Home› U.S. Coin Forum

grading question w/ NEW pics

TbarTbar Posts: 521
in U.S. Coin Forum
This columbian in hand is the nicest one that has ever graced my meager little collection. In my opinion it is an easy 66 with one exception.....

It has 3 contact marks on the sail on the reverse as highlighted by the photos. How much would one expect to be downgraded for what is really this coins only flaw?

The pics make the 3 marks look worse than they really are and this coin has booming break free luster.

What say ye? Thanks in advance.



** I know this thread has pretty much been beat to death but I took some new pics out of the 2x2 and in a flip........alot of the reverse marks are on flip.

Thaks again for all the great input!

image

image

image

Comments

  • MikeInFLMikeInFL Posts: 10,188 ✭✭✭✭
    The photos make the luster look muted, and I'd be worried more about that than the ticks.

    That said, I see no problem with those 3 ticks on a 66. If they were on the obverse, it might be a different story though.
    Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Your images are a bit soft... would like to see the sail lines on the last sail.
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • fcfc Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭
    the coin does look exceptional if i am interpreting the pictures
    correctly.

    i think the tics on the sail and between the globes on the rev
    should not hold it back from a 66.. with a chance 67.
  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Here's some images of a very clean 64...

    image


    imageimage
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • MikeInFLMikeInFL Posts: 10,188 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Here's some images of a very clean 64...

    image
    >>



    You got hosed on that one. image
    Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
  • TbarTbar Posts: 521
    My photos suck I know. The coin is tilted to show color in hand and to highlight the ticks.

    The luster on this coin is anything but muted. It is very very creamy and almost completly break free.

    Thanks for your replies so far.
  • richardshipprichardshipp Posts: 5,647 ✭✭✭
    I agree... that 64 looks as nice as my 65. At least looking at the pics.
  • seemyauctionseemyauction Posts: 3,655 ✭
    Here is one that I sold a wile back........

    image
    image
    imageCoinZip.com
  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I agree... that 64 looks as nice as my 65. At least looking at the pics. >>



    It's a nice example as when I was looking for a nice MS65-66 in the late 80's to early 90's I never found one that I was happy with.

    These where being pumped through the TPG's like hot cakes as everyone was looking to cash in on then centennial of the Columbian Expo in 1992/93.
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • richardshipprichardshipp Posts: 5,647 ✭✭✭
    sorry, I didn't intend to ignore the OP.

    It's hard to tell from the pics but the coin looks mark free except for what you pointed out. If it is and the luster is there then I'd say a for sure 65 or maybe even 66.
  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭✭
    My initial reaction to your coin is that it appears to be at least a 65. (Columbus' cheek is really clean!) I'd want to see the lustre in person before calling it a 66, but I'm already thinking about it.
    When in doubt, don't.
  • dan8402dan8402 Posts: 2,163
    It would be a lot easier to tell if the coin was taken out of the holder. Is that a stapled 2x2?
  • TbarTbar Posts: 521
    Yes it is a 2x2. If I thought removing it would help my pathetic photography skills I would.....but I just can't seem to image worth a damn lately.

    I think the thing that really strikes me about this one is the cleanliness of the fields and the creaminess of the luster. I've seen alot of these with clean and/or PL fields but not this clean with this thick of luster. At least not in my hands.

    I guess I am just a little giddy because I paid $60 for this thing.....and I know that if the 3 or 4 ticks don't hold it down, it has the surfaces to make it in to a 66 slab.


    Thanks for all your help.
  • zeebobzeebob Posts: 2,825 ✭
    I'd count on a 65 and hope for a 66. The contact marks are on a pretty prominent device. No dice on 67.

    Bob
  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Yes it is a 2x2. If I thought removing it would help my pathetic photography skills I would.....but I just can't seem to image worth a damn lately.

    I think the thing that really strikes me about this one is the cleanliness of the fields and the creaminess of the luster. I've seen alot of these with clean and/or PL fields but not this clean with this thick of luster. At least not in my hands.

    I guess I am just a little giddy because I paid $60 for this thing.....and I know that if the 3 or 4 ticks don't hold it down, it has the surfaces to make it in to a 66 slab.


    Thanks for all your help. >>



    Please report back on the submission results
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • derrybderryb Posts: 37,330 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Tbar,
    I'd say the reverse marks will keep it from a 67, but a 66 is an 80% definite. Very nice strike, nice coin.

    Capital investment depends on confidence. - Martin Armstrong

  • fcfc Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭
    frankly, based on the pics, i have never seen a cleaner commem
    like that unless it was in a 67 slab. the luster looks awesome!

    those hits on the rev are not that bad and everyone knows the
    obv is the majority of the grade.

    even if only a 66, one heck of a coin there! nice score.
  • derrybderryb Posts: 37,330 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ok, the masters have spoken. image

    Send it in and be sure to let us know the results!

    Capital investment depends on confidence. - Martin Armstrong

  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭
    If you enhance the image you can see a line on the cheek that runs into the hair and a gouge between the globes.
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 20,134 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm going to pee on this parade and say 64. The hits on the sail on the reverse are in a prime focal spot and a deal-breaker for 65+ for me. Take the coin out of the 2x2 and reshoot, and you should get better contrast. Also, set your exposure a little darker and see how the pictures turn out.
    John
    Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
  • TbarTbar Posts: 521
    new pics...
  • fcfc Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭


    << <i>new pics... >>



    well those pics show many more small tiny marks then i saw before
    especially on the obv.

    i am going to throw out the 67 swag i had and say solid 65 shot
    66 if the moons are aligned. i thought the coin was much much cleaner.

    still the coin is a beauty. the luster in the fields looks very very nice.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...