My only seated coin at the moment. I have a thing for any 1883 coins as its 100 years from my birthyear of 1983. This ony has a little weakness in the hair but I love the eye appeal.
Just picked this up yesterday at a local show: PF65 in an old PCGS slab. Now I need to figure out how to get some quality pictures of it. The toning is beautiful and the mirrors are deep and watery.
@JonBrand83 said:
My only seated coin at the moment. I have a thing for any 1883 coins as its 100 years from my birthyear of 1983. This ony has a little weakness in the hair but I love the eye appeal.
Nice dime! I’m also fond of coins from 1884 for the same reason as you since I was born in 1984. I’m working on a proof set from this year and finding nicely toned proofs is proving to be a challenge!
Just received this 1857-S VF35 with a chopmark. Shown below is the dealer's photo that lightens the toning a bit and accentuates surface chatter. In hand, it's appearance is a close match to my VF35 1857-O (obverse shown below). The chopmark tell a story and doesn't diminish from the overall look with nice circ cameo toning, IMO
I decided to only collect AU and higher Seated halves, but broke my own rules. Actually, my coin addiction did the buying and I was only along for the ride. PCGS XF45
Oh, and I bought this coin raw just because I liked it. No hairlines and looks AU58. This one won't ever see a plastic holder on my watch.
@Realone I can only think of 2 reasons
1 It's a Seated Liberty Coin ( title of thread:Please post your Seated Liberty images.)
2-I own it
That's the only reasons I can think of.
Here is an image of it
@Realone I can only think of 2 reasons
1 It's a Seated Liberty Coin ( title of thread:Please post your Seated Liberty images.)
2-I own it
That's the only reasons I can think of.
Here is an image of it
I was just wondering if you showed it because there is a rare die marriage for that year per the late MrHalfdime.
TY
@Realone I must say I have no idea if it's a rare die marriage for that year.
I'll have to investigate it.
@Realone said:
I was just wondering if you showed it because there is a rare die marriage for that year per the late MrHalfdime.
TY
@Twobitcollector said: @Realone I must say I have no idea if it's a rare die marriage for that year.
I'll have to investigate it.
This coin has very strong clashing, and @MrHalfDime wrote in 2013 (for a similar coin):
The 1854 half dime that you cited is ...
somewhat typical of many examples for this date. Severe clashing, even worse than
exhibited on your example, is not unusual.
Because of the ambiguity of the Valentine variety
descriptions, it is always difficult, and sometimes impossible, to attribute
die marriages for the mid and later dates of Liberty Seated half dimes. Dr. Valentine
describes just six (6) die marriages for the 1854 date, but provides photographic
plates of both obverse and reverse for only V1, V2, and V3; there are no plates
for V5, and his V4 and V6 are represented by only one side each.
@MrHalfDime had 37 coins for 1854 in his reference collection, of which he attributed
8 to V-1 to V-4a,
10 to 3 new varieties (that were not published, but he described one with a shattered reverse in his forum post,
and another had a MPD 8 in the dentils below 5 of which @Realone has a nice example), and
19 were unattributed (several had various die rotations, which he liked to study).
It appears that many of the 1854 dies had the date in the hub, which means the date position does not help
distinguish between those dies.
So possibly when I write the 1854 attribution guide, a lot of it will be based on different clash patterns,
which can identify different die states, but clashing does not usually strictly identify different dies.
And with all the varying rotations in 1854, the same dies could produce several different clashes,
so that method could fail.
@Realone said:
I was just wondering if you showed it because there is a rare die marriage for that year per the late MrHalfdime.
TY
@Twobitcollector said: @Realone I must say I have no idea if it's a rare die marriage for that year.
I'll have to investigate it.
This coin has very strong clashing, and @MrHalfDime wrote in 2013 (for a similar coin):
The 1854 half dime that you cited is ...
somewhat typical of many examples for this date. Severe clashing, even worse than
exhibited on your example, is not unusual.
Because of the ambiguity of the Valentine variety
descriptions, it is always difficult, and sometimes impossible, to attribute
die marriages for the mid and later dates of Liberty Seated half dimes. Dr. Valentine
describes just six (6) die marriages for the 1854 date, but provides photographic
plates of both obverse and reverse for only V1, V2, and V3; there are no plates
for V5, and his V4 and V6 are represented by only one side each.
@MrHalfDime had 37 coins for 1854 in his reference collection, of which he attributed
8 to V-1 to V-4a,
10 to 3 new varieties (that were not published, but he described one with a shattered reverse in his forum post,
and another had a MPD 8 in the dentils below 5 of which @Realone has a nice example), and
19 were unattributed (several had various die rotations, which he liked to study).
It appears that many of the dies had the date in the hub, which means the date position does not help
distinguish between those dies.
So possibly when I write the 1854 attribution guide, a lot of it will be based on different clash patterns,
which can identify different die states, but clashing does not usually strictly identify different dies.
And with all the varying rotations in 1854, the same dies could produce several different clashes,
so that method could fail.
@yosclimber Thank you Now I see the clashing. Interesting
I fired up my Dino-Lite
Yes, the 1853 half dimes often have deep clashes like the 1854.
I guess the Philadelphia mint was so busy striking those 13 million 1853 half dimes that they weren't that concerned about clash marks?
Comments
Pics for this PM, newp into Paesan's Stash, PC50:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All Of Us
My only seated coin at the moment. I have a thing for any 1883 coins as its 100 years from my birthyear of 1983. This ony has a little weakness in the hair but I love the eye appeal.
Jbknifeandcoin.com
IG: jb_rarities
Just picked this up yesterday at a local show: PF65 in an old PCGS slab. Now I need to figure out how to get some quality pictures of it. The toning is beautiful and the mirrors are deep and watery.
Sorry no picture of the reverse handy but just as nice. Coin has been cac’d since I bought it.
Nice dime! I’m also fond of coins from 1884 for the same reason as you since I was born in 1984. I’m working on a proof set from this year and finding nicely toned proofs is proving to be a challenge!
Love the 1883 !! Very nice
Beautiful coins, thanks for posting.
Pics for this PM, fresh into Paesan's Stash, PC55:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Pics for this PPM, newp into Paesan's Stash, PC6:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
My latest NEWP !!!
1862 MS64+
Kudbegud - Lots of luster for a 64+.
Pics for this PM, newp into Paesan's Stash, PC25:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Nothing fancy just a nice raw coin I have.
Shout out to fellow member for this beauty...XF45 MPD FS-301
45 That's a strong strike for a 50-o
Pics for this PM, another newp into Paesan's Stash, P58:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Pics for this PM, one that got away. Used to belong to my friend Elmo, PC40:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Not the best coins, and not very good pics (taken in 2007 with a point and shoot), but it'll have to do for now!
Rocking my "shiny-object-syndrome"!!!
Lafayette Grading Set
Common date, but I am enjoying shiny over "rare".
Pics for this PM, not a grade seen every day, PC58+:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
JBN - Nice coin.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Pics for this PM, a blast from the past (a Walt K) coin, PC40:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All Of Us
Purchased this coin raw at the local B&M. Just doing my part to keep the little guy in business.
Just received this 1857-S VF35 with a chopmark. Shown below is the dealer's photo that lightens the toning a bit and accentuates surface chatter. In hand, it's appearance is a close match to my VF35 1857-O (obverse shown below). The chopmark tell a story and doesn't diminish from the overall look with nice circ cameo toning, IMO
I don’t remember if I posted before but here’s my dirty arrows and rays!
Collector of randomness. Photographer at PCGS. Lover of Harry Potter.
Barberian - neat chop mark on a seated half.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
I decided to only collect AU and higher Seated halves, but broke my own rules. Actually, my coin addiction did the buying and I was only along for the ride. PCGS XF45
Oh, and I bought this coin raw just because I liked it. No hairlines and looks AU58. This one won't ever see a plastic holder on my watch.
I don't think I've posted on this therad yet.
Wonderful coins posted lately. Thanks for sharing.
Pics for this PM, newp into Paesan's Stash, PC58:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
I picked this one up at the FUN auction a few weeks back and it just came in the mail today. I love it!
SeatedToners - What a beauty!
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
@Realone I can only think of 2 reasons
1 It's a Seated Liberty Coin ( title of thread:Please post your Seated Liberty images.)
2-I own it
That's the only reasons I can think of.
Here is an image of it
INYNWHWeTrust-TexasNationals,ajaan,blu62vette
coinJP, Outhaul ,illini420,MICHAELDIXON, Fade to Black,epcjimi1,19Lyds,SNMAN,JerseyJoe, bigjpst, DMWJR , lordmarcovan, Weiss,Mfriday4962,UtahCoin,Downtown1974,pitboss,RichieURich,Bullsitter,JDsCoins,toyz4geo,jshaulis, mustanggt, SNMAN
1867 pcgs au53
@Realone I must say I have no idea if it's a rare die marriage for that year.
I'll have to investigate it.
INYNWHWeTrust-TexasNationals,ajaan,blu62vette
coinJP, Outhaul ,illini420,MICHAELDIXON, Fade to Black,epcjimi1,19Lyds,SNMAN,JerseyJoe, bigjpst, DMWJR , lordmarcovan, Weiss,Mfriday4962,UtahCoin,Downtown1974,pitboss,RichieURich,Bullsitter,JDsCoins,toyz4geo,jshaulis, mustanggt, SNMAN
Pickwick- such an underrated date and so tough to find nice. She definitely was a stand out when I saw your set in person. Congrats on finding her...
.
Successful transactions with-Boosibri,lkeigwin,TomB,Broadstruck,coinsarefun,Type2,jom,ProfLiz, UltraHighRelief,Barndog,EXOJUNKIE,ldhair,fivecents,paesan,Crusty...
Pickwick - Nice. And very tough IMO.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
This coin has very strong clashing, and @MrHalfDime wrote in 2013 (for a similar coin):
@MrHalfDime had 37 coins for 1854 in his reference collection, of which he attributed
8 to V-1 to V-4a,
10 to 3 new varieties (that were not published, but he described one with a shattered reverse in his forum post,
and another had a MPD 8 in the dentils below 5 of which @Realone has a nice example), and
19 were unattributed (several had various die rotations, which he liked to study).
It appears that many of the 1854 dies had the date in the hub, which means the date position does not help
distinguish between those dies.
So possibly when I write the 1854 attribution guide, a lot of it will be based on different clash patterns,
which can identify different die states, but clashing does not usually strictly identify different dies.
And with all the varying rotations in 1854, the same dies could produce several different clashes,
so that method could fail.
@yosclimber Thank you Now I see the clashing. Interesting
I fired up my Dino-Lite
INYNWHWeTrust-TexasNationals,ajaan,blu62vette
coinJP, Outhaul ,illini420,MICHAELDIXON, Fade to Black,epcjimi1,19Lyds,SNMAN,JerseyJoe, bigjpst, DMWJR , lordmarcovan, Weiss,Mfriday4962,UtahCoin,Downtown1974,pitboss,RichieURich,Bullsitter,JDsCoins,toyz4geo,jshaulis, mustanggt, SNMAN
Speaking of clashing...
Yes, the 1853 half dimes often have deep clashes like the 1854.
I guess the Philadelphia mint was so busy striking those 13 million 1853 half dimes that they weren't that concerned about clash marks?