Options
What would you call the marks above the eagle’s head?
drddm
Posts: 5,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
0
drddm
Posts: 5,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Graffitti?
bob
“Hal”. Looks like graffiti.
My Type Set & My Complete Proof Nickel Set!
This, or old scratches (basically the same thing.)
Graffiti
Are the lines raised above the surface od the coin, or cut into the coin?
struck thru grafitti
Not good.
Lol...I have no idea why but this response reminded me of a Monty Python
PMD or post mintage damage.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Gouges.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
damage
BHNC #203
Post mint damage.....Cheers, RickO
Now, with all the above answers taken into consideration, would any of you be surprised that this coin is actually in a straight graded leading TPGS holder?
Those marks are toned over old marks and probably aren't that noticeable when viewed in hand with the naked eye.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I disagree since they happen to actually span under the entire scroll of E PLURIBUS UNUM. I only showed the most obvious area in the picture above. And just below the scroll on either side of the eagle’s head happens to be a prime focal area on this coin.
Nope. I’ve seen much worse in holders. Had a seated half that looked like someone outlined most of the obverse design and had long since toned over.
Showed it to an ex grader and he said he didn’t think the marks even though he clearly thought they were damage would actually limit its grade.
My Ebay Store
Faint graffiti on an old coin is often "market tolerable," so I'm not surprised it graded. I wouldn't pay wholesome money for it, though. Was the coin net graded because of it?
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I don't think random marks like this can be considered to be graffiti. Normally graffiti is initials or a name or a date or some art work etc.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
My comment was based on what you showed. If there is more to see, show me and I may change my mind.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Again, I respectfully disagree with this comment as I believe it also includes (or should include) other random marks like the ones above.
Then again, this is just my opinion.
Here is an example I recently viewed in hand of two X’s made in the same area which were called Graffiti by PCGS.
Unless it can be determined that the marks were intentionally placed on the coin, we can't be completely sure that it's graffiti. The two X's are most likely graffiti while the four scratches of the first coin may or may not be random marks and hence may or not be graffiti.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
It's not about being "completely sure."
How could it possibly be?
It's about evaluation of probabilities and plausibilities.
The marks on the op coin look intentional to me.
"random marks" that form any kind of pattern, only in the wide open field of a coin, were often intentional. Sometimes more marks are added later by a doctor to make them appear random.
Sometimes this will fool even expert eyes.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Call it what you wish but it's still damage and shouldn't be straight graded.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
@PerryHall
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree then.
And FWIW, the coin also happens to have a little green bean sticker on it which really shocked me too.
If you actually look close enough in the pic, this long continuous mark is the “four scratches” you refer to in your post above.
Well, let's have a look at the whole coin.. it takes an uncommon level of sophistication to be able to understand the concept of the Net Grade, Most just say the easy No.
Maybe it's a nice coin overall, for the grade 😉
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
The coin is actually being sold by someone else and since I’m not one to bash another’s inventory publicly, unfortunately this pic will have to suffice in order to protect the anonymity of the seller.
Looks like an enhanced reverse to me.
Looks like WW to me.
Suggestion: I prefer to call marks as this - scratches. Gouges go deeper into the surface and look different. When scratches resemble figures or letters they are called Graffiti.
The "X's" can be considered both. However, for me, a stand alone "X" does not count as a letter. So, IMO this is "scratch damage."
>
If it's called scratch or gouge or graffiti or blibble-blabble, does that change the quality/value?
Or is it just pontificating?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Kaint git no more graffic that that!
Looks like toned over scratching. Easy to miss if you’re looking too quickly at a coin. Lots of scratching makes it into straight graded holders. Just depends on severity and how the rest of the coin looks. Sure doesn’t bother me as much as straight graded coins with big rim bruises!
Suggestion: Call such marks whatever you wish. To me, they looked deep enough to refer to them as “gouges”, as opposed to “scratches”. And I’m not aware of any specific measurements which distinguish one from another.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Glad to see you back. Great question. Some folks get paid to examine coins for other folks. Often this involves educating them either-face-to-face, over the phone, in classes, or even with a few words printed on a label.
Actually, you managed to stumble into the reason words mean something by your reference to blibble-blabble. That's one reason why many reference books have several pages of numismatic definitions. If an ignorant person were to think a scratch was the same as a gouge or a planchet flaw, a more informed collector would consider he/she uninformed and in need of help; but a less informed collector could get all screwed up.
BTW, at a certain point of intensity, a scratch becomes a gouge! Perhaps that is confusing, causing the terms to be merged into the same characteristic by some folks.
As for "pontificating," I assumed you might be a very knowledgeable numismatist. If that is true, I'll suggest you try more "pontificating" to educate us rather than the silly "blibble-blabble" in your post.
FOR EXAMPLE
I think you buy coins on a regular basis. How do the scratches affect that coin's value. Do you disagree with the difference between the three words in my post? Is there a difference between a scratch, gouge or graffiti? Hopefully, you will make a serious attempt to reply rather than attacking me for passing on what may actually be an informed opinion.
@Baley
"Crickets..."
Some posters' inability to grasp the concept is well documented
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Crickets
Lmao, gimme a minute, some of us have lives off the forum, and it's not often I'm both day-drinking and in the mood to push yer buttons.
It depends, on the coin type and detail grade and surfaces, and the location, severity, and nature of the damage. The categories of scratch do blend into each other.
I don't know if a big skitch is better or worse than a small dig. Show me the coins...
The whole coins, all 3 sides.
In good light.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
That's more like it. My original belief is restored.
"It depends, on the coin type and detail grade and surfaces, and the location, severity, and nature of the damage. The categories of scratch do blend into each other."
Scratched/graffiti/ gouged are all types of surface damage. I can understand net grading a coin with one light scratch in a non focal area but these mark's are excessive that should of put this in a details holder.
I think the coins imaged in this discussion are in "details" holders.
Not if I’m interpreting the below copied post from the OP correctly.
“Now, with all the above answers taken into consideration, would any of you be surprised that this coin is actually in a straight graded leading TPGS holder?”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
He also stated that it has a green CAC sticker.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
The OP's coin appears to be in Very Fine condition and almost 200 years old. Although I would "details" grade it, this proves that others are not as critical when examining older coins. Much of the time I'll bet many folks would just assign a net grade to reflect a lower value. We've all seen worse examples than this coin straight graded.
If that's the case, perhaps it is only graded F-15.
Not according to the OPs post.
Thanks, that's what another member posted.
I won't identify this coin due to the reason I explained above, but I will say that it is in an AU 53 holder, and has a CAC sticker.
Your welcome!