Which of these 1869 Seated Liberty Half dollars do you like better?

mercurydimeguy

Number 1









Number 2

ebaybuyer

although both have been .... "conserved" the first one is un-naturally grey, at least the second one has a bit of life remaining

Yorkshireman

#2 because it has a bit a character.

Walkerfan

#2 as the fields and devices look clearer with less chatter.

keyman64

#2

MrEureka

#2. The frost seems thicker and the surfaces less abused. And even though the speckling in the right obverse field may be ED, perhaps what's left of a fingerprint, some natural toning would reduce that a trivial concern. As for #1, it will probably never look any better.

rhedden

Another vote for #2 here. Coin #1 has more field chatter on the obverse, and it has a little stain around the word HALF of the sort that looks like it didn't come off even after a good dip. The negatives for coin #2 just amount to some tiny obverse flyspecks.

thebeav

I have to go with two also.......

jesbroken

#2 by quite a bit

TopographicOceans

#2 has the better eye appeal

oih82w8

Another vote for #2. I like the tone on this one.

grip

#2 for most of the reasons posted.

DoubleEagle59

no doubt for me, it's #2.

ricko

Number 2... although it could be photography, it seems to show more life/luster...Cheers, RickO

lkeigwin

Let's make it unanimous.

Lance.

Boosibri

Agree with the others

BillJones

#2.

There is no rub on the Ms. Liberty's breast. #1 has a slight one although it still grades Mint State. There is spotting in the right field on #2, but #1 has some on the left side.

TwoSides2aCoin

The chatter or the speckles. Great strike detail. I could live with either in my 7070.

mercurydimeguy

I updated Coin #1 image for the purpose of contuniuing the discussion.



Coin was Ex NGC OGH MS62 CAC, crossed at grade, re-CAC stickered.



Pretty semi-PL fields, which are impossible to capture in an image. As expected in this grade, the fields will be abraded but they will show more abrasions because of the semi-PL base they reside on. The devices are sharp/frosty, the skin is fairly original.



I guess I got a total "F" on the image...it was taken somewhat on the quick, so I'll have to re-image it (thanks for feedback). Notwithstanding, it kind of looks just like the image plus/add PL fields and a bit more frost to devices.



These coins clearly come from different dies and/or die states...



Now what do you guys think of Coin #2?

golden

#2.

breakdown

A number of people who know a lot more than me about coins have chosen 2. My initial reaction was that coin 1 looked like it had some proof like qualities that I appreciate. 2 looks washed out and although cleaner, not as visually interesting. I think it is a close call because of the right field chatter and reverse residue on #1, but I would still give one vote for 1.

Of course, in hand might be a whole different story. As you can see from my sig line, I collect seated halves and I find the images of this series can be inconclusive at best and deceptive at their worst. The Gardner images have some great examples of coins that in hand had a entirely different character to them.