I struggled with Franklin halves and $5 Indian gold as the toughest series for me as well as the specific date/mm 1922 No D lincoln cent. Also I struggled with Pioneer gold. There are no winners.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@Old_Collector said:
Any heavily toned silver coins, I just cannot seem to see through the toning well enough to get close on them.
Any tips would be appreciated.
What type(s) of light do you use most often for viewing?
LED 5000 degrees (daylight type bulbs) most often and occasionally UVA 400nm bulb or simple sunlight with an open window. Is there a better color bulb for viewing toned coins?
If you haven’t already done so, I’d try 100W incandescent bulbs. I’d also consider a Tensor lamp.
Thanks, I have a case of them left over from when I switched my whole house to LED, so plenty to use in my office lamp. I'll give that a try, thanks!
You’re welcome and please let me know whether it helps.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Walking liberty half dollars in circulated condition. VG or VF? Sometimes I can't tell the difference. Not one of my favorite designs though, so I don't spend much time trying!
However, I'm going to say broadly speaking, I'd like to be able to discern consistently what is wear vs strike weakness for various classic type coins. I know to look at the whole coin side where the strike weakness might be evident when comparing the stronger strike of other device elements, but nonetheless, I could use more experience in recognizing it and having the knowledge of what is common for a particular date.
Seated Half Society member #38
"She comes out of the sun in a silk dress, running like a water color in the rain...."
Ill state it differently, The hardest part of grading for me is strike detriments or credits. So the hardest series for me are series that overweight those specific considerations in the MS ranges. I often undervalue detriments for Peace dollars & walkers at MS63 and above that are strike limited due to me actually preferring weak strikes. Even knowing the game, Ill throw out Gem grades for luster bombs with clean surfaces knowing deep down they need to be at the 64 level to CAC.
Its the incongruousness of my standards vs market standards.
Grading-wise, I struggle most with modern clads (quarters and halves). Coins that I think should be 67 come back 64 or 65. And I see Coinfacts photos of 67 State Quarters that look 63 or 64 to me. I am still very low on the learning curve compared with classic coins.
I see a distinction between the hardest coin and hardest series to grade. Coins within a series are simply not created equal and the key is to develop an appreciation for production issues and characteristics that make the coin what it should be. And having written that, there will be glaring differences between different dates at the same grade level. A 1925 D Buffalo that grades 64 will simply not match a 1938 D. My point is that certain dates within a series represent a greater challenge to grade than others.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
In addition to those coins already mentioned, the California Fractional Gold Coins are difficult to grade due to their small size and their primitive methods of manufacture.
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
Spoiler alert - you’re about to read a grading tip.
Not surprisingly, a popular answer among respondents to this thread was incuse ($2.50 and $5) Indian gold coins. Prior to my working at NGC, that might have been my answer, as well. But I was greatly assisted by a tip that one of my fellow graders gave me. I don’t remember exactly what he said - I’ll use the excuse that it was more than 30 years ago - but it led me to start focusing on the fields, first, rather than the devices. And ever since that conversation, it’s made a world of difference.
For example, I used to start my grading assessments by examining the devices first. And in many instances, the coins looked like they had rub on the Indian’s cheek, so I was immediately thinking AU or lower for the grade. But due to the incuse designs, as a general rule, if the fields qualify as mint state, so should the devices. So when starting the grading process, I recommend examining and assessing the fields first. Form a preliminary grade opinion based on that. Then, look at the devices, and while doing so, keep in mind that some of the issues are apt to exhibit areas of striking weakness. Don’t take that for wear. After you’ve assessed the devices, if warranted, make any adjustments to your preliminary grade. And voilà, you're an incuse gold coin grader.😉
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld said:
Spoiler alert - you’re about to read a grading tip.
Not surprisingly, a popular answer among respondents to this thread was incuse ($2.50 and $5) Indian gold coins. Prior to my working at NGC, that might have been my answer, as well. But I was greatly assisted by a tip that one of my fellow graders gave me. I don’t remember exactly what he said - I’ll use the excuse that it was more than 30 years ago - but it led me to start focusing on the fields, first, rather than the devices. And ever since that conversation, it’s made a world of difference.
For example, I used to start my grading assessments by examining the devices first. And in many instances, the coins looked like they had rub on the Indian’s cheek, so I was immediately thinking AU or lower for the grade. But due to the incuse designs, as a general rule, if the fields qualify as mint state, so should the devices. So when starting the grading process, I recommend examining and assessing the fields first. Form a preliminary grade opinion based on that. Then, look at the devices, and while doing so, keep in mind that some of the issues are apt to exhibit areas of striking weakness. Don’t take that for wear. After you’ve assed the devices, if warranted, make any adjustments to your preliminary grade. And voilà, you're an incuse gold coin grader.😉
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
Heard this strategy years ago, so I tried it and never went back. Fantastic tip.
@RedRocket said:
Great advice.
Does this strategy work on any other series or just the incused gold?
QD Bowers once recommended that he studies the right obverse field on walking liberty halves, to differentiate slider AUs from MS coins, by looking for breaks in the cartwheel luster. This helped me a lot. Of course it works better with the coins in hand, but can be useful on photographs, depending on the lighting and angle.
@MFeld said:
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
I'm more involved with world coins than US coins and this is what I do. There's not always any sort of grading guide available and there are far too many types involved to have encyclopedic knowledge of strength of strike issues, so you have to start somewhere. If it works for you that's cool, but my personal opinion is that focusing on details of the design right off the bat can be misleading ("Full horn" buffalo nickels, anyone?). Starting with the fields is what works for me.
"This reverse is the most heavily worn reverse in the 1922 Cent universe. Even on Mint State coins the reverse has the detail of a Fair-2 coin."
I don't think that handling a coin right off the dies just a little bit wears an uncirculated coin down to Fair. How about you?
As I said, the reverse has the detail of a Fair-2 coin when new. There is no wear on the coin.
With original luster and color you can tell it is a Mint State coin. Handle it a few times and the grade on the reverse drops from 60 to 2.
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Author of "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
@RedRocket said:
Great advice.
Does this strategy work on any other series or just the incused gold?
None that I’m aware of.
Thank you.
It would make for an interesting thread for experts (such as yourself and others here) to contribute 'inside baseball' grading tips for various denominations. Those specialists within their fields of interest.
It's interesting to note that the incused Indian $2.5 and $5 gold coins do not have raised rims to help protect the fields from wear and all devices are at the level of the fields or below the fields with one exception. The mintmark is the only design element that is raised above the fields since it's punched into the completed die as a separate operation and it usually shows considerable wear after brief circulation since there are no raised rims to protect it.
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
While I suspect there will be pushback for posting this image to this question, it really illustrates my earlier point and expanding on the importance of closely examining the fields. Starting with the fields on just about any series really helps with not the quality of the strike and grade, but the question of originality which is important to some collectors.
There really is no substitute for developing the necessary knowledge of coins within a series and the skill to recognize whether the coin in question is simply as good as it is going to get.
I suspect this coin would not fare too well here if we were to offer grade opinions.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
"This reverse is the most heavily worn reverse in the 1922 Cent universe. Even on Mint State coins the reverse has the detail of a Fair-2 coin."
I don't think that handling a coin right off the dies just a little bit wears an uncirculated coin down to Fair. How about you?
The dies are worn to the point that a mint state coin has a similar level of detail as a Fair 2, is how i interpret it.
Yes, I understand that. My question is- does lightly handling a mint state coin immediately wear it down to Fair 2? I don't think so, but that doesn't work for those who depend on design details (or lack of them) for grading.
"This reverse is the most heavily worn reverse in the 1922 Cent universe. Even on Mint State coins the reverse has the detail of a Fair-2 coin."
I don't think that handling a coin right off the dies just a little bit wears an uncirculated coin down to Fair. How about you?
The dies are worn to the point that a mint state coin has a similar level of detail as a Fair 2, is how i interpret it.
Yes, I understand that. My question is- does lightly handling a mint state coin immediately wear it down to Fair 2? I don't think so, but that doesn't work for those who depend on design details (or lack of them) for grading.
Like the Die Pair #2, you grade it by the stronger side.
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Author of "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
The hardest coins for me to grade are Ancients, most especially Byzantine copper. But after that, I would say just about anything struck off of roller dies is extremely difficult to grade.
I would have to say the smaller denomination proofs. i have always struggled with PF 3CN and PF Buffalo Nickels. I think when its proof its already supposed to have some standards, so sometimes certain marks and such seem to really lower the grade and throws me off.
@MFeld said:
Spoiler alert - you’re about to read a grading tip.
Not surprisingly, a popular answer among respondents to this thread was incuse ($2.50 and $5) Indian gold coins. Prior to my working at NGC, that might have been my answer, as well. But I was greatly assisted by a tip that one of my fellow graders gave me. I don’t remember exactly what he said - I’ll use the excuse that it was more than 30 years ago - but it led me to start focusing on the fields, first, rather than the devices. And ever since that conversation, it’s made a world of difference.
For example, I used to start my grading assessments by examining the devices first. And in many instances, the coins looked like they had rub on the Indian’s cheek, so I was immediately thinking AU or lower for the grade. But due to the incuse designs, as a general rule, if the fields qualify as mint state, so should the devices. So when starting the grading process, I recommend examining and assessing the fields first. Form a preliminary grade opinion based on that. Then, look at the devices, and while doing so, keep in mind that some of the issues are apt to exhibit areas of striking weakness. Don’t take that for wear. After you’ve assed the devices, if warranted, make any adjustments to your preliminary grade. And voilà, you're an incuse gold coin grader.😉
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
So...ummm...how does one do that to the devices...and when is it warranted?
@Old_Collector said:
Any heavily toned silver coins, I just cannot seem to see through the toning well enough to get close on them.
Any tips would be appreciated.
What type(s) of light do you use most often for viewing?
LED 5000 degrees (daylight type bulbs) most often and occasionally UVA 400nm bulb or simple sunlight with an open window. Is there a better color bulb for viewing toned coins?
If you haven’t already done so, I’d try 100W incandescent bulbs. I’d also consider a Tensor lamp.
Where can I buy a case of them?
Sorry, I don’t know, but think there’s a decent chance that quite a few large dealers have a supply of them.
I don’t know if 250 pounds qualifies me as a large dealer, but I do have a good supply. NFS though.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@MFeld said:
Spoiler alert - you’re about to read a grading tip.
Not surprisingly, a popular answer among respondents to this thread was incuse ($2.50 and $5) Indian gold coins. Prior to my working at NGC, that might have been my answer, as well. But I was greatly assisted by a tip that one of my fellow graders gave me. I don’t remember exactly what he said - I’ll use the excuse that it was more than 30 years ago - but it led me to start focusing on the fields, first, rather than the devices. And ever since that conversation, it’s made a world of difference.
For example, I used to start my grading assessments by examining the devices first. And in many instances, the coins looked like they had rub on the Indian’s cheek, so I was immediately thinking AU or lower for the grade. But due to the incuse designs, as a general rule, if the fields qualify as mint state, so should the devices. So when starting the grading process, I recommend examining and assessing the fields first. Form a preliminary grade opinion based on that. Then, look at the devices, and while doing so, keep in mind that some of the issues are apt to exhibit areas of striking weakness. Don’t take that for wear. After you’ve assed the devices, if warranted, make any adjustments to your preliminary grade. And voilà, you're an incuse gold coin grader.😉
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
So...ummm...how does one do that to the devices...and when is it warranted?
Thank you, Tom. I have corrected my typo. And in answer to your two questions - you’ll have to wait for my next grading tip to find out.😀
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld said:
Spoiler alert - you’re about to read a grading tip.
Not surprisingly, a popular answer among respondents to this thread was incuse ($2.50 and $5) Indian gold coins. Prior to my working at NGC, that might have been my answer, as well. But I was greatly assisted by a tip that one of my fellow graders gave me. I don’t remember exactly what he said - I’ll use the excuse that it was more than 30 years ago - but it led me to start focusing on the fields, first, rather than the devices. And ever since that conversation, it’s made a world of difference.
For example, I used to start my grading assessments by examining the devices first. And in many instances, the coins looked like they had rub on the Indian’s cheek, so I was immediately thinking AU or lower for the grade. But due to the incuse designs, as a general rule, if the fields qualify as mint state, so should the devices. So when starting the grading process, I recommend examining and assessing the fields first. Form a preliminary grade opinion based on that. Then, look at the devices, and while doing so, keep in mind that some of the issues are apt to exhibit areas of striking weakness. Don’t take that for wear. After you’ve assed the devices, if warranted, make any adjustments to your preliminary grade. And voilà, you're an incuse gold coin grader.😉
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
So...ummm...how does one do that to the devices...and when is it warranted?
I saw that, but did not wish to be judgmental.
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Author of "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
@MFeld said:
Spoiler alert - you’re about to read a grading tip.
Not surprisingly, a popular answer among respondents to this thread was incuse ($2.50 and $5) Indian gold coins. Prior to my working at NGC, that might have been my answer, as well. But I was greatly assisted by a tip that one of my fellow graders gave me. I don’t remember exactly what he said - I’ll use the excuse that it was more than 30 years ago - but it led me to start focusing on the fields, first, rather than the devices. And ever since that conversation, it’s made a world of difference.
For example, I used to start my grading assessments by examining the devices first. And in many instances, the coins looked like they had rub on the Indian’s cheek, so I was immediately thinking AU or lower for the grade. But due to the incuse designs, as a general rule, if the fields qualify as mint state, so should the devices. So when starting the grading process, I recommend examining and assessing the fields first. Form a preliminary grade opinion based on that. Then, look at the devices, and while doing so, keep in mind that some of the issues are apt to exhibit areas of striking weakness. Don’t take that for wear. After you’ve assed the devices, if warranted, make any adjustments to your preliminary grade. And voilà, you're an incuse gold coin grader.😉
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
So...ummm...how does one do that to the devices...and when is it warranted?
I’m not sure exactly how it’s done, but I’m pretty sure I’ve seen lots of coins that have undergone the process.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I recently had to catalog two boxes full of certified cobs. Based on what I would call extreme outliers in terms of assigned grades, maybe these are toughest?
Then again, I am not sure they properly fall under the category of "coins".
Comments
I struggled with Franklin halves and $5 Indian gold as the toughest series for me as well as the specific date/mm 1922 No D lincoln cent. Also I struggled with Pioneer gold. There are no winners.
It scares me when I meet with John Albanese and he cannot read a fine print paper document without putting his glasses on. LOL.
Definitely blank planchets!
It’s harder to see the design.
Commemoratives just because there are so many different designs.
You’re welcome and please let me know whether it helps.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have the opposite problem, when I'm wearing glasses or contacts I have a hard time seeing fine details up close, without glasses it's no problem.
3c silver coins.
Also coins with a lot of things going on on the surfaces that have redeeming features as well as near fatal flaws.
Walking liberty half dollars in circulated condition. VG or VF? Sometimes I can't tell the difference. Not one of my favorite designs though, so I don't spend much time trying!
Ditto re: Indian incuse gold.
However, I'm going to say broadly speaking, I'd like to be able to discern consistently what is wear vs strike weakness for various classic type coins. I know to look at the whole coin side where the strike weakness might be evident when comparing the stronger strike of other device elements, but nonetheless, I could use more experience in recognizing it and having the knowledge of what is common for a particular date.
"She comes out of the sun in a silk dress,
running like a water color in the rain...."
All of them...
Ill state it differently, The hardest part of grading for me is strike detriments or credits. So the hardest series for me are series that overweight those specific considerations in the MS ranges. I often undervalue detriments for Peace dollars & walkers at MS63 and above that are strike limited due to me actually preferring weak strikes. Even knowing the game, Ill throw out Gem grades for luster bombs with clean surfaces knowing deep down they need to be at the 64 level to CAC.
Its the incongruousness of my standards vs market standards.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Most moderns. They seldom show much wear at all and appear AU at worst. They also seem, to me, to have the least amount of detail. JMO
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
For me, those are the hardest to authenticate, even with the Fivaz book!
Grading-wise, I struggle most with modern clads (quarters and halves). Coins that I think should be 67 come back 64 or 65. And I see Coinfacts photos of 67 State Quarters that look 63 or 64 to me. I am still very low on the learning curve compared with classic coins.
Indian Gold, certain type coins
I see a distinction between the hardest coin and hardest series to grade. Coins within a series are simply not created equal and the key is to develop an appreciation for production issues and characteristics that make the coin what it should be. And having written that, there will be glaring differences between different dates at the same grade level. A 1925 D Buffalo that grades 64 will simply not match a 1938 D. My point is that certain dates within a series represent a greater challenge to grade than others.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
In addition to those coins already mentioned, the California Fractional Gold Coins are difficult to grade due to their small size and their primitive methods of manufacture.
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
Spoiler alert - you’re about to read a grading tip.
Not surprisingly, a popular answer among respondents to this thread was incuse ($2.50 and $5) Indian gold coins. Prior to my working at NGC, that might have been my answer, as well. But I was greatly assisted by a tip that one of my fellow graders gave me. I don’t remember exactly what he said - I’ll use the excuse that it was more than 30 years ago - but it led me to start focusing on the fields, first, rather than the devices. And ever since that conversation, it’s made a world of difference.
For example, I used to start my grading assessments by examining the devices first. And in many instances, the coins looked like they had rub on the Indian’s cheek, so I was immediately thinking AU or lower for the grade. But due to the incuse designs, as a general rule, if the fields qualify as mint state, so should the devices. So when starting the grading process, I recommend examining and assessing the fields first. Form a preliminary grade opinion based on that. Then, look at the devices, and while doing so, keep in mind that some of the issues are apt to exhibit areas of striking weakness. Don’t take that for wear. After you’ve assessed the devices, if warranted, make any adjustments to your preliminary grade. And voilà, you're an incuse gold coin grader.😉
If anyone who’s reading this tries it, please report back and let us know if it helped.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Great advice.
Does this strategy work on any other series or just the incused gold?
Heard this strategy years ago, so I tried it and never went back. Fantastic tip.
Coin Photography
QD Bowers once recommended that he studies the right obverse field on walking liberty halves, to differentiate slider AUs from MS coins, by looking for breaks in the cartwheel luster. This helped me a lot. Of course it works better with the coins in hand, but can be useful on photographs, depending on the lighting and angle.
None that I’m aware of.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm more involved with world coins than US coins and this is what I do. There's not always any sort of grading guide available and there are far too many types involved to have encyclopedic knowledge of strength of strike issues, so you have to start somewhere. If it works for you that's cool, but my personal opinion is that focusing on details of the design right off the bat can be misleading ("Full horn" buffalo nickels, anyone?). Starting with the fields is what works for me.
On another thread, CaptHenway said:
"This reverse is the most heavily worn reverse in the 1922 Cent universe. Even on Mint State coins the reverse has the detail of a Fair-2 coin."
I don't think that handling a coin right off the dies just a little bit wears an uncirculated coin down to Fair. How about you?
Cool thread. As I read through this, I thought that authentication might be even more difficult than grading.
As goofy as it sounds, I have a bit of a hard time with Morgans. I learned on Peace dollars, and Morgans always seem a point or two over-graded to me.
As I said, the reverse has the detail of a Fair-2 coin when new. There is no wear on the coin.
With original luster and color you can tell it is a Mint State coin. Handle it a few times and the grade on the reverse drops from 60 to 2.
Thank you.
It would make for an interesting thread for experts (such as yourself and others here) to contribute 'inside baseball' grading tips for various denominations. Those specialists within their fields of interest.
It's interesting to note that the incused Indian $2.5 and $5 gold coins do not have raised rims to help protect the fields from wear and all devices are at the level of the fields or below the fields with one exception. The mintmark is the only design element that is raised above the fields since it's punched into the completed die as a separate operation and it usually shows considerable wear after brief circulation since there are no raised rims to protect it.
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
Italy -Venice 1732-35 Ducato
While I suspect there will be pushback for posting this image to this question, it really illustrates my earlier point and expanding on the importance of closely examining the fields. Starting with the fields on just about any series really helps with not the quality of the strike and grade, but the question of originality which is important to some collectors.
There really is no substitute for developing the necessary knowledge of coins within a series and the skill to recognize whether the coin in question is simply as good as it is going to get.
I suspect this coin would not fare too well here if we were to offer grade opinions.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
The dies are worn to the point that a mint state coin has a similar level of detail as a Fair 2, is how i interpret it.
Cotton bolls on Morgan dollars, according to an old timer would be a tell tale wear indicator.
Yes, I understand that. My question is- does lightly handling a mint state coin immediately wear it down to Fair 2? I don't think so, but that doesn't work for those who depend on design details (or lack of them) for grading.
Does this forum not allow us to type, 'balls'?
The part of the cotton plant that contains the seeds and fluff is actually called a boll
Well, that is quite embarrassing.
Like the Die Pair #2, you grade it by the stronger side.
And the destructive insect that attacks them is the boll weevil.
The hardest coins for me to grade are Ancients, most especially Byzantine copper. But after that, I would say just about anything struck off of roller dies is extremely difficult to grade.
Official PCGS account of:
www.TallahasseeCoinClub.com
I would have to say the smaller denomination proofs. i have always struggled with PF 3CN and PF Buffalo Nickels. I think when its proof its already supposed to have some standards, so sometimes certain marks and such seem to really lower the grade and throws me off.
I’d say Peace dollars and I have a hard time with Buffalo nickels sometimes.
So...ummm...how does one do that to the devices...and when is it warranted?
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Not just the strike, but the depth of the die cutting.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I don’t know if 250 pounds qualifies me as a large dealer, but I do have a good supply. NFS though.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Only if you are 5'6" or shorter.
Thank you, Tom. I have corrected my typo. And in answer to your two questions - you’ll have to wait for my next grading tip to find out.😀
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I saw that, but did not wish to be judgmental.
I’m not sure exactly how it’s done, but I’m pretty sure I’ve seen lots of coins that have undergone the process.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I recently had to catalog two boxes full of certified cobs. Based on what I would call extreme outliers in terms of assigned grades, maybe these are toughest?
Then again, I am not sure they properly fall under the category of "coins".
Official PCGS account of:
www.TallahasseeCoinClub.com
@MrEureka
250 pounds simply doesn't buy as much as it once did...
1826 Half Crown Mint State
You are a big dealer... its just that the coins have become even bigger.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.