Spectacularly Toned 1795 Small Eagle PCGS-65 Bust Dollar - (Off-Center Bust Variety)

I thought he sold it?

Oops nevermind

m

Beautiful coin with some attractive secondary toning. It's usually a great indicator when both TV and SP images are nice.

A real jewel. Gorgeous. Amazing to think it survived so long in such good condition.

Now, can we debate original vs. secondary toning?

That piece is of stellar galactic properties. Striking. Like it very much.

@WinLoseWin said:

@Insider2 said:
Someone may wish to post why ("Off-Center") is in the OP's title.

Not what I expected. Sure fooled me at first when I saw all the rim intact.

It is an old though sometimes confusing term referring to Liberty's profile being farther to the left side compared to other 1795 varieties where it is more centered between the stars.

See how PCGS CoinFacts list by this category also:

https://pcgs.com/coinfacts/category/dollars/draped-bust-dollar/type-1-small-eagle-1795-1798/737

.
.

I would argue that the "off-center" bust is actually more centered than the "centered" bust..

@ColonelJessup said:

@ChrisH821 said:

@WinLoseWin said:

@Insider2 said:
Someone may wish to post why ("Off-Center") is in the OP's title.

Not what I expected. Sure fooled me at first when I saw all the rim intact.

It is an old though sometimes confusing term referring to Liberty's profile being farther to the left side compared to other 1795 varieties where it is more centered between the stars.

See how PCGS CoinFacts list by this category also:

https://pcgs.com/coinfacts/category/dollars/draped-bust-dollar/type-1-small-eagle-1795-1798/737

.
.

I would argue that the "off-center" bust is actually more centered than the "centered" bust

Don't give up your day job :'(

Minute or two in MS paint, which one looks more centered to you? To me the centered bust is absolutely not in the center, it's to the right of center. Maybe I'm just crazy.

What exactly are we calling the bust?

From Webster:

art : a sculptured representation of the upper part of the human figure including the head and neck and usually part of the shoulders and breast
ex "has a bust of Abraham Lincoln in his office"
2 : the upper part of the human torso between neck and waist
especially : the breasts of a woman
ex "her bust size"

Well, ummm, I suppose if you are using the second definition and are only paying attention to the, ummmm, bust, it, um, well, I suppose, it's actually right of center. @ChrisH821 is not entirely wrong......

It's fascinating to watch two people troll each other.
Neither of them is very good at it, but both of them are so easy that they manage to get the worst out of each other with a minimum of effort

See how easy it is!

I feel like Lucy with her sign that says "Psychiatrist - 5c"
And fondling a football

A few years back @wingedliberty posted a nice write-up on TV photos of toners and introduced the concept of "optimal viewing angle" that maximizes the color. I also agree that when it comes to toners, a single image will not be enough to give you a good representation of the coin.

@WingedLiberty1957 said:
I have been a collector of colorfully toned coins for a bit over 1.5 years and have learned a lot about this interesting sub-field of numismatics in that time. During this time, my primary coin photographer has been Phil at PCGS TrueView. Over the past few weeks, I have been amazed to read (on various posts by a few people on a few different coin forums), how some collectors think that PCGS TrueVeiw photos are "juiced" "oversaturated", "unrealistic", or "enhanced".

I have to say that I have probably had over 200 TrueView photos taken for me over the past 18 months and I have never had any photos taken that did not capture the look of the coin -- most typically seen at the optimal viewing angle -- defining "optimal" as the viewing angle that "max's out" the coins color. All of the PCGS TrueView photos I have received, were totally accurate and completely captured the look of the coin at the optimal viewing angle.

One fact that perhaps some collectors might overlook is that a single photo does not (and can not) capture the full spectrum of looks that a colorfully toned coin might show. For that you would need perhaps 5 to 10 photos of a coin (or perhaps a video would be better showing a nearly infinite spread of viewing and lighting angles). So when I see people post that they do NOT find TrueView photos "representative" of a coin, my jaw drops.

Yesterday, it began to dawn on me that perhaps many of the people that think that PCGS TrueViews are not "realistic" don't realize how DIFFERENT colorfully toned coins can look at various view angles. As you tip and tilt a toned coin under the light, the colors and look CHANGES, sometimes drastically. So when a photographer is hired to produce single photo (as is the case for PCGS TrueView), the photographer has to CHOOSE which of the coins various looks to capture in the image.

Most of us "color" lovers typically WANT the photographer to max out the color (even if a coin only shows that color at one special viewing and lighting angle). So this kind of photographing philosophy (maxing the color) might be just assumed by most photographers (as sort of a default) as to what the owner of a colorfully toned coin wants. I have to say, if you don't want that, say something!

Finally, I wanted to add that if you ever SELL a colorfully toned coin, you should always provide a number of photographs showing the various "looks" of the coin from different angles. This is not only good from the point of disclosure, but also helps mitigate returns from disappointed buyers who bought based on a single photo.

If you ever BUY a colorfully toned coin, based on a single photo, realize that the photo shown probably is a maximum color view of the coin and the coin could look more muted from other view angles (esp from straight on). So in this case, an air-tight return policy is in order so you can examine the hundreds of "looks" of the coin in-hand before you decide to keep it.

@scubafuel said:
I’m with @realone on this one.
For me, a juiced image Is any that does not show the coin as it appears to my eyes (or any eyes) in hand, straight on, in good light. It does not have to be edited in post processing to be “juiced”, just sufficiently far away from “yeah, that’s the same coin”.

Many of the true view glamour shots are such that they give me no sense of what the coin looks like in hand. If you buy a coin based on a shot taken in this style, you’ll be disappointed most of the time. However once you OWN the coin, I can see how this type of shot becomes very desirable.

@scubafuel said:
I’m with @realone on this one.
For me, a juiced image Is any that does not show the coin as it appears to my eyes (or any eyes) in hand, straight on, in good light. It does not have to be edited in post processing to be “juiced”, just sufficiently far away from “yeah, that’s the same coin”.

Many of the true view glamour shots are such that they give me no sense of what the coin looks like in hand. If you buy a coin based on a shot taken in this style, you’ll be disappointed most of the time. However once you OWN the coin, I can see how this type of shot becomes very desirable.

I'm with TDN on this one. To me, a "glamour shot" is not synonymous with a "juiced" image. I think of the latter as one which has had the color and/or luster manipulated/enhanced, and not just by tilting the coin and/or using optimal lighting conditions.