@BryceM said:
My own position is that I have a certain fondness for really incredible luster and frosty, granular, original-looking surfaces. I'd take a couple little hits or a couple of stars that aren't perfectly struck-up to get a real blazing beauty. You can fake eye appeal (AT), and you can find coins without hits, but a coin is either lustrous or it isn't. Once it's gone, it isn't coming back either. That's what's so insanely cool about really high-grade US federal issues like TDN's dollars.
Really pretty toning without much luster doesn't do much for me. Both together can be incredible:
Beautiful coins! Looks and sounds like you agree that originality should be part of the equation?
Thanks for your thoughts. Hard to disagree from what I observe.
As for originality, yeah, I like it, but all (silver) coins were blast white when truly original. I like coins that look appropriate for their era. White Flowing Hair coins look off and wild ASE toners don’t sit quite right with me.
It really depends on the series, the date, and the condition. With large copper cents it's luster and eye appeal but with Morgans or clad quarters it's all strike and die condition. But by the same token a better date Morgan can have a less than stellar strike if it's clean and lustrous. If a 1983-P quarter is less than fully struck it is more forgivable than a 1970-D.
As a rule first is strike, than die condition, then being free of marks. After that surfaces and centering are important. Almost every coin has some deficiency and where that deficiency is typical for the date it is more easily "overlooked".
Comments
Beautiful coins! Looks and sounds like you agree that originality should be part of the equation?
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
@MFeld
Thanks for your thoughts. Hard to disagree from what I observe.
As for originality, yeah, I like it, but all (silver) coins were blast white when truly original. I like coins that look appropriate for their era. White Flowing Hair coins look off and wild ASE toners don’t sit quite right with me.
It really depends on the series, the date, and the condition. With large copper cents it's luster and eye appeal but with Morgans or clad quarters it's all strike and die condition. But by the same token a better date Morgan can have a less than stellar strike if it's clean and lustrous. If a 1983-P quarter is less than fully struck it is more forgivable than a 1970-D.
As a rule first is strike, than die condition, then being free of marks. After that surfaces and centering are important. Almost every coin has some deficiency and where that deficiency is typical for the date it is more easily "overlooked".