??Tooled??
JeffMTampa
Posts: 3,298 ✭✭✭✭✭
A couple of months back I purchased a nice looking raw Barber Quarter. It was submitted raw to our hosts in early May for grading. It came back a couple of days ago in a "Tooled" holder. I've looked the coin over from top to bottom on all 3 sides and can't find anything that looks like tooling. Can someone give me an education?
I love them Barber Halves.....
0
Comments
Is the lower band below Liberty messed with?
Edit to add...also looks like some of the letters have been enhanced. Look at the B.
Compare with the obverse. See how the tail feathers; wing tips; lower portion of the shield, and the eagle's head are slightly worn? AU coin with 'enhanced' obverse details. I think LIBERTY and the band along with some lower hair details were (somewhat) expertly tooled.
The B in Liberty looks messed with...the top is squared rather than curved....Cheers, RickO
Too bad a very valuable asset to this forum is not here to point out the tooling.
We need better close up pics of the areas in question to answer your question.
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
Here's a closeup of the LIBERTY band on the coin:
Here's the same area on another 1916 graded Quarter:
I don't see anything tooled in the LIBERTY band, but I have old eyes....
Obverse looks tooled to enhance the features on Liberty.
This is a AU 58 out of coin facts. Yours almost looks counterfeit compared to the AU 58. The details of the Eye, lips, Nose all look different ( Worn dies?) But I think the top of the hair looks retooled to me.
My best guess is the star radials.
On the Reverse the word UNUM looks like it could have been enhanced because of the wear around the Eagles head and wear on the ribbon, Just thinking!
I looked at all the stars up close; I can't see anything in the star radials.
Here's an enlargement of UNUM:
I don't see anything there, either.
this!
Could it be the gouge in the hair. Could of been a deep scratch and flattened out.
I see a flattening of the top leaves and into the letters T & R also. This is an interesting exercise, but I am not one to be able to "give an education" that's for sure.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the area of tooling isn’t even apparent in the images and thus, hasn’t been mentioned.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It is truly a shame that PCGS doesn't provide a sentence or two explaining their reason(s) for bodybagging a coin.
IMO this would be enormously popular and a great service to collectors and the hobby.
Lance.
The area in front of the eye on nose doesn’t look right. In hand does that area look like some metal has been moved?
I'm going to guess that the whole obverse has been smoothed.
My Saint Set
That was the first place I thought of to look at, but I don't see anything.
Maybe above "OF?"
Looks like wing feather details have been added to the wing right of the shield. At least it looks a little off to me.
From the photos, I am not seeing anything obvious.
A coin can sometimes get a tooled designation from very small things such as pin scratches from someone trying to remove a spot. It does not always have to be major liike recarving design details or smoothing fields.
Which leads me to wonder about a couple of areas. Is there anything going on above the O in OF or around the spot that is between the ER in QUARTER?
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Geez, no clue. Sure would have been nice to get an explanation from the grading company. For as much as it costs to ship something to them, the service itself and the shipping back...I would just consider it to be darn near a common sense courtesy for a couple of words to be written down or typed somewhere, especially when it isn't obvious like with this example. What do I know though?
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
If that were the case, it’s likely PCGS would have indicated such, rather than describing it as “tooled”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The entire look of the coin does have that overly "smooth" and fuzzy look. Hard to say from what. Between 2 left and 2 right obverse stars the luster is gone. Around the date as well. That's a bit odd looking. You wouldn't quite expect that with luster around all the other stars. The coin almost seems like it had more luster on it before something might have been done to it. It has a "very faint" resemblance to the fields of a whizzed coin....but not where you can put your finger right on it. A puzzler.
I went through all of PCGS no grade designations. Nowhere do I find whizzing, polishing, etc. as a specific issue. Altered surfaces, damage, and cleaning are the closest ones.
https://pcgs.com/grades
Here are enlargements of the areas recently mentioned:
There are a couple of small scratches between the serifs on the "E" in Quarter. They look natural to me, however.
I wish I could help you figure this out, but I do not see anything that stands out and un-natural. It would be nice if all coins that get genuine / smoothed, damaged, tooled etc. got an explanation. The cost of grading is not cheap.
Maybe resend it in for grading again see if they grade it this time. Then you will know! Don’t say a word just send it in by itself. It would be a good test I bet they give it a grade this time around.
I think a better idea would be to take it to a show and present it to PCGS during an "Ask the Experts" session. If you just send it in again and get a straight grade, you won't know if it's a borderline coin or whether the first graders just whiffed.
I agree with this. It may just be the toning. But the pictures make Liberty and the band look like they have been messed with to me.
Perhaps the most unfortunate "mechanical error"??
Jesse C. Kraft, Ph.D.
Resolute Americana Curator of American Numismatics
American Numismatic Society
New York City
Member of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), British Numismatic Society (BNS), New York Numismatic Club (NYNC), Early American Copper (EAC), the Colonial Coin Collectors Club (C4), U.S. Mexican Numismatic Association (USMNA), Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC), Token and Medal Society (TAMS), and life member of the Atlantic County Numismatic Society (ACNS).
Become a member of the American Numismatic Society!
Someone picked away at crud/tarnish/whatever. Seems most evident on reverse. Check out the nooks and crannies.
Hair behind and below the ear?
Everything is all right!
Yes. Look more closely at the obverse stars, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
This is a fascinating post. I have absolutely nothing to add, however everything to learn. If that makes sense. Thanks.
Exactly what I see. This.
Will’sProoflikes
BINGO, We have a winner.
This is what I saw, pretty obvious to me at least. Eye went right to it, but I don't collect Barbers, so may be way off.
bob
Now I see it.
Good eye.
.
Most of us are on more than one forum and this came from CT.
I paraphrased so it isn't word for word.
.
My Saint Set
I do not believe there has been any tooling to restore star radials or other details.
What I see looks like someone took a toothpick and tried to clean off a spot.
I suspect that at one time there was a larger black spot centered between the letters "OF" that connected to the denticles.
It seems fairly minor, but there may be other similar scrapings, including perhaps the lighter-color area around the "R" of QUARTER. This picture shows an area of the toothpick scraping (magenta outline):
That look comes from a coin that was, at one time, somewhat heavily toned.
The dark toning was reversed by dipping, but some stubborn spots remained.
Fortunately, the coin still has an overall decent appearance (market acceptable) except for some small area(s) of toothpicking.
Many other coins like that were frequently cleaned with mild abrasive, which would yield a cleaned/polished appearance (which would not be "market acceptable").
This has been a very educational post. How about an "upclose" of the stars that have been mentioned? The OP takes excellent photos BTW!
I agree with @dcarr You push away crud and the toning is different. Peace
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
As a follow up, I decided to crack this coin out and resubmit it raw. It came back in a straight AU55 holder this time:
If I weren't so far underwater on the coin I would be happy.
good for you!
Congrats Jeff
100% positive transactions with SurfinxHI, bigole, 1madman, collectorcoins, proofmorgan, Luke Marshall, silver pop, golden egg, point five zero,coin22lover, alohagary, blaircountycoin,joebb21
at least you know now. the shareholders looooove you.
i think they'll be loving me a little bit by xmas. ><
Way to hang in there. Glad for you it finally graded.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the area of tooling isn’t even apparent in the images and thus, hasn’t been mentioned
As a follow up, I decided to crack this coin out and resubmit it raw. It came back in a straight AU55 holder this time
..................as I was reading the replies and arrived at the first by Mark, I was in total agreement and thought that if the coin was re-submitted it might even straight grade. the fact that it did points to the subjective nature of coin grading. it doesn't say anything good or bad about PCGS to me, only that we each see different things when we examine coins and interpret that "data" based on prior experience. that seems to be what two different grading teams have done in this case.
So three people - two graders and finalizer, saw tooling the first time and the second time around - no one sees tooling....
I understand subjective grading, so now I must add subjective damage observation to my list as well??
WS