<< <i>Yep, it's mine. I decided to take a couple shots of it. Can you believe I have never sent it in! >>
Can you share any story behind this coin? If this coin is genuine and looks like the photos while in hand, I can't imagine how I would have never sent it in!
Follow me on Twitter @wtcgroup Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
That second photo you posted shows what looks like a really rough or scraped up bottom chin that doesn't look right. The whole coin does have an odd finish to me but it could be the photos.
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say there is something wrong with the chin. There is, the same thing that is wrong with all of them!
Apparently, it is against forum rules to own a nice ungraded coin? My kids know what to do if something happens to me. Outside of that, she only needs grading if I want to sell it.
<< <i>I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say there is something wrong with the chin. There is, the same thing that is wrong with all of them! >>
Yes, the banded chin. It is a proof coin. Nothing wrong with owning a nice ungraded coin, but it exacerbates the process of evaluating the coin when proper images aren't provided. Taking a set head-on will help.
I thought I was pretty strait. You have to angle some on a proof or it looks really strange and dark. At least Morgans. So many are ugly nasty toning, thus a clean white one apparently looks wrong, at least from the comments here.
<< <i>I thought I was pretty strait. You have to angle some on a proof or it looks really strange and dark. At least Morgans. So many are ugly nasty toning, thus a clean white one apparently looks wrong, at least from the comments here. >>
You do not need to angle the coin. Straight on would allow us to see the fields, hairlines etc. What you have provided is a mock glamour shot. The provided shots are still titled just enough to hide something.
Now with the larger pics it looks much less like a Cal Cameo and that is a very good thing.
<< <i>I thought I was pretty strait. You have to angle some on a proof or it looks really strange and dark. At least Morgans. So many are ugly nasty toning, thus a clean white one apparently looks wrong, at least from the comments here. >>
You do not need to angle the coin. Straight on would allow us to see the fields, hairlines etc. What you have provided is a mock glamour shot. The provided shots are still titled just enough to hide something.
Now with the larger pics it looks much less like a Cal Cameo and that is a very good thing. >>
Mock glamour shot? Hide something. What is this, a trial?? Just posting pics of a nice coin.
The coin it is beautiful but at the same time I have an uneasy gut feeling about it and I can't figure out what it is maybe the chrome look of it? I dunno not sure maybe I haven't seen that many Morgan proofs mainly deep mirror proof likes I'm hoping that it's the real deal.
<< <i>Here is come black and white straight on for you, die polish, nicks, hits, pitting..... >>
Let me see you angle that coin and make it look nice. You just won't give up. Whatever makes you happy. I think its funny to watch someone go to such extremes rather than admit he was wrong, or just stay quiet!
<< <i>Here is come black and white straight on for you, die polish, nicks, hits, pitting..... >>
Let me see you angle that coin and make it look nice. You just won't give up. Whatever makes you happy. I think its funny to watch someone go to such extremes rather than admit he was wrong, or just stay quiet! >>
I was just posting a black and white coin since that is what the thread.
I dont have any angle shots, this is another look, but not what I prefer.
When I first saw the subject coin, it had 3 responses at most. I was going to reply "I could go swimming in that!", but I did not because I thought it looked "fake" or "altered" - in any case wrong. Odd surface. Orange peely, with strangeness around some stars, weird bit(es) to the right of the eagle etc. I don't claim to know Proof Morgans, just a passing dalliance with an alleged 95 in threads past, but the coin seems odd, with some weirdness on the surfaces, fields, the stuff under the chin. It has the denticles, the square appearance of numerals...and some odd chrome look that unsettles me with the above observations noted. This is from images only.
Comments
gotta be a proof
.
<--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -
Yep, it's mine. I decided to take a couple shots of it. Can you believe I have never sent it in!
<< <i>paperweight? >>
Funny! Wouldn't it be Sweet for them to mistake it for a DMPL??!!
<< <i>California Cameo, polished and whizzed. >>
yup.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
No it's not! WOW!!
Just a proof at an angle. And a nice one!
It looks like it's been tooled.
<< <i>Maybe larger and straight on pictures. >>
I agree. Has the classic "eBay tilt" hiding any flaws.
-Paul
<< <i>Yep, it's mine. I decided to take a couple shots of it. Can you believe I have never sent it in! >>
Yes.
Best wishes,
Eric
There are lots of good coins that have never been seen by any TPG, yet.
<< <i>Yep, it's mine. I decided to take a couple shots of it. Can you believe I have never sent it in! >>
Can you share any story behind this coin? If this coin is genuine and looks like the photos while in hand, I can't imagine how I would have never sent it in!
<< <i>California Cameo, polished and whizzed. >>
I was thinking the same thing.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
Maybe it's the image, dunno.
<< <i>Wow...if that is real.... amazing. That truly needs to be sent in for grading >>
I agree
Better photo's? The pro's wish they could take these!
<< <i>Better photo's? The pro's wish they could take these!
>>
That's better! Wow nice coin...
Successful BST Transactions!SIconbuster, Meltdown, Mission16, slothman2000, RGjohn, braddick, au58lover, allcoinsrule, commemdude, gerard, lablade, PCcoins, greencopper, kaz, tydye, cucamongacoin, mkman123, SeaEaglecoins, Doh!, AnkurJ, Airplanenut, ArizonaJack, JJM,Tee135,LordMarcovan, Swampboy, piecesofme, Ahrensdad,
Why aren't the pictures shot square? Sure looks odd oval.
Lance.
the images are big and clear but ironically enough not sufficient to be 100% imo.
i'm leaning towards proof but a little uneasy after seeing the images enlarged
.
<--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say there is something wrong with the chin. There is, the same thing that is wrong with all of them!
Apparently, it is against forum rules to own a nice ungraded coin? My kids know what to do if something happens to me. Outside of that, she only needs grading if I want to sell it.
<< <i>I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say there is something wrong with the chin. There is, the same thing that is wrong with all of them! >>
Yes, the banded chin. It is a proof coin. Nothing wrong with owning a nice ungraded coin, but it exacerbates the process of evaluating the coin when proper images aren't provided. Taking a set head-on will help.
I thought I was pretty strait. You have to angle some on a proof or it looks really strange and dark. At least Morgans. So many are ugly nasty toning, thus a clean white one apparently looks wrong, at least from the comments here.
<< <i>I thought I was pretty strait. You have to angle some on a proof or it looks really strange and dark. At least Morgans. So many are ugly nasty toning, thus a clean white one apparently looks wrong, at least from the comments here. >>
You do not need to angle the coin. Straight on would allow us to see the fields, hairlines etc. What you have provided is a mock glamour shot. The provided shots are still titled just enough to hide something.
Now with the larger pics it looks much less like a Cal Cameo and that is a very good thing.
<< <i>
<< <i>I thought I was pretty strait. You have to angle some on a proof or it looks really strange and dark. At least Morgans. So many are ugly nasty toning, thus a clean white one apparently looks wrong, at least from the comments here. >>
You do not need to angle the coin. Straight on would allow us to see the fields, hairlines etc. What you have provided is a mock glamour shot. The provided shots are still titled just enough to hide something.
Now with the larger pics it looks much less like a Cal Cameo and that is a very good thing. >>
Mock glamour shot? Hide something. What is this, a trial?? Just posting pics of a nice coin.
The reason for the thread was how cool I think B&W Morgans look. I still think that!
<< <i>The reason for the thread was how cool I think B&W Morgans look. I still think that! >>
reverse?
<< <i>Here is come black and white straight on for you, die polish, nicks, hits, pitting.....
>>
Let me see you angle that coin and make it look nice. You just won't give up. Whatever makes you happy. I think its funny to watch someone go to such extremes rather than admit he was wrong, or just stay quiet!
<< <i>
<< <i>Here is come black and white straight on for you, die polish, nicks, hits, pitting.....
>>
Let me see you angle that coin and make it look nice. You just won't give up. Whatever makes you happy. I think its funny to watch someone go to such extremes rather than admit he was wrong, or just stay quiet! >>
I was just posting a black and white coin since that is what the thread.
I dont have any angle shots, this is another look, but not what I prefer.
<< <i>
<< <i>The reason for the thread was how cool I think B&W Morgans look. I still think that! >>
reverse? >>
I'm worried, too.
but I'm no morganologist either.
btw, I like the contrast, too.
When I first saw the subject coin, it had 3 responses at most. I was going to reply "I could go swimming in that!", but I did not because I thought it looked "fake" or "altered" - in any case wrong. Odd surface. Orange peely, with strangeness around some stars, weird bit(es) to the right of the eagle etc. I don't claim to know Proof Morgans, just a passing dalliance with an alleged 95 in threads past, but the coin seems odd, with some weirdness on the surfaces, fields, the stuff under the chin. It has the denticles, the square appearance of numerals...and some odd chrome look that unsettles me with the above observations noted. This is from images only.
Best wishes,
Eric
Edit for spelling.