If the coin looks like it does on eBay, there would be a STAR. If it looks like the image by the folks who graded it (NGC)..............no STAR. Case closed.
I've been consistent in my statements. I noted that it had a soft strike 2 days ago. I believe that such coins tend to tone up nicer.
Although NGC images are crude and lack detail; they do capture luster well and this coin has good luster. If it was 'played with'; it was done many years ago and not harshly, as it likely spent a lot of time in an album toning up as it did.
I'm like RickO, as I prefer a whiter coin with good luster and strike, so this would not be a coin for me, as I'd never pay such a premium for color. My only issue is if it is too dark, which I cannot tell w/o seeing it in hand. If it looks anything like the OP photos; I'd find it quite attractive.
I'll be really interested to see cameonut2011's pics, when he receives the coin.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
I suspect that the OP coin looks more like the NGC images than the eBay pictures. a coin with this type of toning generally looks like the eBay pictures if it's held at the right angle in the right light. another thing, everyone keeps alluding to NGC "scanning" their images. when I was at F.U.N. several years ago they were offering images at their luncheon and all those were done with a standard Digital SLR.
my hope is that when the new owner receives the coin he is able to be honest with us about how it really looks.
If we're going to criticize this MS66 for strike weaknesses let's see how the 100X more expensive MS68 compares. There are similar weaknesses in the frontal cap and hand/branch area. Not exactly what I'd call a hammered strike. The coins look somewhat similar to me strike-wise. If the drapery lines on the MS66 don't look fully separated that might be an illusion caused by the variations in toning. From what I can see in the photo the drapery on the MS66 looks pretty full and split. And we are comparing a PCGS 68 to an NGC 66 here. The PCGS Photograde of the MS68 1939 is better struck along with essentially full hand detail.
Miss Liberty MS68 has the same issue with a touch of friction/scraping on the left breast. And there are small ticks running up along the center drapery. I would think ALL MS Walkers seem to have those high point friction and minor tick issues....same for seated halves. Have never seen a MS67/68 seated half w/o some high pt obverse friction. The streaky toning on the MS68 Walker might not appeal to the blast white crowd. In the Heritage photos the fields look like those of a toned proof.
Looks NT to me. Both of them do. There was a second one auctioned on eBay next to OP coin. Rare and beautiful, but not unheard of.
I have existed since the creation of this world and will exist until its end. Only my form will change. For these 80 human life years, I have the benefit of having a functioning body and consciousness. I will not waste this opportunity.
But differentiating NT from AT, along the way, one eventually comes up with a set of rules to clear that hurdle before buying and the amount of money one is willing to back that decision up with. But almost every time I review my toners whether they're certified or not, this question has been a reoccurring one. I just think that one needs a powerful microscope to view just how deep or thick the toning is embedded into the coin, that it's just not a thinner/topical surface effect.
And yes, I'm asking myself.........what am I talking about?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
It appears the 36 D got a grade bump due to color. You normally don't expect to see a gash in Miss Liberty's upper thigh and another one in nearby drapery on a 5. A number of noticeable but not annoying contact marks in these areas, yes, but nothing like this.
I do not like the coin's reverse at all. That color is very easy to manufacture. I run as fast as I can from silver coins with light purple toning.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
Hello Again--- My friend Gary's post has caused me to reply another time.
Experience is what is needed. Knowledge is what is needed. Years of looking at coins both raw and slabbed is what is needed.
Ask yourselves: Have I ever bought a complete set of Walkers? Have I ever bought a complete set of MS Walkers from say 1935--36 to the end in 1947? Have I ever bought "raw" Walkers and submitted them for grading myself? Have I ever "conserved" a Walker by sending it to NCS?
Albums and holders started in 1935 approx. Have you ever seen a Wayte Raymond page? Have you ever bought a set of Walkers that were housed in Wayte pages? How about the Whitman blue books? Ever seen UNC coins in either of these holders?? Would or have you purchased "raw" coins from collections---knowing exactly what you have----or do you depend on the services to decide for you what is appropriate??
If you buy toned coins, do you KNOW what they SHOULD look like----depending on their housing? Or do you only buy what strikes your fancy--or what OTHERS tell you are OK?? Do you buy "market acceptable" coins? Do you know exactly what that means?
While it is definitely TRUE that you should buy whatever that you like. It is also TRUE that you ought to know---we hope before you buy---exactly what you are buying and approx. what it's value should be.
We could also go into dip or conserved coins a little more. But, rather than start a WAR---I'll just say that one should know what is in the TPG holders---before you buy---and I'll leave it at that.
We could go on and on about experience and knowledge. It is, however, IMPORTANT----to buy the books as well as just looking at the coins. The very best Walker book ever written IMHO---is Bruce Fox book written in 1993. That book is as true today as it was in 1993. They tell me that you can find it on the computer---rather than having to buy it. PLEASE LOOK at it when you have the time. You will NOT regret your time spent. As always, I wish all of you the best in your collecting efforts. Bob [supertooth]
<< <i>Hello Again--- My friend Gary's post has caused me to reply another time.
If you buy toned coins, do you KNOW what they SHOULD look like----depending on their housing? Or do you only buy what strikes your fancy--or what OTHERS tell you are OK?? Do you buy "market acceptable" coins? Do you know exactly what that means? >>
Hey folks it's 4th of July, why not light off some fireworks. I learned the hard way years ago not to buy raw coins and gamble with getting them certified. I now let others take that chance and reap the rewards if their bet pays off. I now only buy NGC or PCGS certified coins because no matter what, their reputations have guaranteed value on resale. I personally like uniqueness in my toned collection of mostly walkers. So if they have colors that are pleasing to my eye but are not normally found in that series, then I don't have a problem with it. The Morgan dollar series is rift with the same type of controversial toning that is seldom seen in the walker series yet they don't get the backlash. A lot of factors go into creating different colors on silver based coins, while not excluding the coin doctors, considered elements in the air and surrounding environment. Also the silver content and other metals added to their mix. I find that the year also seems to have a bearing on color proclivity. The early to mid 1880 Morgan dollars are a dime a dozen in outrageous toning. All my off the chart walkers are 1936 and mid forty coins. Can someone explain how that can be. If I was a coin doctor I wouldn't want to be limited to just a few dates to do my magic. There will always be the purists that cherish their shiny white coins which is good for me since they won't be competing with me for the toners. If you want to see an outstanding collection of toned coins check out this gallery.
I predict there is no chance in H*ll you are keeping that for the price paid. I see you're also lighting it up right to the edge of the coin. Dark toning = not much premium for me anyway.
<< <i>I predict there is no chance in H*ll you are keeping that for the price paid. I see you're also lighting it up right to the edge of the coin. Dark toning = not much premium for me anyway. >>
Actually that is ambient lighting. Here is another:
I am very torn. I actually like the coin, but I paid a premium for it assuming that it would be brighter. I want to reach out to the seller but am resistant for fear that it will look like I am attempting to play games, so I probably will just return the piece.
You can now see why it does not have a Star. Certainly no exceptional eye appeal on that toning. Also, seller should be slapped for listing it the way he did. Nothing ticks me off more than images "enhanced" to make a coin look better.
<< <i>You can now see why it does not have a Star. Certainly no exceptional eye appeal on that toning. Also, seller should be slapped for listing it the way he did. Nothing ticks me off more than images "enhanced" to make a coin look better. >>
In fairness, I am not a professional photographer. With that said, the coin is unquestionably darker than I thought it would be.
Cameonut, I have been watching this thread and not chiming in due to the fact that lighting can do many things and none of us had seen the coin in person.
I thank you for stepping in and talking about it AND showing the coin when you received it. I can understand being torn on the decision. It certainly isn't a common looking walker even for a common date. I truly understand wishing it wasn't quite as dark, in hand.
Again, thank you for your info as the only one who has seen it.
FWIW, in my experience, all digital images of toned coins - yes even our hosts' truviews - show enhanced brightness compared to in-hand viewing. The degree of enhancement varies obviously, and with more 'correct' images it's only slightly enhanced, but such is the nature of a backlit digital image. I own a couple coppers which I purchased because the toning was bright and desirable. Upon receiving them I found the "in-hand" look to be much darker than the computer screen look. I kept them because (1) the grade was accurate, and when light hits at 'just the right angle' the colors are indeed as advertised; and (2) it was my money to gamble and I took a chance buying without previewing in person.
In this case, I feel it never hurts to ask the seller such questions. And so I did! But I don't necessarily agree with him after seeing the buyer's images. I would have sent that back already.
"They look great in person, i did brighten the images to show off the colors a little better. But they do look fantastic in person.
- independencecoin >>>
Dear independencecoin,
How do the colors look in person? Is the photo a fair representation or was the saturation bumped up to highlight the color a bit more?
This makes me so glad that I am not addicted to toners. I'm addicted to some other things like scarce to rare varietes of Civil War Tokens in high grade (High grade for these items is Ch AU to MS-64 R&B) which are normally found in Fine or VF, and the same grade range for Dahlonega gold. At least those items have an over all rarity, not just a condition or color rarity.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Wow, what a difference in images. I know you can never get a photo to look exactly what it will look like in hand, especially with all the ways to view a coin image out there, but that Ebay image does appear to be juiced up quite a bit after seeing your pics. I can't blame you if you returned it.
I prefer lightly toned silver coins that have a bit of color around the edge, like what one might find in an old album. They don't generally trade for much of a premium, if any, so it's tough to get hurt by paying too much. It's clear that not everyone agrees with me.
So, everyone that hadn't seen the coin in hand, that was going by "juiced", or scanned, pictures, or even just pictures on the internet, were telling the buyer he was hosed, buried, etc, look to have been wrong.
Last I recall, Cameonut was thinking to return the piece because it was darker than he thought, but he did like it. Of course, all the "experts" jumping all over it probably had an influence in his thinking as well.
So, who made the score then? The original seller, who may have gotten the coin back and refunded the money? Or, Cameonut if he was the one who upgraded it and sent it to auction?
Seems like all the "experts" would have left a lot of $$$ on the table.....
Good, or bad, going by pictures on the internet is not a certain way to make authoritative comments about coins with toning, or coin grades. Sure, one can be "close" or even correct, but I wouldn't want to put my money on it at this point.
So, everyone that hadn't seen the coin in hand, that was going by "juiced", or scanned, pictures, or even just pictures on the internet, were telling the buyer he was hosed, buried, etc, look to have been wrong.
Last I recall, Cameonut was thinking to return the piece because it was darker than he thought, but he did like it. Of course, all the "experts" jumping all over it probably had an influence in his thinking as well.
So, who made the score then? The original seller, who may have gotten the coin back and refunded the money? Or, Cameonut if he was the one who upgraded it and sent it to auction?
Seems like all the "experts" would have left a lot of $$$ on the table.....
Good, or bad, going by pictures on the internet is not a certain way to make authoritative comments about coins with toning, or coin grades. Sure, one can be "close" or even correct, but I wouldn't want to put my money on it at this point.
Some of us collect coins, we don't flip them and aren't out for a "score". I said the coin was ugly a year ago, and I still think it's ugly in the current Heritage Auction. I would not want the coin in my collection, and thus would have never bid on it at the original $1200 NGC MS66 range or the (IMO ridiculous) $6000 PCGS MS67 CAC range.
I don't really think anyone claimed to be "experts" in 2015 either, so much as simply giving our opinions of the coin (which was the point of the thread!). It's convenient that your hindsight is 20-20, but I don't see the point of your post besides to belittle people for giving their opinions.
-Brandon -~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins] -~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
I didn't see this thread until now, and it was fun to read how the story unfolded. I finally got to see the reverse of the coin at the HA link... and I really like it. Doesn't the appearance of the reverse help alleviate any concerns about AT?
Comments
If the coin looks like it does on eBay, there would be a STAR. If it looks like the image by the folks who graded it (NGC)..............no STAR. Case closed.
Although NGC images are crude and lack detail; they do capture luster well and this coin has good luster. If it was 'played with'; it was done many years ago and not harshly, as it likely spent a lot of time in an album toning up as it did.
I'm like RickO, as I prefer a whiter coin with good luster and strike, so this would not be a coin for me, as I'd never pay such a premium for color. My only issue is if it is too dark, which I cannot tell w/o seeing it in hand. If it looks anything like the OP photos; I'd find it quite attractive.
I'll be really interested to see cameonut2011's pics, when he receives the coin.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
my hope is that when the new owner receives the coin he is able to be honest with us about how it really looks.
If we're going to criticize this MS66 for strike weaknesses let's see how the 100X more expensive MS68 compares. There are similar weaknesses in the frontal cap and hand/branch area. Not exactly what I'd call a hammered strike. The coins look somewhat similar to me strike-wise. If the drapery lines on the MS66 don't look fully separated that might be an illusion caused by the variations in toning. From what I can see in the photo the drapery on the MS66 looks pretty full and split. And we are comparing a PCGS 68 to an NGC 66 here. The PCGS Photograde of the MS68 1939 is better struck along with essentially full hand detail.
Miss Liberty MS68 has the same issue with a touch of friction/scraping on the left breast. And there are small ticks running up along the center drapery. I would think ALL MS Walkers seem to have those high point friction and minor tick issues....same for seated halves. Have never seen a MS67/68 seated half w/o some high pt obverse friction. The streaky toning on the MS68 Walker might not appeal to the blast white crowd. In the Heritage photos the fields look like those of a toned proof.
PCGS photograde
My YouTube Channel
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>PCGS does grade coins with outrageous toning such as this one 1936-d MS-65 #50078744
That kind of purple is VERY suspect!
Toning can be cool. And it can be not. Beauty is in the eye …
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
<< <i>What kind, glowing iridescent neon?
Toning can be cool. And it can be not. Beauty is in the eye … >>
Yes, it is iridescent neon. I took another pic of the reverse with lighting at a different angle. See below.
But differentiating NT from AT, along the way, one eventually comes up with a set of rules to clear that hurdle before buying and the amount of money one is willing to back that decision up with. But almost every time I review my toners whether they're certified or not, this question has been a reoccurring one. I just think that one needs a powerful microscope to view just how deep or thick the toning is embedded into the coin, that it's just not a thinner/topical surface effect.
And yes, I'm asking myself.........what am I talking about?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I do not like the coin's reverse at all. That color is very easy to manufacture. I run as fast as I can from silver coins with light purple toning.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Experience is what is needed. Knowledge is what is needed. Years of looking at coins both raw and slabbed is what is needed.
Ask yourselves: Have I ever bought a complete set of Walkers? Have I ever bought a complete set of MS Walkers from say 1935--36 to the end in 1947? Have I ever bought "raw" Walkers and submitted them for grading myself? Have I ever "conserved" a Walker by sending it to NCS?
Albums and holders started in 1935 approx. Have you ever seen a Wayte Raymond page? Have you ever bought a set of Walkers that were housed in Wayte pages? How about the Whitman blue books? Ever seen UNC coins in either of these holders?? Would or have you purchased "raw" coins from collections---knowing exactly what you have----or do you depend on the services to decide for you what is appropriate??
If you buy toned coins, do you KNOW what they SHOULD look like----depending on their housing? Or do you only buy what strikes your fancy--or what OTHERS tell you are OK?? Do you buy "market acceptable" coins? Do you know exactly what that means?
While it is definitely TRUE that you should buy whatever that you like. It is also TRUE that you ought to know---we hope before you buy---exactly what you are buying and approx. what it's value should be.
We could also go into dip or conserved coins a little more. But, rather than start a WAR---I'll just say that one should know what is in the TPG holders---before you buy---and I'll leave it at that.
We could go on and on about experience and knowledge. It is, however, IMPORTANT----to buy the books as well as just looking at the coins. The very best Walker book ever written IMHO---is Bruce Fox book written in 1993. That book is as true today as it was in 1993. They tell me that you can find it on the computer---rather than having to buy it. PLEASE LOOK at it when you have the time. You will NOT regret your time spent. As always, I wish all of you the best in your collecting efforts. Bob [supertooth]
<< <i>Hello Again--- My friend Gary's post has caused me to reply another time.
If you buy toned coins, do you KNOW what they SHOULD look like----depending on their housing? Or do you only buy what strikes your fancy--or what OTHERS tell you are OK?? Do you buy "market acceptable" coins? Do you know exactly what that means? >>
Hey folks it's 4th of July, why not light off some fireworks. I learned the hard way years ago not to buy raw coins and gamble with getting them certified. I now let others take that chance and reap the rewards if their bet pays off. I now only buy NGC or PCGS certified coins because no matter what, their reputations have guaranteed value on resale.
I personally like uniqueness in my toned collection of mostly walkers. So if they have colors that are pleasing to my eye but are not normally found in that series, then I don't have a problem with it. The Morgan dollar series is rift with the same type of controversial toning that is seldom seen in the walker series yet they don't get the backlash.
A lot of factors go into creating different colors on silver based coins, while not excluding the coin doctors, considered elements in the air and surrounding environment. Also the silver content and other metals added to their mix. I find that the year also seems to have a bearing on color proclivity. The early to mid 1880 Morgan dollars are a dime a dozen in outrageous toning. All my off the chart walkers are 1936 and mid forty coins. Can someone explain how that can be. If I was a coin doctor I wouldn't want to be limited to just a few dates to do my magic. There will always be the purists that cherish their shiny white coins which is good for me since they won't be competing with me for the toners. If you want to see an outstanding collection of toned coins check out this gallery.
aurora borealis toners
ps also if you want to see my collection here is a link to it also.
gary sullivan toned coins
I predict there is no chance in H*ll you are keeping that for the price paid. I see you're also lighting it up right to the edge of the coin. Dark toning = not much premium for me anyway.
<< <i>I predict there is no chance in H*ll you are keeping that for the price paid. I see you're also lighting it up right to the edge of the coin. Dark toning = not much premium for me anyway. >>
Actually that is ambient lighting. Here is another:
<< <i>are you keeping it or returning? >>
I am very torn. I actually like the coin, but I paid a premium for it assuming that it would be brighter. I want to reach out to the seller but am resistant for fear that it will look like I am attempting to play games, so I probably will just return the piece.
You can now see why it does not have a Star. Certainly no exceptional eye appeal on that toning. Also, seller should be slapped for listing it the way he did. Nothing ticks me off more than images "enhanced" to make a coin look better.
<< <i>You can now see why it does not have a Star. Certainly no exceptional eye appeal on that toning. Also, seller should be slapped for listing it the way he did. Nothing ticks me off more than images "enhanced" to make a coin look better. >>
In fairness, I am not a professional photographer. With that said, the coin is unquestionably darker than I thought it would be.
I thank you for stepping in and talking about it AND showing the coin when you received it. I can understand being torn on the decision. It certainly isn't a common looking walker even for a common date.
I truly understand wishing it wasn't quite as dark, in hand.
Again, thank you for your info as the only one who has seen it.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I own a couple coppers which I purchased because the toning was bright and desirable. Upon receiving them I found the "in-hand" look to be much darker than the computer screen look. I kept them because (1) the grade was accurate, and when light hits at 'just the right angle' the colors are indeed as advertised; and (2) it was my money to gamble and I took a chance buying without previewing in person.
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
"They look great in person, i did brighten the images to show off the colors a little better. But they do look fantastic in person.
- independencecoin
>>>
Dear independencecoin,
How do the colors look in person? Is the photo a fair representation or was the saturation bumped up to highlight the color a bit more?
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
This one failed CAC:
PCGS MS65
Current bid in the Central States HA auction is $5500 ($6462.50 w/juice)! Ends tomorrow.....Sky's the limit!
Someone has left some money on the table.
A LOT of nice Walkers are in this sale.
I will be watching in awe....
1944 67 crazy color
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
My Ebay Store
PS, wow on your memory of finding this old thread!
Radically toned WLHs do go for moon money. There are not that many of them.
Interesting history for this coin.
Nice
Here is mine bought off a forum member like a year or 2 ago
This is my idea of a nicely toned WLH.
Lance.
Amazing!!!
I'm blown away!
Goes to show what I know.....
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins]
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
CC
That's pretty wild. If I hadn't seen the date I'd have thought it was an ASE!
me too, like this
Last I recall, Cameonut was thinking to return the piece because it was darker than he thought, but he did like it. Of course, all the "experts" jumping all over it probably had an influence in his thinking as well.
So, who made the score then? The original seller, who may have gotten the coin back and refunded the money? Or, Cameonut if he was the one who upgraded it and sent it to auction?
Seems like all the "experts" would have left a lot of $$$ on the table.....
Good, or bad, going by pictures on the internet is not a certain way to make authoritative comments about coins with toning, or coin grades. Sure, one can be "close" or even correct, but I wouldn't want to put my money on it at this point.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
So, everyone that hadn't seen the coin in hand, that was going by "juiced", or scanned, pictures, or even just pictures on the internet, were telling the buyer he was hosed, buried, etc, look to have been wrong.
Last I recall, Cameonut was thinking to return the piece because it was darker than he thought, but he did like it. Of course, all the "experts" jumping all over it probably had an influence in his thinking as well.
So, who made the score then? The original seller, who may have gotten the coin back and refunded the money? Or, Cameonut if he was the one who upgraded it and sent it to auction?
Seems like all the "experts" would have left a lot of $$$ on the table.....
Good, or bad, going by pictures on the internet is not a certain way to make authoritative comments about coins with toning, or coin grades. Sure, one can be "close" or even correct, but I wouldn't want to put my money on it at this point.
Some of us collect coins, we don't flip them and aren't out for a "score". I said the coin was ugly a year ago, and I still think it's ugly in the current Heritage Auction. I would not want the coin in my collection, and thus would have never bid on it at the original $1200 NGC MS66 range or the (IMO ridiculous) $6000 PCGS MS67 CAC range.
I don't really think anyone claimed to be "experts" in 2015 either, so much as simply giving our opinions of the coin (which was the point of the thread!). It's convenient that your hindsight is 20-20, but I don't see the point of your post besides to belittle people for giving their opinions.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins]
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
My YouTube Channel