Options
This must be gorgeous in hand
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,796 ✭✭✭✭✭
Because my first reaction off the obverse image was ‘whoaaaaa’ and not in a good way
0
Comments
I swear that I already knew what coin you must have posted before I even clicked on the link.
I had the exact same thought when I saw it 15 minutes ago.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
Holder scuffs? Except they outline the design.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
So way back in 1986 when I was at submarine school in Connecticut I received a seated Liberty dollar that was graded 64 because of slight hairlines on the obverse but was drop dead gorgeous with hard mirrors and subtle original toning. I always wondered if that coin would have made a higher grade these days and now I know for sure.
Die polish? Wouldn't hairlines go right up to the relief?
I suspect that part of this has to be raised lines associated with die polish... especially to the left and at the heaviest area in the fields affected. Otherwise... there is simply no reasonable way this coin could end up in a 65 holder... period.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Looks like die polish to me.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Trueview doesn't look as bad, but also doesn't really show the surfaces well. Those hairlines are probably light, they just caught it at an angle that really highlights them.
Straight die polish lines? Hmmmmmm
Edited to add: For that matter, I’ve never seen a proof only trade dollar with die polish lines. Not a single one.
Not die polish. I think the hairline patch is present on the coin, but the photo through the slab is making it look worse than it actually is.
I'm thinking roller marks.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
I don't think they're roller marks and don't think they're hairlines, which makes me think they are die polish lines. Roller marks would likely be more parallel to one another and these are not all parallel while hairlines would most likely go up to and over the devices and these lines appear to stop cleanly well within the open fields. These open areas are the highest point of any die so I think they were polished.
Obviously, I have not seen the coin in-hand and could absolutely be wrong.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Ya sure that’s not because you mostly deal in the moon graded examples? To say no proof only trade dollars have die polish is crazy talk.
You misunderstand me. I have seen many of the early proofs with die polish lines, but by the time they started doing proof only dates they knew what they were doing. Show me another example of an 1879 or later proof with die polish lines.
If they are die polish lines, there should be other examples out there from this die with the exact same lines, regardless of their grade.
Yuck. I can’t believe it stickered.
Die polish lines on an 1879? The Mint was well acquainted with striking brilliant proofs by that point. Have you seen other proof coins from that era with heavy die polish lines from any series?
No, I haven't, and I realize my own thoughts on this are problematic and I have not seen the coin in-hand. I could absolutely be wrong.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
My GUESS is that the coin has 68+ quality/eye appeal without the lines and the image is taken at just the angle to accentuate what are otherwise very slight defects in hand. Kinda like the gold coin in the other recent thread that had wowza appeal but light lines.
I absolutely love these trade proofs, I think the devices on these are just second to none, so so pretty 😍
🇺🇸 Harlequin
harlequinnumismatic@gmail.com
Home of the Americana Collection of USA silver coins
Curious to why the seller didn't use the trueview photos for the listing.
This is a reputable seller. If those really are hairlines, I can see them wanting to alert potential buyers as to their presence. Using the glamor-shot trueviews would result in an unpleasant buyer surprise and potentially a quick return.
Using the worst-case images may result in a pleasant surprise when the coin looks better in-hand. I suspect there are many angles at which the hairlines are unnoticeable.
You guys have it the wrong way around. Die polish lines go up to the edges of the devices, not hairlines. Just think about the mechanism of wiping the field of a die vs the mechanism of wiping the field of a coin, keeping in mind how the relief or incuse devices will interact (or not) with the process of wiping. They are also not roller marks, those would generally be on the high points anyway. These are hairlines.
Gobrecht's Engraved Mature Head Large Cent Model
https://www.instagram.com/rexrarities/?hl=en
I got zero problem with it, gorgeous.
I think someone else asked a similar question, but could those lines be unfairly reinforced to the camera by the slab somehow?
Official PCGS account of:
www.TallahasseeCoinClub.com
In addition to the lines (I doubt they are die polish for the reason that Rexford stated), I'm not a fan of what appears to be "wetting" discoloration around numeral 1 in the date and many of the letters & numerals 420, 900 GRAIns on the reverse. Maybe I'm seeing things. But, the general coloring is beautiful.
This seems to illustrate the subjective nature of grading... Not to mention in challenges in grading coins from an image-especially proof coins where the lighting and tilting used can frame the tale of two coins.
I will likely never see this one in hand so there really is no point in making any further comments.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
For me, this is a very interesting thread and coin.
Even if, in hand, the hairlines are that conspicuous at only one particular angle but barely show at others, I can’t see the coin as any better than PR63. But the fact that PCGS graded it 65 and that CAC stickered it,makes me wonder - what does the coin really look like?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm thinking tradedollarnutcase's (educated) hunch about the coin having superb gem+ eye appeal, plus photography that exacerbates the hairline issue, is the most likely explanation.
Similar case for my 1889 gold dollar, which had wispy hairlines on the obverse that were accentuated by my photos, but presents in-hand like a 66+. PCGS and CAC were happy to call it a 65 with "great eye appeal", as JA put it.
I think many folks assume JA grades with a harder line in the sand than he does (ie., any hairlines on a gem automatically disqualify a sticker), because it's easier to internalize firm rules than the nuances of the art of grading.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
That said, I'm not 100% convinced the strong lines in the left obv field are hairlines (although I lean that way).
Look in the right obv field under and right of Liberty's elbow. There are arced lines that go all the way up to the devices. To me, that seems like evidence of die polish rather than hairlines from mishandling.
Of course, it's possible that coin could have both. As @MFeld and others have said, very curious to see it in hand.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
I just forwarded the pictures to John Albanese and discussed the coin with him.
He said he’s 100% confident that the heavy obverse lines are actually marks on the holder.
That would certainly explain a lot!
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Oh yes, those marks on the holder that mysteriously stop just short of the devices. Heh
But let’s assume he is correct for a moment. What kind of dealer wouldn’t take the time to re-holder a $15,000 coin that likely isn’t probably going to sell in the current holder?
Holder marks typically show in images as blurry and in a range of the white tone. I have never seen holder marks match the precise tone of the coin, whereas hairlines usually show up in a rainbow of colors or as the tone of the coin. See below:
Fig. 1 - Holder marks readily distinguishable from hairlines.
Fig 2 - Holder marks reflect as white and blurry.
Coin Photography
No disrespect to JA, but I question whether he can be 100% certain without having the coin in hand.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
I’ve messaged the eBay seller, asking about the lines. If I receive a reply I’ll report back.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That makes the most sense as the lines don't appear on the Trueview.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
I am, however, seeing faint outlines of the arced/circular lines adjacent to Liberty’s elbow in the right obv field, and arcing from the top of her leg to her torso in the left obverse field.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
That is why I do not believe they are die polish lines. You can see the slight arc for those, but no trace of raised lines in the field. That leaves us with either very light hairlines or lines on the holder.
Raised lines (polish) will show in axial images. Hairlines will not.
Coin Photography
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
Here’s the reply I received:
“Good morning Mark, the line I circled is on the holder, not the coin. The other lines are from the die being polished, they are mint made. Please let me know if you have any other questions.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The line the seller circled is not the set of lines we've been debating, so it sounds like he is confirming that they are die polish lines. Do you interpret his comments the same way?
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
If those "supposed" die polish lines (the straight ones) went right up tight against Liberty's knee, I might buy it, but the gap tells me somebody wiped the coin at some point.
Die polishing would go all the way up to the devices. A wipe would stop short. Also, the mint would not have produced a proof coin with heavy die polishing lines in the field. JD's book on silver proofs makes no mention of heavy die polishing in the field. Finally, if TDN says he hasn't seen such die polishing lines on a proof trade dollar, I'll tend to believe him.
I don't see any possibility other than hairlines. The light must have caught them perfectly to light them up like that. I was briefly thinking it could be a smeared fingerprint, but very briefly. That would show up on the TrueView. It's likely that the holder is reflecting them back onto the coin, making them seem a little worse than they are, but only a little. From here, it looks like JA had an Angel Hernandez moment.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
What’s your assessment of the circular/arced lines that I pointed out, which do run up to the devices on both sides of Liberty (see my previous comments), and also show up in the TrueView?
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
Those look like die polish, but very subtle compared with the hairlines.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I do.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.