Accurate grade?

Yorkshireman

Regardless of what the label holder has written on it, could this really be a 53? 50, maybe?

The color/ tint in photo is off the in hand look. It does not look cleaned in hand.

cmerlo1

I see it as more of a 50.

LindeDad

Real close to being called a details coin for cleaning.

Have to see this in hand before committing for it.

messydesk

I'd have GTG'ed 50, maybe 45. Can't comment further without seeing the coin in hand.

TwoSides2aCoin

Proper coin. That's for sure. … being partial to gold eagles and all.

AUandAG

Looks properly graded to my eyes...



Nice piece.



bob

golden

It would not cross.

ricko

53 is questionable..... I would have said 50 if it were a GTG... Cheers, RickO

johnny9434

Originally posted by: messydesk
I'd have GTG'ed 50, maybe 45. Can't comment further without seeing the coin in hand.

same here. in the mean time ill go with what the label says fwiw

BillJones

It all comes down the remaining luster on the piece, and you can't judge that from this picture. Sharpness grade is around AU-50, but the difference between AU-50 and 53 is probably not that great.

TopographicOceans

The grade looks generous

coinkat

I would rather see it in hand before offering an opinion- This is not intended to be critical of the photo

lordmarcovan

Grade looks accurate to me.

Desert Moon

If one uses PCGS photograde to grade this coin from its images, you can see that this coin could be anywhere from 45 to 53. There is obvious striking issues on the obverse (e.g. lower stars) that could fool some to believe it is wear that could result in a downgrade when it is just weak strike. You can't tell if a coin has severe cleaning from an image but dirt in the letters and devices, and the toning patterns on both sides look like there was little cleaning. This looks like an image taken with CFL's that did not bring out the luster well. Capturing luster on worn gold can be tricky. Hence without seeing it in hand, no way to determine the grade beyond the fact that it looks anywhere from 45 to 53. HST, the minimal wear in the outer buns of Ms. Liberties hair are more consistent with 53 than 45 given the striking issues on the lower obverse. As Bill Jones stated, depends on how much luster is there. This is why one has to see coins in hand to grade them well.




Best, SH




Edited to add - oops I put up my 51-O half eagle, here is the eagle at 55, the 54-O is close in grade to this one:









Here is a 48-O in 55, the 54-O is close in grade to this one:

winky

Originally posted by: golden
It would not cross.

Leave it alone unless you have a registry set. Just my thought.

Yorkshireman

Really like that 1848-O

Desert Moon

Thanks Yorkshire, I am guessing the 54-O is nice, but need to see it in hand. NGC can grade these very well - both of my CACed.



Best, SH

PTVETTER

Looks fine to me
Kind of splitting Hairs 50/53
Tilt it one way it's a 50 tilt it another way it's 53

Yorkshireman

SHD,
Who took your photos?

Desert Moon

Yorkshire, thanks for asking - Moi. I am still working on perfecting my gold images, the 48-O is nailed, the 51-O needs some work to capture it at is best.... Gold is challenging, every gold coin is different, that makes it tough. I have had some excellent role models and advisors for imaging - Robec, brg, Bluvette, sirmessy to name a few, have all helped me out...... Those guys know how to image coins.



Best, SH

Desert Moon

For wear comparison, there are 3 54-O eagles up for auction right now at HA - P45, N55, and P55. The OP's coin looks much closer to the 55's than the 45, which shows much more wear. None of these 3 display as much dirt as does the OP's coin. Could be seeing all 4 in hand, OP's N53 wins out.



Best, SH

Yorkshireman

Thanks for the kind praise!
Maybe I should auction it to the highest bidder. (Ha!)

BryceM

I agree that gold is mighty challenging to image consistently. Different pieces can look a hundred different ways depending on the day. Just a little change in the lighting can bring out or totally obscure luster. This coin is fine at AU53 to my eyes, but it would be nice to see a little luster somewhere. It looks like maybe there is some in the hair and feathers, but it's not emphasized in this photo. I imagine if submitted a bunch of times it would come back in the 50/53 range with maybe a "cleaned" vote or two.

asheland

I think it looks right.