Thanks for the explanation. I see her lower thigh doesn't show the definition of yours, but my uneducated eye can't really see the wear in the shot in question. Thanks again...MIke
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
Well, it's a picture so it is certainly not definitive. But the trailing line of dull grey is usually a signal I look for. It could be an uneven strike, too.
Weakly struck -- interesting. I see really good detail in the shield, toes, and head, but I get the same idea from the gown on the right side of the shield -- the far right edge seems to be not well defined as I've seen. Maybe the picture?!? Thanks, this is very helpful...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
I've been looking for the same coin (either AU58 or MS62-MS63) with a non-dipped look as well. Good luck. Something about it just doesn't look like it would be what I want.
Thanks to all who posted. I got the coin and re-instated the link above.
Most of you didn't notice what I (and PursuitOfLiberty) did... The coin pictured is a 17-D, not a 17, and as such is a rarer coin. The NGC holder clearly says 17, so who knows which is right. I took a chance and will find out in a few days if it was a good one.
Many thanks to PursuitOfLiberty for his insight.
Thoughts....Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
<< <i>Thanks to all who posted. I got the coin and re-instated the link above.
Most of you didn't notice what I (and PursuitOfLiberty) did... The coin pictured is a 17-D, not a 17, and as such is a rarer coin. The NGC holder clearly says 17, so who knows which is right. I took a chance and will find out in a few days if it was a good one.
Many thanks to PursuitOfLiberty for his insight.
Thoughts....Mike >>
Sharp eye there!! Hope that is the coin you get, and that they did not mix up the pictures.
I've been reading diligently and doing alot of window shopping. This is the first really interesting one I've found in the past month or so.
The way I see it, if the coin is not as decribed I'll be able to return it. I paid what I would consider high-end 17 money, so if it is as described and not pictured then I may still keep it. Either way, I think I'm realtively covered.
Anyone have experience with a situation like this or in dealing with David Lawrence? Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks again...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
I've dealt with DLRC a number of times and they are great. But not in a situation with a mislabeled holder. Not sure what will happen. My guess is that they might catch it before they send it out and negotiate with you. But then again, they are a good outfit and may just swallow any loss. Odds are they bought it as a 17 and the original slabber got @#$% by NGC.
DLRC is pretty easy to work with ... good people one and all. I'm sure if there's a problem they'll take care of you.
I will be most interested to see if it's what I think it is.
For the record, since Mike has won it now, I think he will recieve a mislabled NGC holder with a 1917-d that has NOT been dipped, but has an original white skin, and that is solid for the grade.
That's my two bits, and I'm sticking to it!
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
From the "other" Mike In Florida, that is a nice solid MS 64FH coin. I didn't notice anything serious with the leading leg, I think you should be very happy with it. Congrats, great pick up, sharper eye !
Mike Hayes ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
very nice coin. i think it would be a good coin for your type set. First thing i noticed was the line down the leg which could be the photo ? then the mint mark not listed. Good find
Nice, the 1917-D FH is a much better coin than the 1917. That was a big mistake by NGC not to get the D on the holder label. Looks like a 64, there is some roll friction on the leg.
I bought an MS 64 Capped Bust Quarter from David Lawrence & I think they're a good outfit. In a lot consultation, they described a hairline scratch on the coin that you would catch if you rotated it, but such scratch did not appear on the coin's image. I like doing business with people like these folks.
Anyhow, many SLQs were not fully struck and the grading services cut coins in this series some slack for it in terms of slabbing. The 17P is THE gold standard of the SLQ series re strike. Your coin IMO is nice. Your coin is clearly a FH, and the shield and rivulets are complete (something I've rarely seen on a Denver mint SLQ).
The right leg comments relate to this: on a fully struck SLQ, Miss Liberty's rt. knee is fully defined, and her rt. thigh is so well defined, that it looks like she regularly did leg curls at the gym. Most of these coins -- even supergrade coins -- do not show such detail re the knee and thigh. Some people call it wear, some call it friction, but it's really because the coin was not fully struck in this area.
I think your coin displays this lack of a full strike in the thigh. I think it's in a 4 holder due to the friction in the reverse fields. The obverse surfaces are very clean.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
For the record, since Mike has won it now, I think he will recieve a mislabled NGC holder with a 1917-d that has NOT been dipped, but has an original white skin, and that is solid for the grade.
Well, I may have been wrong about the original white skin, but other than that, a nice coin indeed.
Gotta run ... work's calling
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Thank you for the detailed response -- it is very helpful.
FWIW, her leg looks much better in my pic than the stock one. After looking at lots of photos of higher grade SLQ's I really see what you mean. One of the things I noticed as soon as I got the coin was how well it was struck. Her thigh detail, and the detail in the shield, looks much better in hand (and even in my pics) than the stock photo.
That's the good news, the bad news is, as PursuitOfLiberty alludes to, is that it looks dipped albeit lightly. It looks just "too clean" to me and exhibits even less toning than the stock photo. It is a real gleamer with just a hint of toning along the perimeter. However I don't see any softness as would be expected of a dipped coin (at least from what I've read), so I'll say the jury is still out, at least in my eyes.
I have no doubt that the coin as pictured was the same coin I got -- she has a distinctive scratch on her exposed breast that is clearly evident in the stock photo and can be seen in hand easily even though it didn't really show well in my photo.
Again, thanks for your most helpful insight...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
Comments
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Good luck. Something about it just doesn't look like it would be what I want.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Most of you didn't notice what I (and PursuitOfLiberty) did... The coin pictured is a 17-D, not a 17, and as such is a rarer coin. The NGC holder clearly says 17, so who knows which is right. I took a chance and will find out in a few days if it was a good one.
Many thanks to PursuitOfLiberty for his insight.
Thoughts....Mike
<< <i>Thanks to all who posted. I got the coin and re-instated the link above.
Most of you didn't notice what I (and PursuitOfLiberty) did... The coin pictured is a 17-D, not a 17, and as such is a rarer coin. The NGC holder clearly says 17, so who knows which is right. I took a chance and will find out in a few days if it was a good one.
Many thanks to PursuitOfLiberty for his insight.
Thoughts....Mike >>
Sharp eye there!! Hope that is the coin you get, and that they did not mix up the pictures.
I've been reading diligently and doing alot of window shopping. This is the first really interesting one I've found in the past month or so.
The way I see it, if the coin is not as decribed I'll be able to return it. I paid what I would consider high-end 17 money, so if it is as described and not pictured then I may still keep it. Either way, I think I'm realtively covered.
Anyone have experience with a situation like this or in dealing with David Lawrence? Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks again...Mike
DLRC is pretty easy to work with ... good people one and all. I'm sure if there's a problem they'll take care of you.
I will be most interested to see if it's what I think it is.
For the record, since Mike has won it now, I think he will recieve a mislabled NGC holder with a 1917-d that has NOT been dipped, but has an original white skin, and that is solid for the grade.
That's my two bits, and I'm sticking to it!
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
From the "other" Mike In Florida, that is a nice solid MS 64FH coin. I didn't notice anything serious with the leading leg, I think you should be very happy with it. Congrats, great pick up, sharper eye !
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
I'll take some high resolution pics later today, but just wanted to gloat a little.
Take care...Mike
Good for you !
Glad its nicer in hand than you originally thought.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
May want to downsize the pic. Intially a Red-X, then loaded up after about 40 sec (on DSL!!)
FrederickCoinClub
Anyhow, many SLQs were not fully struck and the grading services cut coins in this series some slack for it in terms of slabbing. The 17P is THE gold standard of the SLQ series re strike. Your coin IMO is nice. Your coin is clearly a FH, and the shield and rivulets are complete (something I've rarely seen on a Denver mint SLQ).
The right leg comments relate to this: on a fully struck SLQ, Miss Liberty's rt. knee is fully defined, and her rt. thigh is so well defined, that it looks like she regularly did leg curls at the gym. Most of these coins -- even supergrade coins -- do not show such detail re the knee and thigh. Some people call it wear, some call it friction, but it's really because the coin was not fully struck in this area.
I think your coin displays this lack of a full strike in the thigh. I think it's in a 4 holder due to the friction in the reverse fields. The obverse surfaces are very clean.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
So glad you are happy
For the record, since Mike has won it now, I think he will recieve a mislabled NGC holder with a 1917-d that has NOT been dipped, but has an original white skin, and that is solid for the grade.
Well, I may have been wrong about the original white skin, but other than that, a nice coin indeed.
Gotta run ... work's calling
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
FWIW, her leg looks much better in my pic than the stock one. After looking at lots of photos of higher grade SLQ's I really see what you mean. One of the things I noticed as soon as I got the coin was how well it was struck. Her thigh detail, and the detail in the shield, looks much better in hand (and even in my pics) than the stock photo.
That's the good news, the bad news is, as PursuitOfLiberty alludes to, is that it looks dipped albeit lightly. It looks just "too clean" to me and exhibits even less toning than the stock photo. It is a real gleamer with just a hint of toning along the perimeter. However I don't see any softness as would be expected of a dipped coin (at least from what I've read), so I'll say the jury is still out, at least in my eyes.
I have no doubt that the coin as pictured was the same coin I got -- she has a distinctive scratch on her exposed breast that is clearly evident in the stock photo and can be seen in hand easily even though it didn't really show well in my photo.
Again, thanks for your most helpful insight...Mike