Options
I got questionable color. Does this look natural 1888 O
Scomer412
Posts: 10 ✭
I believe this got questionable color due the high grade and beauty of the coin. Why does PCGS do this when this coin clearly has some old textile toning and natural look.
This has not been AT and I’ve had it for years.
What grade would you give it?
Do you think it’s Questionable Color?
Thanks fellow collectors
0
Comments
It’s almost a flawless cheek too!
Ok thanks for honest opinion. And please if you’re just looking to knock someone or bring them down don’t post, just honest happy collectors.
God bles
Yea there is a cudd at the top
I would send it to NGC or ICG and get it holdered then try to cross it to PCGS later.
Welcome to the forum.
Sorry, but (edited) portions of the color look questionable to me. High quality and attractiveness aren’t reasons that coins ate labeled “questionable color”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Not sure, I’d think it was NT too if I saw it. But maybe something was done to camouflage that scratch that starts on Liberty’s chin and goes across the cheek and/or the funky black patch on the 888 in the date. Might have strategically darkened the toning in one of those 2 places to camouflage damage. Here’s enlarged images showing the 2 areas I’m referring to. But yeah, if it was in a straight graded holder I wouldn’t be suspicious
Mr_Spud
Looks original to me, at least based on the pics. Are there signs of cleaning beneath the toning?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
It passes my eyes as NT. Must be something I can't see.
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
U.S. Army Veteran 1/11 ACR Fulda, Germany
From the PCGS images my first reaction was that it would go QC (Questionable Color). YMMV.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
As mentioned by another member the dark toning around the date looks off and may have been what caused the QC designation.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
As others have opined, I would get your strongest loupe and look closely at the dark toning around the date. Check to see if anything is hiding under there.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Would give it - Unc Details, agree with our hosts - questionable color.
Overall just dont like it. What’s going on with the cheek - white stuff? Yuck.
Did you buy this coin raw?
It looks market acceptable.
The dark area around the date looks terminal-getting close to environmental damage but probably not quite there. I don't think it is something that would cause a QC designation. If it is hiding a scratch or cleaning, then one of those should have been listed as the reason for details.
Welcome aboard. Look. the problem with subjectivity is a loss of objectivity. And fear must play a part in the grader's mind.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I think it's natural, and that it should receive a straight grade of 67 or maybe 67+. Surprising it didn't get a straight grade considering the textile pattern from 12 to 2 o'clock on the obverse, but I agree that it was most likely suspected of AT because of the dark spot by the date. If it were me, I would try cracking it out and resubmitting, or trying a different grading service.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Absent color .... ( not that I suggest a dip and ruin pretty.....) it looks near gem.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Color progression looks off to me
"Bongo hurtles along the rain soaked highway of life on underinflated bald retread tires."
~Wayne
Look at the pull-away toning under the date and the stars. That form of toning is extremely hard to replicate for coin doctors, if not impossible. I say NT.
Successful BST transactions- Bfjohnson, Collectorcoins, 1peter223, Shrub68, Byers, Greencopper, Coinlieutenant, Coinhunter4, SurfinxHI, ProfLiz
The PCGS graders see a lot of "color" Morgan Dollars. They have probably gotten very proficient at spotting artificial toning.
AT is most likely correct.
Well what the graders say is like the down marker when the ref indicates the line of scrimmage. What they say talks and everybody else and their bs walks.
At first got me as being dullish, then obv
unattractive white spots. Certainly not straight grade lol. Can’t decide what is more terrible about it the obv cheek white spots or mess top rt obv.
A no go for me any way you slice it. Do you think you could get MS60 bid with a problem coin dealer or would he discount it even more behind that. I would think the latter. How Much below MS 60 MV would it even be tagged for retail sell?
I don't think the color is artificial, so I wouldn't call it "questionable color".
However, I suspect that the coin had a larger dark patch around the date, and someone worked on it to lighten some of that area (via localized cleaning).
to me its AT. Sorry.
Yea there is a cudd at the top> @U1chicago said:
Yes I sent it to Pcgs. They said environmental damage on the date. I sent to NGC to conserve the coin. Sent back a ms62. I was very shocked since cheek is almost flawless other than the tiny scratch. Sent to PCGS, questionable color. Strike, luster are all very good. I’m going to send to NGC again to look at. You all are very good with coins, 🎩 is off to you:
It’s natural, small textile toning it hard to replicate and would take years if possible at all.
I’ll update you, but at least ms66 or better from others I’ve seen.
I think the unattractive toning on the cheek looks like damage, but is not and at quick glance (they look at coins for 5-10 seconds each) they assumed damage but it’s not. Just the way it toned over decades, and to be honest it toned a bit too long if you ask me.
If it comes back straight grade, what grade do you all see this coin receiving?
Yea I did. This will be the 3rd submission
It’s already received a straight grade from NGC. This is not a problem coin, I guess you would need to hold it to make a better judgment. Pictures are hard
Best photos I could get without the cheek toning looking like damage, because it’s not. Gonna try pcgs one more time then anacs maybe before NGC. Anacs is the most conservative grading service so if they give it a high grade I’ll be good (yes they are not first in market, but harsh on grades)
"Anacs is the most conservative grading service", where the heck did you get that from?
I think @dcarr is correct. It looks like someone played around with the color and this sort of "tipped them off".
If it was in an NGC MS62 that's where it should have stayed.
I do like the eye appeal of the coin overall myself.
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7 JWP BruceS bigjpst
JWP PROMETHIUS88
I like the Trueview pictures better than the second set. Based on the Trueview, I would have said natural but in the 2nd set the coin doesn't look quite right overall.
Their current iteration is pretty conservative
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Their> @Scomer412 said:
It's your money, but you're just throwing good money after bad.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I would have fallen for it but wouldn’t have paid big premium raw. If I saw the edge and it was bright untoned I wouldn’t have gone near it unless base price.