1886 Morgan: Guess the grade, but what's it worth?

chaze215 · September 19, 2008 11:19AM

STONE · September 19, 2008 11:21AM

The angle you photographed the coin at really takes away a lot of the surface imperfections.

From what I'm seeing, it's an MS-64 coin worth about $60 in that grade.

tightbudget · September 19, 2008 11:25AM

<< The angle you photographed the coin at really takes away a lot of the surface imperfections.

From what I'm seeing, it's an MS-64 coin worth about $60 in that grade. >>

chaze215 · September 19, 2008 11:33AM

I didnt phograph it at a specific angle on purpose to hide anything. I just tried my best to get a good picture. How would you suggest I take the pic to get a better photo?

AUandAG · September 19, 2008 11:34AM

Maybe it's just the pic but I see NO luster, cartwheel or other indications that it hasn't been
dipped. What is going on below the UM on the obverse? IF it has the requisite luster I'd say
a nice 65 worth about $80?

bob

pheh · September 19, 2008 11:38AM

Wear looks 66 to me - maybe even better. Can't really read the luster from the pictures - but I'm betting its there.

Whats more, it looks to me like it might be a VAM-1c 3+2 - but I could be wrong.

$400?

coinbuf · September 19, 2008 11:49AM

Well from the stand point of strike I'd give her a 67 min, and overall the surfaces look 65 or better. But as already mentioned its impossible to tell anything about the luster with these pics, you need pics that show the cartwheel/luster. Really well struck!! As to price its worth what somebody's willing to pay.

JRocco · September 19, 2008 12:10PM

You can't really see the coin in this pic because of the angle and the diffused lighting.
I can't tell you what her cheek really looks like.
I can't see the coins fields either come to think of it.
The one thing that grabs me is the tough condition of the lower reverse from 5 to 7.

fc · September 19, 2008 12:32PM

<< You can't really see the coin in this pic because of the angle and the diffused lighting.
I can't tell you what her cheek really looks like.
I can't see the coins fields either come to think of it.
The one thing that grabs me is the tough condition of the lower reverse from 5 to 7. >>

this is the typical angle fishy ebay sellers use to hide imperfections.
i will take a guess of 63.

chaze215 · September 19, 2008 12:35PM

<< 

<< You can't really see the coin in this pic because of the angle and the diffused lighting.
I can't tell you what her cheek really looks like.
I can't see the coins fields either come to think of it.
The one thing that grabs me is the tough condition of the lower reverse from 5 to 7. >>

this is the typical angle fishy ebay sellers use to hide imperfections.
i will take a guess of 63. >>

I didnt phograph it at a specific angle on purpose to hide anything. I just tried my best to get a good picture. How would you suggest I take the pic to get a better photo?

-------------------------
Chaz

Proud recipient of Y.S. Award on 07/26/08 for my 1878 Morgan 8TF VAM 5 Top 100 cherrypick.

JRocco · September 19, 2008 12:39PM

Hey Chaz.
No One is accusing you of trying to hide anything.

The pic looks to need a more direct light or set of lights at say 10 and 2 o'clock so the fields and surface conditions can be seen.

Give it another shot and lets see what it looks like.

fc · September 19, 2008 12:42PM

chaz, i agree with jrocco. i did not mean to say anything bad about
you. it is just a fact that the angle showing off the coin is the worst
possible to guess a grade from.

try shots straight down onto the coin with good lighting.
we need to see the luster. any marks. the cheek. etc...

sorry if i offended you. just do not buy coins off ebay when you see
pics like that from a power seller if you know what i mean ;-)

MORGANHUNTER2 · September 19, 2008 12:43PM

this 'looks' like a 6 - but as a few have said- fix your lighting and do more of a direct shot on the coin- forget the angle - it does look like you are hiding slight impefections- ie- the chin at 6:35...

chaze215 · September 19, 2008 12:51PM

Thanks for the input and feedback all. I will see if I can get a better shot with more light. I am no Mark Goodman (if you havent noticed), but I will see what I can do. Stay tuned...

JRocco · September 19, 2008 12:57PM

<< I am no Mark Goodman >>

There are a few of us in that club Chaz

BlindedByEgo · September 19, 2008 1:06PM

Even with the angle of the coin making it difficult to get an honest "as in hand" perspective, I can see one fairly substantial contact mark below the lips, another graze on the central area of the cheek, and a hit on the jaw. None appear too severe but are in prime focal areas -probably enough to take it down from Gem to MS64.

The contact mark below the "NE" on the reverse doesn't help the coin, but few Morgans are upgraded because of flawless reverses anyway.

anablep · September 19, 2008 1:36PM

64 or 65 depending on luster (of which I see none).

GoldenEyeNumismatics · September 19, 2008 1:51PM

65/66

YaHa · September 19, 2008 3:07PM

Are you guys blind? Ms 61

blu62vette · September 19, 2008 3:11PM

I dont see the 3+2 clashing mentioned in an earlier post.

BlindedByEgo · September 19, 2008 3:53PM

<< Are you guys blind? Ms 61 >>

Sorry. I thought that it was a serious question worthy of a serious response.

Steve27 · September 19, 2008 6:29PM

I don't like the angle of the pic either, but the coin appears to have a great strike and only very minor abrasions, so I would say MS66.

Sunnywood · September 19, 2008 6:34PM

It is impossible to grade uncirculated coins accurately from images. Two different images of the same coin can present wildly different characteristics. An image taken under harsh halogen lighting will magnify every hairline and imperfection; while another image of the same coin, taken with other lighting conditions, angles, exposures, and resolutions may cause the same coin to appear to have virtually flawless surfaces.

Similarly, colorfully toned coins can appear absolutely vibrant and beautiful in one image, and completely washed out, dull and lifeless in another. One image elicits responses such as, "Wow, that's an awesome neon godzilla monster !!" while the other image (of the same coin) will get nothing more than a passing ho-hum.

Not to spoil everyone's fun, but the "grade the coin" threads are often useless for this reason. That said, most ciruclated coins can be graded more accurately as wear is harder to disguise, although surface luster can be invisible in photos (making accurate grading of AU55 and AU58 coins similarly impossible).

Best,
Sunnywood

chaze215 · September 19, 2008 10:57PM

The grade of the coin in the OP is an NGC MS 65. I am still trying to play with the lighting a bit to get a more true image, but this seems to be a difficult task. My biggest problem is finding the right angle to photograph the coin without having shadows or uneven lighting on the surfaces. Should I prop up the coin? Should I have it on a flat surface? Any input would be helpful. I am not into an expensive set-up, I just want the best images possible for the set-up that I have right now. Thanks again everyone!

ziggy29 · September 20, 2008 12:40AM

<< Are you guys blind? Ms 61 >>

Please tell me where you see all the hits and scratches that make this a 61.....

chaze215 · September 20, 2008 1:59AM

<< 

<< Are you guys blind? Ms 61 >>

Please tell me where you see all the hits and scratches that make this a 61..... >>

NGC thinks it is a 65........I think I will go with that. Whats the greysheet for this date in MS 65?

1886 Morgan: Guess the grade, but what's it worth?

Comments

Leave a Comment