FS:1909 MPL cent PCGS PR65RB "OGH" color!
BWRC
Posts: 1,448 ✭✭✭
$2,500 delivered!
Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
0
Comments
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
Lookin' good, brother.
POB 854
Temecula CA 92593
310-541-7222 office
310-710-2869 cell
www.LSRarecoins.com
Larry@LSRarecoins.com
PCGS Las Vegas June 24-26
Baltimore July 14-17
Chicago August 11-15
Hi Doug,
I would say it's well within the R/B range because it has at least 6% remaining red color, actually quite a bit more than that.
The coin in-hand has great luster, and original mint red (orange-yellow) all along the reverse right side.
It's not really a 'Red-brown' but more like an orange-magenta-green. So I guess it's technically a PR65 OMG
Duane
It's just too complicated to fit in a nice, neat little box of "RB."
But, this is the fun part of collecting .... the subjective part. If every coin fit in a neat little box of BN, RB, or RD, they would all be widgets, right?
You probably just think of me as a fan of Reds. Yes, I am a big fan of Reds. But, before I went Red with my set, I had almost a full set of RB's in 66, including the vdb and the 16. They were beautiful coins, I just chose to go a different direction.
Don't get me wrong. I agree with you totally, and myself own a number of beautiful red coppers. I actually thought that you were referring to Jaime's article.
That's way I mentioned calling the coin an "orange-magenta-green" (joke: OMG!)
I don't thing 'beauty' or eye appeal in the formal sense can be easily quantified, so we have collectors of all types of coins who find beauty the coins they collect. Personally, I have 1950 and 1953 cameo Jeffersons with amazing strike and color that I find as beautiful as many proof 65 MPLs! To each his own, right?
You may find this idea attractive: I actually have developed a patent -pending system of quantifying eye appeal called the AURA™ (soon to be AURA®) system (Acronym: "Axial Ultimate Refractory Angle"). It's sort of similar to the idea of CAC but works on a 1-70 scale, and relates to any and all coin series and is just related to the eye appeal of a given individual coin. Like a quantification of the NGC * system, if you will. I simply want to quantify coins by eye appeal, as a separate designation.
As you say, a coin is not a widget, and the particularities of each coin need be assessed very specifically to determine the merit of that particular coin. Our present system is great, but, IMHO, lacks the specificity to divide or break down coins for their variable attributes (like pure eye appeal).
As to Brian's 1909, I can tell you, under Jaime's rules, the coin is a RB, hands down. It screams
If I were to give the coin an AURA™ number for eye appeal as compared to other MPLs (as my having experience with MPLs), I'd say it has an AURA 64.5-65.5. It's a gem from a strict eye appeal standard.
Duane
I appreciate what you are trying to do in quantifying "eye appeal", but isn't that very subjective depending on the opinions of each individual? For instance, I probably have a prejudice for original red Lincoln cents over beautifully toned Lincoln cents. I may question in my own mind whether the particular red coin is truly original red, but once I have determined that it is, I tend to see the eye appeal differently than I see the eye appeal on a beautifully toned Lincoln cent. I may be in the minority on this, but how can you universally determine eye appeal if some collectors, like me, have a prejudice for red over toned coins? I appreciate your comments.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>Duane,
I appreciate what you are trying to do in quantifying "eye appeal", but isn't that very subjective depending on the opinions of each individual? For instance, I probably have a prejudice for original red Lincoln cents over beautifully toned Lincoln cents. I may question in my own mind whether the particular red coin is truly original red, but once I have determined that it is, I tend to see the eye appeal differently than I see the eye appeal on a beautifully toned Lincoln cent. I may be in the minority on this, but how can you universally determine eye appeal if some collectors, like me, have a prejudice for red over toned coins? I appreciate your comments.
Steve
Steve,
I completely appreciate your argument. But unfortunetly for numismatics, even the present system is 'subjective'. So-called "Grading Arbitrage" works on this very premise. Why do crack-outs some times result in upgrades? One person's "MS58" is another's "MS63". This has been proven in experiments using numismatists of the highest order.
So I don't see the question as one of 'subjective' v. objective, but one of minimizing the actual subjectivity. This is the idea behind "Eagle Eye", CAC and my AURA concept. My patent application describes into great detail as to the working system to achieve this goal of creating 'more' objectivity, or if you like, 'less' subjectivity. It's at it's core incremental.
Sheldon must have struggled with the same question. We are all just building on the ideas of those who came before us. That's innovation, in a nutshell.
Respectfully,
Duane
<< <i>Though Duane's AURA ranking is pretty interesting, I sort of agree with Steve that each person might have a different AURA rating depending on what their eye sees as being appealing on an MPL. For example, in looking at all but the cream of the crop MPLs, there are often very small spots to be found. While some collectors easily dismiss such minor spotting and give more weight to the overall luster, toning and look of the coin, other collectors may focus on such minor spotting and will dismiss a coin completely as those spots may bug them a little more than the next guy, regardless of the toning and other features of the coin. >>
Thanks Mike.
To counter the concerns, what I propose is that a group of numismatists with experience in the specific series 'vote' or find consensus on the AURA grade. Minor spots on a MPL WOULD matter, if they in fact affect the eye appeal, and that's why I say the system is incremental.
A AURA 65.5 would have better eye appeal (and hence, likely more value), than a 64.8 (these AURA numbers given by the group of experts in conjunction with the coins formal grade.
The AURA is a supplement and not a supplant to the present system. As numismatics develop, we try to better quantify our grading. Even temporal conditions are considered in the patent application. just because a coin is an AURA 65 on day one, does not mean it's a AURA 65 on day 365. So this problem is addressed. This is one way to quantify better objective grades for insurance considerations (for one easy example).
Duane