I’ll post the grades in an hour or so. Quite a few people got close (within half a grade). I’ll draw from the winners & send the lucky someone a prize. It’s interesting that those that I consider to be the best graders consistently do pretty darn well from photos. Better than I would do....... to the point it has me thinking.
@CoinJunkie said:
Am I misreading the photo of the Indian, or are there abrasions all over the cheek? All of these guesses of 64 and 65 have me scratching my head.
Here’s a PCGS 64 for comparison of the cheek:
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld , thanks for the photo. On that coin, I see discoloration, but nothing that looks like roughness. Perhaps it's just the lighting or unusual toning on Bryce's coin.
@CoinJunkie said: @MFeld , thanks for the photo. On that coin, I see discoloration, but nothing that looks like roughness. Perhaps it's just the lighting or unusual toning on Bryce's coin.
Sure thing. Only Bryce knows for sure.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Sorry guys, Internet connection problems chez-moi this evening. After much cussing, it's working again. This is one of the ugly downsides of living in the sticks. Radio wireless is OK, but not great.
So..... here's the way the graders at PCGS saw it, and my comments below each coin:
So...... collecting half-cents is an interesting endeavor. I've been looking for a nice Draped Bust Half Cent forever, and after a great deal of looking, this is what showed up. In a recent article of The Numismatist, there was a statement that floored me. It said there are more extant S-VDB cents than all half-cents combined!!! Wow. I digress.......
I think this is a reasonably tricky coin to grade, especially from photos. First, is there wear? Nope. Is it gradeable? Well, I think so. With early copper there are always compromises. The weird crescent of color on the obverse could have been from another coin resting over this one. The diameter is correct for that. It's evident in hand, but not especially distracting. The rims are a bit busy, the surfaces are a bit porus, but such is the life of early copper. The coin is reasonably clean, doesn't show much mint luster, and detail is good in the centers, but clearly fading out around the rims. Worn dies? Screw-press striking artifact? I dunno. I've got plenty to learn about early Federal issues. Overall I think 62 is fine. A bit more lively luster and a 63 would be easy. CAC liked it, which is plenty rare in early copper.
This is the easiest of the three. There's not much holding this one back. Just a bit of weakness, and veeeery slightly subdued luster maybe. The die cracks are interesting. One little field tick is evident below star 8 and another below the date. It's an easy 66, shot 67..... so why not 66+? I'm sure this would reliably grade right around here if submitted a dozen times.
Here's how I grade incuse gold: I look at the label. That's a slight exaggeration, but not much. When it comes to Indian half eagles, there's a galaxy of distance between MS64 and MS65. Look at the Price Guide if you don't believe me. When looking for one, I was in the market for nice luster, excellent detail, but I wasn't willing to pony up for a 65. A few hits are perfectly tolerable here if the rest is solid. This one has really nice detail, especially in the headband and obverse feathers. There are a few ticky-tack hits on the fields, but that's how gold comes. Color is rich and a handful of really small obverse copper spots to me are no distraction. This is a "but for" coin. It's a gem... "but for" a few hits. Really, when it comes to grading gold, luster seems to be heavily weighted and a few hits easily tolerated. Here's a closeup of the cheek for @CoinJunkie.
All coins look terrible if you magnify them enough. In-hand, there's nothing that draws attention to the cheek. A bit of luster graze, perhaps.
So, as for the prize, @MFeld, @Baley, @kaz, and @messydesk were each off by one grade point in total (counting the plus as 1/2 of a grade). @Baley nailed the 66+ and 64+, which is pretty impressive (or a lucky guess). Interesting that they also were precise enough to include the copper color designation.
@BryceM said:
So, as for the prize, @MFeld, @Baley, @kaz, and @messydesk were each off by one grade point in total (counting the plus as 1/2 of a grade). @Baley nailed the 66+ and 64+, which is pretty impressive (or a lucky guess). Interesting that they also were precise enough to include the copper color designation.
My random number generator picks.....
drumroll....
4
Messydesk, you are a winner!
He might have a messy desk, but he’s certainly not a messy grader!😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@BryceM said:
So, as for the prize, @MFeld, @Baley, @kaz, and @messydesk were each off by one grade point in total (counting the plus as 1/2 of a grade). @Baley nailed the 66+ and 64+, which is pretty impressive (or a lucky guess). Interesting that they also were precise enough to include the copper color designation.
@ambro51 said:
Great Fun. How about 3 coins that are Not MS? More in the 25-40 range.....
Sounds like a great idea for the next one.
@mannie gray said:
What is really funny is that as I was making my guesses my first thoughts were
62
66+
64
I've learned that my initial gut reaction is usually pretty close. It's probably only a good idea to change your opinion if there is a good reason to change it (hairlines that you didn't initially see, etc.)
I was on the 62/63 fence with the half cent, almost said 62+ but don't think that's a thing?
At any rate, nice to see that PCGS and CAC graded these so accurately 😉
@Baley said:
I was on the 62/63 fence with the half cent, almost said 62+ but don't think that's a thing?
At any rate, nice to see that PCGS and CAC graded these so accurately 😉
I was also on the 62/63 fence for the half cent. Ultimately, the subdued luster and (to a lesser extent,) the slightly rough surfaces caused me to go with 62.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I intentionally overgraded the half cent bc I never thought BryceM would buy such a low grade. So although it did not look 64, I figured I was missing something in the images. 62? Is that your lowest graded coin?
That Nickel must have more eye appeal / luster than it is apparent in the pic. A clean coin like that with booming eye appeal would grade MS 66 all day long. These coins are now often in 6 + holders.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
@Baley said:
I was on the 62/63 fence with the half cent, almost said 62+ but don't think that's a thing?
At any rate, nice to see that PCGS and CAC graded these so accurately 😉
62+ is indeed "a thing".
PCGS will award a plus for grades 45-58 and 62-68, where warranted.
Comments
62BN
66
64
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
62
65
58+
62,66, and 65.
63 BN
66
63
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
I’ll post the grades in an hour or so. Quite a few people got close (within half a grade). I’ll draw from the winners & send the lucky someone a prize. It’s interesting that those that I consider to be the best graders consistently do pretty darn well from photos. Better than I would do....... to the point it has me thinking.
That’s a topic for another thread.
63
66
64
64 BN
66
65
Am I misreading the photo of the Indian, or are there abrasions all over the cheek? All of these guesses of 64 and 65 have me scratching my head.
Here’s a PCGS 64 for comparison of the cheek:
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld , thanks for the photo. On that coin, I see discoloration, but nothing that looks like roughness. Perhaps it's just the lighting or unusual toning on Bryce's coin.
Sure thing. Only Bryce knows for sure.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The cat is suffocating.
huh?
Sorry guys, Internet connection problems chez-moi this evening. After much cussing, it's working again. This is one of the ugly downsides of living in the sticks. Radio wireless is OK, but not great.
So..... here's the way the graders at PCGS saw it, and my comments below each coin:
So...... collecting half-cents is an interesting endeavor. I've been looking for a nice Draped Bust Half Cent forever, and after a great deal of looking, this is what showed up. In a recent article of The Numismatist, there was a statement that floored me. It said there are more extant S-VDB cents than all half-cents combined!!! Wow. I digress.......
I think this is a reasonably tricky coin to grade, especially from photos. First, is there wear? Nope. Is it gradeable? Well, I think so. With early copper there are always compromises. The weird crescent of color on the obverse could have been from another coin resting over this one. The diameter is correct for that. It's evident in hand, but not especially distracting. The rims are a bit busy, the surfaces are a bit porus, but such is the life of early copper. The coin is reasonably clean, doesn't show much mint luster, and detail is good in the centers, but clearly fading out around the rims. Worn dies? Screw-press striking artifact? I dunno. I've got plenty to learn about early Federal issues. Overall I think 62 is fine. A bit more lively luster and a 63 would be easy. CAC liked it, which is plenty rare in early copper.
This is the easiest of the three. There's not much holding this one back. Just a bit of weakness, and veeeery slightly subdued luster maybe. The die cracks are interesting. One little field tick is evident below star 8 and another below the date. It's an easy 66, shot 67..... so why not 66+? I'm sure this would reliably grade right around here if submitted a dozen times.
Here's how I grade incuse gold: I look at the label. That's a slight exaggeration, but not much.
All coins look terrible if you magnify them enough. In-hand, there's nothing that draws attention to the cheek. A bit of luster graze, perhaps.
So, as for the prize, @MFeld, @Baley, @kaz, and @messydesk were each off by one grade point in total (counting the plus as 1/2 of a grade). @Baley nailed the 66+ and 64+, which is pretty impressive (or a lucky guess). Interesting that they also were precise enough to include the copper color designation.
My random number generator picks.....
drumroll....
4
Messydesk, you are a winner!
Congrats to @messydesk .
He might have a messy desk, but he’s certainly not a messy grader!😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Cool! Thanks for the contest!
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
What is really funny is that as I was making my guesses my first thoughts were
62
66+
64
But then as I was typing I (as usual) decided to tweak my guesses.😆
Nice coins @BryceM and even better write up.
Coingrats Messy, add the prize to the piles on the desk 😉 Fun thread 👍
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Fun contest! Only missed it by this much!
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Sorry for that, Maxwell Smart
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Great Fun. How about 3 coins that are Not MS? More in the 25-40 range.....
58
65+
64
My YouTube Channel
I was late
My YouTube Channel
Me too, but I had ALL 3 right, with the gold at 64+ , and changed my mind after a brain tweak. What are the chances? Dumb luck. 😂
Sounds like a great idea for the next one.
I've learned that my initial gut reaction is usually pretty close. It's probably only a good idea to change your opinion if there is a good reason to change it (hairlines that you didn't initially see, etc.)
I was on the 62/63 fence with the half cent, almost said 62+ but don't think that's a thing?
At any rate, nice to see that PCGS and CAC graded these so accurately 😉
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I was also on the 62/63 fence for the half cent. Ultimately, the subdued luster and (to a lesser extent,) the slightly rough surfaces caused me to go with 62.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I intentionally overgraded the half cent bc I never thought BryceM would buy such a low grade. So although it did not look 64, I figured I was missing something in the images. 62? Is that your lowest graded coin?
Best, SH
Congrats, Messydesk. I'm happy just to have been in the running
That Nickel must have more eye appeal / luster than it is apparent in the pic. A clean coin like that with booming eye appeal would grade MS 66 all day long. These coins are now often in 6 + holders.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
62+ is indeed "a thing".
PCGS will award a plus for grades 45-58 and 62-68, where warranted.