin. I like it!

BigRed

I like it . For a fine-15 it has a nice reverse, sometimes the reverses of DBH are very weak in spots and yours is fairly even. For a 200 year old coin I think its very nice.

commoncents05

I agree, cleaned and retoned.

-Paul

ziggy29

This coin is a perfect example of cleaned older coins getting slabbed when a newer coin would be bagged. The simple fact is that so many of these -- even the nicer ones -- have been messed with over the last 200+ years that the TPGs have learned to cut them a little more slack than with other, newer coins.

gecko109

<< <i>This coin is a perfect example of cleaned older coins getting slabbed when a newer coin would be bagged. The simple fact is that so many of these -- even the nicer ones -- have been messed with over the last 200+ years that the TPGs have learned to cut them a little more slack than with other, newer coins. >>



And that is basically the definition of "market grading".

jdillane

I do not doubt that there is trace luster clinging to the perimeter devises. Not uncommon to find on early silver in circulated grades. Well, maybe a bit uncommon. But I am amazed at the "capabilities" of some to challenge your assertion re luster based on an image.

Nice bustie! The obverse seems to be dictating the grade. The reverse is a bonus as it looks 20.

EagleEye

I think it is entirely possible to have some of the original surface still showing on a coin that worn. It possibly acquired dirt early on which remained in the protected areas until it was removed (the "cleaning" mentioned) exposing the original, untoned surface.

ARCO

The coin looks quite nice. Unfortunately, "luster" when used on coins grading less than about XF45 really means, "cleaned". When ever you see a descriptive label on a coin (quite a few large dealers use it) on a coin grading less than about XF45, know that the coin has probably been cleaned and the original patina removed.

Tyler

nankraut

<< <i>The luster is an illusion. The coin has been cleaned and has retoned over a long period of time, probably in an album. >>





edited to add: It is still a very nice coin, and the cleaning should not detract from the value in these old beauties.

seemyauction

Do you know what Overton Variety it is?

stman

I have no idea about the coin in the OP..... but concerning "Luster" it sometimes can be confused with Being glossy looking.
Which can be an indication of a previously boinked with coin. Just my worthless opinion.

fc

i want to agree with 291fifth but

right underneath liberty's chin on the obv (obviously) i think i see
luster remaining.

it could be an illusion like 291fifth says.. but boy, it sure looks like
remaining luster in the pic.

JJM

Im not seeing the luster either, nice coin for what it is tho

Prethen

Luster? With that much wear? No way. Sorry, I can't buy it. I know of some coins I've seen listed as VF with luster, but that seems questionable as well. If the coin is worn past EF it basically means it has seen enough circulation to kill any luster that the coin originally had. Yes, I guess a 40 could have some luster. When I've seen coins that have claims to luster at 40 or below, usually that means it has been cleaned and it's retoning...a big red flag.

Longacre

Not bad for what it is. Unfortunately, no sticker for that coin.

fc

Luster? With that much wear? No way. Sorry, I can't buy it

some coins have a design that protects certain areas for quite a
while. like i said, what is under liberty's chin sure appears to
"look like luster" based on the pics.

keep in mind i am just saying it looks like it.. not that it definitely
is.

Danegeld

Great coin and looks like it's been graded accurately as well...

JRocco

Many wouldn't know luster if it came up and bit them in the a$$.
That said.
Not making ANY reference to ANYTHING posted here by ANYONE.....(I think I covered everything), there should not be any luster remaining on a coin in this grade. Even the theory that dirt might have clung to the coin and therefor protected luster is a real stretch to me. To wear this much this coin passed through quite a few hands and would have taken care of cleaning away the debris. No bad words on your observations TennesseeDave, but I think you are seeing a nice shiny area.

millennium

Here is an excellent example of a PCGS graded problem coin....if this coin was 50 years newer it would have been a BB...

I really like the coin, but it has definitely been cleaned and retoned...

jdillane

Having some 1500 or so CBHs and DBHE's, I can say that I have several that would likely receive a comparable grade and yet still have mint luster. Fact is that if you start with a weak strike, it does not take nearly the circulation to get to VF grade or even F in some cases as it does for a well struck coin.

Agreed that many misinterpret what is luster and what are diffuse reflections from a cleaned or polished or cleaned and polished surfaces. When I tilt a coin and the light reflects in a cartwheel pattern around the perimeter of the coin, I generally conclude that it luster, albeit trace, but luster just the same.

It is not uncommon for images to completely conceal luster. So, while I cannot say the OP is wrong, I cannot affirm that he is right either. I can say that he may be right and in fact I hope he is.

My position is not intended to offend anyone. Nor have I been offended by any other posts to this thread. Reasonable minds can and do differ!

(I remember when I did not know how to identify mint luster. That was a lesson learned from experience at the school of hard knocks!)

Baley

quite a bit of detail deep in the neck and in the wing feathers makes me agree that it can be called newly exposed luster to an extent, and overall and attractive coin

I think those ragging on this coin should show us your nicer example of a 200 year old half dollar

gecko109

Here is my VF30 with LUSTER. Im not imagining "shiny parts" as being luster, it is luster. I have this coin on one of my youtube vids and as I rotate the coin, you can clearly see it.

PQMorgans

This is an F12 with some remaining luster. Even cartwheels

gecko109

Hey PQMorgans....is there a patch of luster right under/behind her ear? That seems to be a serious low spot in this design, cuz its one of the more prominent locations that my VF30 shows the luster.

PQMorgans

It is luster under the ear and more then show up on the True View.

droopyd

<< <i>Nice bustie! The obverse seems to be dictating the grade. The reverse is a bonus as it looks 20. >>



1807 half cents & cents apparently had weakness issues in the hair/temple area on the obverse. I wonder if this was true for other denominations of that year as well?

ahooka454

i like it and think its good for the grde. and nice to boot.