Grade the 1853 large cent newp (update: photos added to supplement the scans)
lordmarcovan
Posts: 44,042 ✭✭✭✭✭
... and help me with the Newcomb variety attribution, if you are so kind.
Other opinions on it welcome.
Note the repunched date, with prominent doubling on the 3.
I posted it on Lee's "Copper For The Weekend" thread but aww, heck, why not make a grade poll.
Images are done on a scanner. The coin is a little bit darker brown in hand.
Edited to add (typically poor) digital photographs:
Other opinions on it welcome.
Note the repunched date, with prominent doubling on the 3.
I posted it on Lee's "Copper For The Weekend" thread but aww, heck, why not make a grade poll.
Images are done on a scanner. The coin is a little bit darker brown in hand.
Edited to add (typically poor) digital photographs:
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
0
Comments
Second thought was it is around XF40, I voted 35 but then thought it has too much detail. BTW I know nothing about this series.
-Paul
Can't help you with the Newcomb variety attribution though.
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
<< <i>I voted 45 as well before looking at any replies. >>
I must admit I wanted to say AU.
What do those who voted AU say?
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
In hand, I noticed no wear on it except for the tip of the coronet and on one little strand over the hair.
I voted AU58 myself, but you can chalk three points of that up to owner's optimism, I suppose.
I do think it is on the high side of AU, personally. I expected to see the poll go AU55.
I suppose I would need better and bigger images for everyone to make a closer inspection. I might try that later.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
One thing about this coin which I do not like is the verdigris / corrosion / pvc - I'd have to see the coin - around the 18 on the date and around the A of STATES. The TPGs look the other way on this, but I wouldn't want this on any of my coins. Perhaps some acetone could get rid of it, I don't know.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
But, really, my assessment of the grade came from my first "gut" impression of the overall look of the coin. I suspect I'm being too hard on the coin.
<< <i>One thing about this coin which I do not like is the verdigris / corrosion / pvc - I'd have to see the coin - around the 18 on the date and around the A of STATES. The TPGs look the other way on this, but I wouldn't want this on any of my coins. Perhaps some acetone could get rid of it, I don't know. >>
Just took the coin out and put a loupe to it, and there is no verdigris or corrosion there. PVC? I don't see any. That's just shadows in the picture, I suspect.
That does it. I need to shoot better pictures, with the camera. But I suck with the camera, which is why I use the scanner so much.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
<< <i>... and help me with the Newcomb variety attribution...
I am unable to help you with attribution. I just wanted to compare notes.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I'm pullin' my hair out with this photo thing. Just shot a whole bunch and STILL can't hit it right. Indoors with artificial light I can never seem to get it right. I have had some luck (pure, dumb luck) outdoors in sunlight but I tried that too and the pics were too dark (today's sunlight is somewhat diffused by clouds, I suppose.)
This is the best I could do. Yes, the background in both pics is supposed to be a light blue (even in the reverse picture).
I so need to get a copystand and read Mr. Goodman's book again, and then reread until I memorize certain passages.
Edit: I don't think I should have saved that jpeg at 65% jpeg quality. I think I see a few grainy jpeg artifacts in that picture.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
Get a copystand. If you can't justify that now, get a long tripod. lean it on two lets up against a table and chair so it will hold the camera in place. then you may have to spend quite a bit of time adjusting it to be totally perpendicular to the coin surface. until you are shooting perpendicular, you can't get all the surface in focus.
If you don't have a cable release or electronic remote, use the autotimer to eliminate vibration.
White balance. you obviously dont have custom white balance feature on your camera (if you do, that is the right answer). Use two cheap desklamps. Pick a bulb that matches a white balance setting on your camera. Most cameras have an incadescent setting that matches conventional bulbs. there are natural light bulbs that may match sunlight. Don't have other sources of light. Mixed light doesn't work. do it at night or with the blinds pulled.
Once you get your setup working, leave it set up. Try to dedicate a space so you don't have to start over every time.
--Jerry
I have long known I need to get a copystand. Perpendicularity is something I have never been able to achieve. But I wonder if my big, bulky old Mavica will work on one of those? And I also wonder where the cable release would attach to it. And how I'd be able to peer down into the viewfinder. (Maybe if I put the copystand on the floor, eh?)
As to white balance, there is a a button on the side that says "white balance", and I pushed that. It improved the color from yellowish to whiter. I have a vague notion of white balance but obviously not much.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
nice coin
Most digital camera use an electonic remote rather than a cable release. You may have to use the countdown timer. I used it for hundreds of photos while waiting for the electronic remote to show up from an ebay purchase. Electronic remotes are brand and model specific.
How far is your camera away from the coin when you shoot? It shouldn't be far. Copystands are normally only a couple feet high.
--Jerry
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.