IT will holder. The people who have held this coin throughly believe it is a looker and gradeable. IMHO the AT does, in no way, diminish the importance of this coin; to me.
<< <i>IT will holder. The people who have held this coin throughly believe it is a looker and gradeable. IMHO the AT does, in no way, diminish the importance of this coin; to me. >>
Personally, I don't think it's in PCGS' best interest to grade this coin. Even when/if a coin exhibits natural toning, simply being the victim of a widely varying opinion can be enough to seal the bodybag. From what I can tell reading these posts, it would appear that the opinion isn't even that varied. AT seems to be the concensus.
The color is probably accented by the photograph but I see natural toning all the way on this. I once had an 09 RD which had these same red to violet toning pattern. The reverse on these coins is frequently different from the obverse.
I say NT and it will grade. PR65RB. If the reverse was a little brighter..it would go RD.
I was speaking to a few people the other day and if the obverse color covered the WHOLE coin then it would have graded without question. Since it is crescent toned like this it makes it questionable in the eyes of some-
However, this toning is IN the coin- It does not lay on top of the coin like some induced toning I have seen. I have the year set of MPL's and this coin's toning is not much different than my 1913 and the target toning on my 1914. When I submit the coin again I will have tru-view pictures taken- I believe the pictures I posted are indicative of the luster but it exacerbates the color a bit. Make no doubt gentlemen- This coin in hand is a lovely lovely example and I am very very happy to have this coin- Holdered or not-
Thanks for the insight and feedback guys- I appreciate it.
It sure does look like an exceptionally nice coin. I wish you the best of luck in your submission, hoping PCGS sends it back 65RB. Would definitely get you a few "You Suck" votes.
The the "color" could easily be natural. It's a textbook for lincolns stored in sulfur paper/boards to tone from magenta to baby blue then to green as a natural progression. The side in contact with the paper can tone completely to green while the other side tones on the edges as the gases leak around the edges of the coin from the hidden side to tone only the periphery.
But was the obverse worked on? So they are more susceptible to retoning with color around ther periphery. I think the reverse is intact and naturally toned.
Similar coloration, I know I'm kind of comparing tangerines to oranges but here goes: Mint Set Copper Coin
My belief is that if I sent it to NGC it would holder with no questions and would be a 65RB! I, however, have my whole set of MPL's and the doubles are ALL in PCGS and thus I want to them to be in PCGS holders for storage simplicity hehehehe.
As far as the reverse- the coin is 100% natural. The area where they are flagging the coin is the crescent coloring on the obverse. The reverse is perfect green/red/blue hues of MPL's. I thorughly enjoy this coin!
<< <i>waterzooey - You seem very determined to get your coin in a PCGS holder. Would it bother you if it was in a genuine holder ?
I will say with all my knowledge the color on the obverse is not natural. The true color of Matte proof Lincolns should not be into the coin.
It may holder and it may not but I will agree with you that your coin is pretty.
Stewart >>
Stewart, without talking about the specific coin in this thread for a moment, am I understanding you correctly that you believe if color on Proof Lincoln cents is "into the coin" than it's not natural? That can't be what you mean?
By no means does the color sit on top of the attached coin- it is firmly ensconced within this coin- My contention all along is this- If my 1916 MPL was toned fully on the obverse and not just in that slight crescent pattern we would not be discussing genuine vs graded slab but Why is it only grade PR 6X. The color is in the coin and that is why I do not care if the coin grades and will be comfortable with it in a genuine holder- but I will try once more to get it graded before I put it away for a few years in the SDB.
Heres a truview of a 1909 proof which I owned once and have since sold to anothe forum member. PCGS PR65RD The toning pattern seems very much like the 1916 in the OP.
Oh and just an FYI none of the coins I have posted in this post are for sale at this time. All data I am trying to acquire is just knowledge not to later put my coin up for sale.
<< <i>Heres a truview of a 1909 proof which I owned once and have since sold to anothe forum member. PCGS PR65RD The toning pattern seems very much like the 1916 in the OP. >>
I don't think the actual COLORS are are issue. The issue is that the obverse of the 16's colors are not as well integrated as Ambro15's 1909, the 16's toning looks "sped-up," thus, AT'd.
I would disagree 100%. I assume it is the picture- To see this coin you would know immediately it was not AT'd.
The 09 that is posted is VERY similar- I think the thing that is throwing people off is just the great amount of luster that is present. I think the luster is making the colors pop.
I will post pictures once I get it in the 65 r/b slab.
<< <i>I would disagree 100%. I assume it is the picture- To see this coin you would know immediately it was not AT'd.
The 09 that is posted is VERY similar- I think the thing that is throwing people off is just the great amount of luster that is present. I think the luster is making the colors pop.
I will post pictures once I get it in the 65 r/b slab. >>
I hope for the best and hope that is DOES slab. True, basing off one picture is hard to do but since that is all we have to work with right now that is the only opinion we can give.
waterzooey
Posts: 412
Comments
Edited to add: Which is too bad because I think it would holder otherwise. It is still a nice coin though.
WS
Having not seen the coin in hand, I would not comment based on those images. If it is truly a 16 MPL, send it in, there's only upside.
Jack
<< <i>IT will holder. The people who have held this coin throughly believe it is a looker and gradeable. IMHO the AT does, in no way, diminish the importance of this coin; to me. >>
Welcome to the boards. Who are "the people?"
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
That is not a typo.
Hoping I'm wrong...Mike
No it is confirmed proof by PCGS. It has ALL of the diagnostics and in hand the luster is out of this world.
People who have looked/held this coin- 1 MPL guy from the board and then I had the coin at a few shows.
We believe the coin is 64/65 but it is sexy~!
Looks like a 65 to me. Why do you say 64? I see a few hits on the obverse, but nothing that jumps out and says 64 to me.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
I say NT and it will grade. PR65RB. If the reverse was a little brighter..it would go RD.
However, this toning is IN the coin- It does not lay on top of the coin like some induced toning I have seen. I have the year set of MPL's and this coin's toning is not much different than my 1913 and the target toning on my 1914. When I submit the coin again I will have tru-view pictures taken- I believe the pictures I posted are indicative of the luster but it exacerbates the color a bit. Make no doubt gentlemen- This coin in hand is a lovely lovely example and I am very very happy to have this coin- Holdered or not-
Thanks for the insight and feedback guys- I appreciate it.
S
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Ws
But was the obverse worked on? So they are more susceptible to retoning with color around ther periphery. I think the reverse is intact and naturally toned.
Similar coloration, I know I'm kind of comparing tangerines to oranges but here goes:
Mint Set Copper Coin
One guys thoughts,
Jeff
As far as the reverse- the coin is 100% natural. The area where they are flagging the coin is the crescent coloring on the obverse. The reverse is perfect green/red/blue hues of MPL's. I thorughly enjoy this coin!
I will keep you posted once it holders.
S
waterzooey - You seem very determined to get your coin in a PCGS holder. Would it bother you if it was in a genuine holder ?
I will say with all my knowledge the color on the obverse is not natural. The true color of Matte proof Lincolns should not be into the coin.
It may holder and it may not but I will agree with you that your coin is pretty.
Stewart
<< <i>waterzooey - You seem very determined to get your coin in a PCGS holder. Would it bother you if it was in a genuine holder ?
I will say with all my knowledge the color on the obverse is not natural. The true color of Matte proof Lincolns should not be into the coin.
It may holder and it may not but I will agree with you that your coin is pretty.
Stewart >>
Stewart, without talking about the specific coin in this thread for a moment, am I understanding you correctly that you believe if color on Proof Lincoln cents is "into the coin" than it's not natural? That can't be what you mean?
Mr. Blay,
By no means does the color sit on top of the attached coin- it is firmly ensconced within this coin- My contention all along is this- If my 1916 MPL was toned fully on the obverse and not just in that slight crescent pattern we would not be discussing genuine vs graded slab but Why is it only grade PR 6X. The color is in the coin and that is why I do not care if the coin grades and will be comfortable with it in a genuine holder- but I will try once more to get it graded before I put it away for a few years in the SDB.
S
Oh and just an FYI none of the coins I have posted in this post are for sale at this time. All data I am trying to acquire is just knowledge not to later put my coin up for sale.
TIA
S
<< <i>Heres a truview of a 1909 proof which I owned once and have since sold to anothe forum member. PCGS PR65RD The toning pattern seems very much like the 1916 in the OP. >>
I don't think the actual COLORS are are issue. The issue is that the obverse of the 16's colors are not as well integrated as Ambro15's 1909, the 16's toning looks "sped-up," thus, AT'd.
The 09 that is posted is VERY similar- I think the thing that is throwing people off is just the great amount of luster that is present. I think the luster is making the colors pop.
I will post pictures once I get it in the 65 r/b slab.
<< <i>I would disagree 100%. I assume it is the picture- To see this coin you would know immediately it was not AT'd.
The 09 that is posted is VERY similar- I think the thing that is throwing people off is just the great amount of luster that is present. I think the luster is making the colors pop.
I will post pictures once I get it in the 65 r/b slab.
I hope for the best and hope that is DOES slab. True, basing off one picture is hard to do but since that is all we have to work with right now that is the only opinion we can give.