Pilgrim opinion

Comments

• kaz Posts: 9,300 ✭✭✭✭✭

  March 13, 2010 11:08AM

  Maybe it's just the photos, but it seems to be lacking in the luster dept., like it's AU, or MS and dipped a few times. Personally, I think these look much nicer with some attractive toning. I think I would hold out for another one, if this one came across my path.

  0
• DRUNNER Posts: 3,919 ✭✭✭✭✭

  March 13, 2010 11:48AM

  Fields look very mark-free, so from that perspective, a superb example, but as we all know, "It's tough to grade from images".
  
  Nice coin!
  
  Drunner (and PM sent)

  0
• cheezhed Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭✭✭

  March 13, 2010 8:02PM

  Scan or photo?
  
  Scans tend to not show luster.

  Many happy BST transactions

  0
• ram1946 Posts: 762 ✭✭

  March 13, 2010 8:58PM

  As said by others, this particular image lacks the depth necessary to make a solid call. However, the obverse strike appears to be exceptionally strong. Look at the details of the folds in the arm of the coat as well as the strong separation within the hair and the beard. Also, there appears to be sharp separation in the pages of the Bible. The reverse also has some strong sharp separations on the high points. If the luster is intact you might have a winner. Good luck if it's your coin and congratulations on a nice pick.

  0
• ricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

  March 13, 2010 9:40PM

  Very nice strike and detail with no ugly tarnish.... great example of this commemorative. Cheers, RickO

  0
• cameron12x Posts: 1,384 ✭✭✭

  March 13, 2010 11:01PM

  The lighting is making it difficult to evaluate the true luster of the coin...

  0
• bidask Posts: 14,050 ✭✭✭✭✭

  March 13, 2010 11:03PM

  Lighting makes it tough.

  I manage money. I earn money. I save money .
  I give away money. I collect money.
  I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
  
  
  
  
  

  0
• Flatwoods Posts: 4,248 ✭✭✭✭✭

  March 13, 2010 11:45PM

  It looks like a nice one from the pics.

  0