<< <i>Why is the obverse so different in color AND appearance ???
Stewart
I would say either a B/B (BodyBag) or a genuine holder >>
I don't know why the difference. The obverse is relatively dark and an obvious Brown. The reverse is mostly Red, very comparable to the 1909 shown below except the red is covering more area. It is currently in a PCGS 65BN holder.
Obverse technically brown (claims to RB aside) even though reverse is clearly red brown (or even red on a good day - certainly at least compared to some reds already in holders) but PCGS would probably grade as BN.
Did that answer it or did this hedge guy hedge too much?
Looks alright to me, but I will say BN thanks to the obverse weighting of the grading. Also, depending on the strength of the luster, maybe only a 64. Still, quite high end and desirable for that number.
<< <i>Why is the obverse so different in color AND appearance ???
Stewart
I would say either a B/B (BodyBag) or a genuine holder >>
BN
I think what Stewart is seeing is a worn obverse die resulting in a satiny appearance and a more matte like reverse. I believe 1911 and 1913 are most commonly found with satin and matte finishes.
Either designation is fine with me. I was just curious as to where the cutoff is. While the obverse is unquestionably BN, the reverse has enough original Rd that would allow the coin to fall into the defined area required for an RB designation. The PCGS definition for RB is: A copper coin that has from 5 to 95 percent of its original mint color remaining (RB).
So far, all good answers. I'm just trying to learn and understand.
Owned and studied them both. Under the PCGS Official Guide (page 70): "Note: A coin with one one full original red and the other side fully brown, or with only traces of red, will be designated RB." Under the rule, The 1909 has too much reverse brown/RB, but the 1911 has an entirely red reverse, and a bit of obverse red as well. It will regrade a RB, Bob. The grader missed. The upgrade from BN to RB will make you a K+. The 1909, I think, is a proper grade. My theory on 'why' to answer Stewart, is that both coin's reverses were protected in an airtight holder of some sort, or protected in some way, while the exposed open air obverses toned. It's the best I could think of.
I don't think the coins were played with on the obverses, and I'm sure of the reverses being red and red-brown - no BBs.
In terms of favorites? Coin dependent. BN, RB and RD, depending on the coin. But has to be natural, and have eye appeal.
Almost forgot: Bob - the '11 has reverse crack through the "O" in ONE on the reverse, if you have not caught it. That with smooth obverse, it's a LDS, IMO. The'09 I can't figure.
Brian's 1915 is a very nice coin. But is slightly darker on both sides than the other two.
Something should be done digitally to assign RD to BN scale numbers to the pixels that make up the truview image, and create a program which would read the tru view image and calculate the color vs. percentage of color coverage and assign an official color designation in that manner. Why Not? They have already introduced mathematics into the grading process by requiring percentages to be made, and we know what the color RD is at its finest and we know what BN is so why not assign each color step toward full RD in a digital way, and then use this information to create a set of color statistics which would determine the official Color.
Agreed. Please do read the new MPL book. Without letting the cat out of the bag, using MPLs as examples, I wrote an article or two about coins, but more importantly, as I mention in the book, one of the articles is now being flushed out in greater detail and filed as a patent application to address some of the aspects of grading, and your idea is respectfully being given some coverage. What you mention is technically important and challenging, but can but pulled off. The patent talks more about specific aspects of grading in the larger eye appeal sense that I hope the industry will pick up on, as it will make for a better "sight-unseen" trading. Please read - any feedback will be appreciated. I don't have all the answers, but am trying to make our hobby better, and add another level of certainty to the way we grade our beautiful treasures.
I think (hope) that you will find the ideas stimulating.
robec
Posts: 6,608 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
WS
-Paul
It's Brown/Red...
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase/2819
Why is the obverse so different in color AND appearance ???
Stewart
I would say either a B/B (BodyBag) or a genuine holder
<< <i>Why is the obverse so different in color AND appearance ???
Stewart
I would say either a B/B (BodyBag) or a genuine holder >>
I don't know why the difference. The obverse is relatively dark and an obvious Brown. The reverse is mostly Red, very comparable to the 1909 shown below except the red is covering more area. It is currently in a PCGS 65BN holder.
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Did that answer it or did this hedge guy hedge too much?
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<< <i>Why is the obverse so different in color AND appearance ???
Stewart
I would say either a B/B (BodyBag) or a genuine holder >>
BN
I think what Stewart is seeing is a worn obverse die resulting in a satiny appearance and a more matte like reverse. I believe 1911 and 1913 are most commonly found with satin and matte finishes.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
WS
So far, all good answers. I'm just trying to learn and understand.
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
WS
I don't think the coins were played with on the obverses, and I'm sure of the reverses being red and red-brown - no BBs.
In terms of favorites? Coin dependent. BN, RB and RD, depending on the coin. But has to be natural, and have eye appeal.
Almost forgot: Bob - the '11 has reverse crack through the "O" in ONE on the reverse, if you have not caught it. That with smooth obverse, it's a LDS, IMO. The'09 I can't figure.
Brian's 1915 is a very nice coin. But is slightly darker on both sides than the other two.
Agreed. Please do read the new MPL book. Without letting the cat out of the bag, using MPLs as examples, I wrote an article or two about coins, but more importantly, as I mention in the book, one of the articles is now being flushed out in greater detail and filed as a patent application to address some of the aspects of grading, and your idea is respectfully being given some coverage. What you mention is technically important and challenging, but can but pulled off. The patent talks more about specific aspects of grading in the larger eye appeal sense that I hope the industry will pick up on, as it will make for a better "sight-unseen" trading. Please read - any feedback will be appreciated. I don't have all the answers, but am trying to make our hobby better, and add another level of certainty to the way we grade our beautiful treasures.
I think (hope) that you will find the ideas stimulating.
Duane