@Catbert said:
This is a new piece (AU55) and is off to CAC stickering review. The TV accurately captures the subtle toning when tilted but the coin is pearlescent straight on. Will be curious to see if it passes. It has an excellent strike and in my opinion it is worthy. Despite the 3.1M mintage, this date isn't easy to find.
Edited to add grade.
Wow! That is hammered! Miss Liberty in her gown looks vacuum sealed.
@Barberian Thanks. I do like the coin. It's on its way back from NJ and it did not pass go. When I get it, I'll find out why. Regardless, I will be keeping and liking the coin.
Look out, Loretta! My 16-coin economy submission grades just posted.
15 out of 16 coins straight-graded. The one that received a "VF details, 98 - Damage" well, I'll let you be the judge. Here's a scan of this darkly toned coin where I've increased the exposure to show surfaces better.
I'll post TVs of the SLH when they're posted.
Edited to add - Yes, that is a serious hit on the upper chest that has to be pointed out. I forget that it's there because it blends in so well with its toning.
Edited again to add - the hit is not why they dinged it. The label reads "PCGS Genuine - Edge Damaged - VF detail." The coin has edges on which the reeding is excessively worn down as if it was hit repeatedly with a spoon. It's a VF+ coin with AG rims. I'd noticed that but had forgotten about it when I chose the coin for this submission.
Lots of "lumps of coal" being loaded up today. A clinker in the mix as well.
@Catbert is that you I see tailgating me in the registry rankings now? Yes! My "coal seam" sits atop Catbert's coruscating "Fleurs des Coins" for the moment.
@JBN, @Southcounty, @LJenkins11, @Catbert, you guys blow my mind frequently with your coins. Many others as well. Catbert has turned into George Costanza, lately! - "When he sees objects of great beauty, he must have them."
Here's a few more, plus the clinker. Several of these halves are duplicates. Nice, raw 1843, 1844, 1846, and late-50's Philly and New Orleans halves were often available on eBay and I'd grab a few.
1858 VF30 - This coin has a splash of iridescent color on the obverse that is not captured by this Trueview. This colorful toning is the reason I had this graded.
1859 EF40 - nicely toned coin with few marks - I forgot that I had this nice coin.
1859-O EF40 -
1856 VF Details - damaged - that hit across upper chest needs to be revealed, IMO. I forgot how extensive that hit was and how it's hidden by toning.
I finally figured out what got the 1856 dinged. I initially thought that the large strike across the upper chest, partially hidden by the coin's dark toning, was the problem.
Yesterday, I received the coin and the label says "PCGS Genuine - Edge Damaged - VF Detail." It turns out that the coin was dinged for having unusually smooth reeding as if it were tapped down with a spoon. I noticed it a long time ago but forgot about it. It's reassuring that PCGS caught it, even at my expense. In general, PCGS has been very good at catching problems with my coins, i.e., I haven't had a coin with a significant problem that I recognized slip past PCGS graders unnoticed. One can see the problem as well with their pronged holders. The 1856 is still a beautiful, darkly-toned coin with no hairlines and a toned over hit to the chest - it just warns the public about the rim.
@Catbert said: @Barberian PCGS attributed my coin as a WB-1, large O? Is your mintmark thicker than mine? I've not taken the time to do the variety lookup
Cool! Now it's collectible as both a nice 1840-O WB8 (R5) and as a PCGS misattributed coin.
The enlarged "square" dentils almost touching star 6, the MM position, and the reverse die break between the ES in STATES running to the eagle's head tell me it's a WB-8.
It has the same date as a WB-1. Maybe that's what confused them.
@Catbert said: @Barberian PCGS attributed my coin as a WB-1, large O? Is your mintmark thicker than mine? I've not taken the time to do the variety lookup
Cool! Now it's collectible as both a nice 1840-O WB8 (R5) and as a PCGS misattributed coin.
The enlarged "square" dentils almost touching star 6, the MM position, and the reverse die break between the ES in STATES running to the eagle's head tell me it's a WB-8.
It has the same date as a WB-1. Maybe that's what confused them.
To follow up on this, it's not unusual to find misattributed coins on Coin Facts. I find them often and have sent messages to CF about them. Frankly, if the attributor had any experience with BB's guides or DM guides in general, they would not have made that mistake.
I see misidentifications all the time in my field as well. This level of mistake reveals a high degree of inexperience, to put it politely. Perhaps a free reholdering would be in order.
Yup. There have been a couple of them on eBay lately. The timing was right that's for sure. This one was unattributed and looks OK for straight grading, though I likely won't grade this coin. Anytime I see the mintmark positioned wide left as it is on the WB-9, I try to grab it. As you know, the die break between the D and O is diagnostic for WB-9.
@Barberian said:
Speaking of 1840-O die marriages, I won this coin on eBay tonight.
It arrived today. Looks OK. The seller's photos were decent, but he hid some scratches. It has 146 reeds, so it is a later die state and considered an R4. Some light scratches in the right field and leg. The rim ding is large.
Comments
A recent upgrade to my collection, PCGS AU55 CAC.
Almost missed that "O", Beautiful!
Another recent upgrade PCGS AU55 CAC
Nice looking SLHs!
@Crepidodera That '59-O quarter is incredible looking, wow.
A Barber Quartet is made up of Nickels, Dimes, Quarters, and Halves.
@sedulous Thank you, it's the nicest example of that date that I've owned.
Doug
Wow! That is hammered! Miss Liberty in her gown looks vacuum sealed.
My 1886 is similar.
Tilted.
Direct light.
@Barberian Thanks. I do like the coin. It's on its way back from NJ and it did not pass go. When I get it, I'll find out why. Regardless, I will be keeping and liking the coin.
Look out, Loretta! My 16-coin economy submission grades just posted.
15 out of 16 coins straight-graded. The one that received a "VF details, 98 - Damage" well, I'll let you be the judge. Here's a scan of this darkly toned coin where I've increased the exposure to show surfaces better.
I'll post TVs of the SLH when they're posted.
Edited to add - Yes, that is a serious hit on the upper chest that has to be pointed out. I forget that it's there because it blends in so well with its toning.
Edited again to add - the hit is not why they dinged it. The label reads "PCGS Genuine - Edge Damaged - VF detail." The coin has edges on which the reeding is excessively worn down as if it was hit repeatedly with a spoon. It's a VF+ coin with AG rims. I'd noticed that but had forgotten about it when I chose the coin for this submission.
Replaces my VF20. Not a huge upgrade but I'll take it.
1842 VF25
1842-O VF20
1846-O MD VF20
1855-O VF35
1858-O EF40
1862 WB-1 F12
1872-S WB-2 VF25
1873 WB-4 NA Closed 3 EF40
1877-CC WB-15 VF30
1877-S VF30
Barberian DOWNLOAD has commenced!
Lots of "lumps of coal" being loaded up today. A clinker in the mix as well.
@Catbert is that you I see tailgating me in the registry rankings now? Yes! My "coal seam" sits atop Catbert's coruscating "Fleurs des Coins" for the moment.
Barberian: A great collection of half dollars!
Here is a big bro for your 72-S:
Outstanding!
Wow! Rare and NICE!
Thanks, JBN for the encouraging words.
@JBN, @Southcounty, @LJenkins11, @Catbert, you guys blow my mind frequently with your coins. Many others as well. Catbert has turned into George Costanza, lately! - "When he sees objects of great beauty, he must have them."
That 72-S is amazing!
Here's a few more, plus the clinker. Several of these halves are duplicates. Nice, raw 1843, 1844, 1846, and late-50's Philly and New Orleans halves were often available on eBay and I'd grab a few.
1858 VF30 - This coin has a splash of iridescent color on the obverse that is not captured by this Trueview. This colorful toning is the reason I had this graded.
1859 EF40 - nicely toned coin with few marks - I forgot that I had this nice coin.
1859-O EF40 -
1856 VF Details - damaged - that hit across upper chest needs to be revealed, IMO. I forgot how extensive that hit was and how it's hidden by toning.
Wow…. What a great collection of nice SLHs !!! Love it !!
Here's my 72-S's other "little brother". It's going in with the next submission and beyond. It's one of my favorite SLHs.
Cracked and submitted raw. VF25.
Nice coin Don! I remember seeing that coin a few months ago. That's a tough coin to find original and problem free.
Doug
Thanks! Yeah, that''s been a tough one to upgrade to VF.
VF35 upgrade. Previous coin was a VF25.
I finally figured out what got the 1856 dinged. I initially thought that the large strike across the upper chest, partially hidden by the coin's dark toning, was the problem.
Yesterday, I received the coin and the label says "PCGS Genuine - Edge Damaged - VF Detail." It turns out that the coin was dinged for having unusually smooth reeding as if it were tapped down with a spoon. I noticed it a long time ago but forgot about it. It's reassuring that PCGS caught it, even at my expense. In general, PCGS has been very good at catching problems with my coins, i.e., I haven't had a coin with a significant problem that I recognized slip past PCGS graders unnoticed. One can see the problem as well with their pronged holders. The 1856 is still a beautiful, darkly-toned coin with no hairlines and a toned over hit to the chest - it just warns the public about the rim.
MS63 CAC
Accurate pics by @robec
A nice green coin with flecks of red. I'll bet the reeding isn't flat on that one. Beautiful coin, @Catbert!
Thanks Mr. B. As you've stated previously, it's coruscating! (I had to look up the definition - not in my vocabulary)
AU58 CAC
Accurate pics by @robec
A very nice WB-8, @Catbert. Nice color. You fought off the Everyman horde!
Here's my WB-8. Safe and pedestrian.
Another addition…
@Barberian PCGS attributed my coin as a WB-1, large O? Is your mintmark thicker than mine? I've not taken the time to do the variety lookup
Cool! Now it's collectible as both a nice 1840-O WB8 (R5) and as a PCGS misattributed coin.
The enlarged "square" dentils almost touching star 6, the MM position, and the reverse die break between the ES in STATES running to the eagle's head tell me it's a WB-8.
It has the same date as a WB-1. Maybe that's what confused them.
A real WB-1 (not a PCGS WB-1) just sold on eBay. I should have grabbed it but it would have been a details coin replacing another details coin.
Note the weak 4 and die breaks in the stars
Zig-zag die break at arrows.
To follow up on this, it's not unusual to find misattributed coins on Coin Facts. I find them often and have sent messages to CF about them. Frankly, if the attributor had any experience with BB's guides or DM guides in general, they would not have made that mistake.
I see misidentifications all the time in my field as well. This level of mistake reveals a high degree of inexperience, to put it politely. Perhaps a free reholdering would be in order.
Speaking of 1840-O die marriages, I won this coin on eBay tonight.
@ Barbarian very nice, just in time for baseball season. WB-9?
Yup. There have been a couple of them on eBay lately. The timing was right that's for sure. This one was unattributed and looks OK for straight grading, though I likely won't grade this coin. Anytime I see the mintmark positioned wide left as it is on the WB-9, I try to grab it. As you know, the die break between the D and O is diagnostic for WB-9.
Reholder trueview.
Reholder trueview
Upgrade for my VF35
It arrived today. Looks OK. The seller's photos were decent, but he hid some scratches. It has 146 reeds, so it is a later die state and considered an R4. Some light scratches in the right field and leg. The rim ding is large.
Here's a scan
Another 1872 S Half, MS63 at hosts. Preslab bad pictures by me
Well, just Love coins, period.
My Newp!!