Nothing to see here.

devious · July 12, 2011 7:18AM

.

Bear · July 12, 2011 7:20AM

Oh my, all I can say is WOW!

kaz · July 12, 2011 7:22AM

After the 2 richly toned Franklins, the BTW comes as a surprise! Kind of like cleansing the palate.

Zoins · July 12, 2011 7:22AM

Lots of color on those two!

Are they not doing the PCGS background anymore? I noticed a number of the photos on the cert lookup also have plain white backgrounds.

devious · July 12, 2011 7:23AM

<< Lots of color on those two!

Are they not doing the PCGS background anymore? I noticed a number of the photos on the cert lookup also have plain white backgrounds. >>

I don't have an answer to this question. The certs are not in the database yet. I used coinfacts to access the trueviews.

crypto79 · July 12, 2011 7:26AM

I will say the Booker T looks very high grade and the Photos are very high quilty too.

scher · July 12, 2011 7:33AM

Sweet!
Bruce Scher

devious · July 12, 2011 7:33AM

The Booker, I really thought would had at minimum hit 67. I looked at so many of these in high grade and thought no way would it come back 66, but then I forgot about the plus grading. So it indeed did come back...a 66+. It was sort of a let down. But I can't be more happy with the images. They did a wonderful job.

123cents · July 12, 2011 7:33AM

Very nice colorful group!

PCcoins · July 12, 2011 7:36AM

I'll take the first '56 if its for sale...

devious · July 12, 2011 7:39AM

<< I'll take the first '56 if its for sale...

>>

That's my favorite one

This is why nobody thought "oh wow" when I posted a picture of the backside of the first one..grin!

rainbowroosie · July 12, 2011 7:43AM

Nice frankies...look 66 or better, I like the top coin best.

devious · July 12, 2011 9:05AM

<< Nice frankies...look 66 or better, I like the top coin best. >>

Can you say EXTREMELY TIGHT with our host right now?

Not to mention, if plus grading wasn't in existence right now, that BTW would had 67'd. In comparison to other trueviews of Bookers in 67, this one holds its ground, even better than some of the others. Ah well. I'm going to go weep into a bucket now

BigE · July 12, 2011 12:04PM

Wow! The Booker is impressive with one of the cleanest cheeks I have seen. Strike is excellent, even his pupils are sharp! ---------BigE

DIMEMAN · July 12, 2011 12:28PM

I love the Franklin's!! Just can't get excited about BTW's.

Groiny · July 12, 2011 12:41PM

.........I don't care what PCGS graded those '56's :

their sick and you suck a huge amount - I will take them both @ a real pretty penny

devious · July 12, 2011 12:45PM

Here's a comparison for those who think I'm an idiot on that BTW being a 67. [LARGE IMAGES]

Bruce Scher's 1947-S BTW

My 1947-S BTW

We sure do a lot of grading by images, so I'd like to get some input from the forum if possible.

And thanks for the comments. DIMEMAN, I had a feeling. I've been working really hard to finding high quality Bookers within my thrifty budget. And I know not many people really care for them, but I like them.

@GROINY: Thanks for the offer.

etexmike · July 12, 2011 12:52PM

I usually not a big Frankie fan. Ol' Ben is looking pretty good to me in these two coins.

Mike

DIMEMAN · July 12, 2011 1:11PM

I actually like the 2nd 1956 the best. I don't like the light brown toning on the first one that much. But they are both beautiful. I think a toned set in 65-66 would be great, but doing all the dimes I haven't got any money left over for anything else.

georgiacop50 · July 12, 2011 10:49PM

All 3 look great! The 1st 56 is a DDO.

Resubmit the BTW. Don't settle for less than 67.

DorkGirl · July 12, 2011 11:22PM

Yummy!

lcoopie · July 12, 2011 11:35PM

photographing in the raw has to be superior to shooting thru the slab

devious · July 13, 2011 12:26AM

<< All 3 look great! The 1st 56 is a DDO.

Resubmit the BTW. Don't settle for less than 67. >>

---
edit to add: And thank you for posting that about our favorite one. I had no idea it was a DDO. I hardly ever do variety searching. What am I looking at for the DD? If properly so, I'd like to sticker it as such for my boy. Turns out the top one is also his favorite one of the two. So to find that out is even more exciting. Thank you!
---
Well, thank goodness they messed up on slabbing the BTW. It was put in a standard holder when it should had been put in a secure holder. Funny, it was the only one that was missed. So I am hoping it works in my favor to get a presidential review without actually getting the coin back first and having to send it back. I'll keep the forum posted.
---
edit to add: Are any of those 1956s BUGS BUNNY variety? I just looked a population reports and see they don't attribute the DDO, but saw that 1956 had a bugs bunny and does PCGS attribute these automatically or must one note a bugs bunny? I've never paid any attention to those.
---

georgiacop50 · July 13, 2011 1:06AM

DDO-002

You can see all the markers at franklinlovers great website.

edit: It is a Very Common variety.

SkyMan · July 15, 2011 12:55PM

Lovely looking Frankies!

Congratulations on the two of them!!!

frnklnlvr · July 15, 2011 10:33PM

Very nice coins!

<< Are any of those 1956s BUGS BUNNY variety? I just looked a population reports and see they don't attribute the DDO, but saw that 1956 had a bugs bunny and does PCGS attribute these automatically or must one note a bugs bunny? I've never paid any attention to those. >>

The two posted aren't Bugs Bunny. Even if they were you'd have to pay for variety review to have it designated. Most of the '56 mint set Franklins that are struck from the Bugs Bunny die pair are late die state and the clash is too weak for PCGS to designate.

It's possible that PCGS would attribute the 1956 DDO as a "Minor Variety" but since it's a common variety it wouldn't be worth the fees IMO. The doubling shows best on the L of LIBERTY as strong extra thickness on the horizontal bar, also shows on the date and TRUST. If you compare the L of LIBERTY to the 2nd 1956 posted you can see the difference in the thickness.

devious · July 18, 2011 12:16PM

I don't care for variety attribution in the slab insert. But it's great to know and has been noted under the comments in my son's registry set. Thank you georgiacop50 for pointing it out. And that L is pretty fat, wow. What a difference!
Just wanted to say thanks to everybody for their comments. I'll have more trueview images to post of more coins from our collection in the upcoming month. Oh, and tonight I'll be checking out all of our franklins for varieties. It'll be a long and tedious task. But definitely worth the undertaking. Thanks for linking that site, georgiacop50!

Aaron

Groiny · July 18, 2011 1:58PM

HEY .......

how many Franklins you got ??

Nothing to see here.

Comments

Leave a Comment