Sad thing is, if you shinied it up a bit with some baking soda, and resent it, they'd give it a 30. It's becoming pitiful re: the inconsistency of grading and moreso, what's making it in these days (PCGS). That is a PQ coin and is a solid VF, but not worth resubmitting as true Barber collectors know originality and will pay for quality coinage.
Here is only one of 2 remaining halves from my set, bought raw off ebay before the big blastoff... graded 2004.
Do your best to avoid circular arguments, as it will help you reason better, because better reasoning is often a result of avoiding circular arguments.
Go to PCGS photo grade and there VF20-35 examples are similar to yours. The coin is indeed a F-15, but I could see it in a VF-20 holder. Seriously, go to the PCGS photo grade and look at the barber half VF-30 example and I say your coin is nicer. This is why I started and bought 2 VF-35 Barber halves. Both were so far different I gave up on the half series and focus on the dimes now and raw is good in my book.
Going through my own Barber Half collection I located a coin that possesses almost an identical look to the 1912-S in question in this thread. I've created a composite image so you can compare them.
Ignoring the difference in image clarity, I think just about everyone would agree the coins are virtually identical in amount of wear AND wear pattern. But here's the kicker. PCGS gave the 1912-S a grade of F12; PCGS gave my 1910 a grade of VF35. So we have essentially identical coins receiving wildly different grades. As one would guess from my prior comments in this thread, I disagree with BOTH assessments. Both coins should have graded VF30. I base my grading opinion on my 14 years of collecting VF and XF Barber Halves exclusively and having seen and/or handled tens of thousands of examples during that time. I'm not trying to "toot my own horn", but I've become very adept at assessing CONSISTENT grades to coins of this series.
Comments
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I love the obverse.
And thanks again for the 00-O, Chris.
Very nice looking half by the way.
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
https://n1m.com/bobbysmith1
.....................................................
siliconvalleycoins.com
Here is only one of 2 remaining halves from my set, bought raw off ebay before the big blastoff... graded 2004.
<< <i>Thanks for your guesses. I think they missed the boat on this one. I graded it a solid 25, I lost!
NAILED IT!
I'd love to own it.
<< <i>
<< <i>Thanks for your guesses. I think they missed the boat on this one. I graded it a solid 25, I lost!
NAILED IT!
Yep... and IN MY OPINION both you and PCGS got this one wrong. Congrats!
it's hard to get the font correct with a Sharpie.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I gave it a VF 25 - and I see very little difference between
the one you posted, Chris and the one and the one Don posted.
I only have one image of another circulated 12-S
but in PCGS 45 so its not a good comparison.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
I've created a composite image so you can compare them.
Ignoring the difference in image clarity, I think just about everyone would agree the coins are virtually identical in amount of wear AND wear
pattern. But here's the kicker. PCGS gave the 1912-S a grade of F12; PCGS gave my 1910 a grade of VF35. So we have essentially identical
coins receiving wildly different grades. As one would guess from my prior comments in this thread, I disagree with BOTH assessments. Both
coins should have graded VF30. I base my grading opinion on my 14 years of collecting VF and XF Barber Halves exclusively and having seen
and/or handled tens of thousands of examples during that time. I'm not trying to "toot my own horn", but I've become very adept at assessing
CONSISTENT grades to coins of this series.