VKurtB

Pictures this loaded with digital sharpening and jpeg interpolation artifacting are essentially useless here.

There are two camps on the "with parentheses" (S), (W), and (P) ASE's. Some people believe they are a legitimate variety and include them in a "Full Set". Other people believe that a non-mintmarked ASE is all the same thing because they cannot be discerned outside the slab, and the whole thing is BS (bullsnot). I am in the second camp. If there's no mintmark there, it's not a S, W, or anything else.

Not just "no", he....

Not just "no", he....

I agree with the above, but I believe considerable time in contact with both coins and a corrosive liquid. I don't think pressure alone explains this.

Any chance we could swap? I have a feeling that in a few months, being an ex-pat will be looking pretty good.

Balmoral Castle
Oct. 7, 1856
 
Sir,
I am commanded by
His Royal Highness Prince
Albert to acknowledge the receipt of  

your note of the 4th - [not sure] - with 
the accompanying very handsome
[not sure] of the memorials of James Watt
But then again, I’m just a “troll”, according to Larry and Jason, and they are Honourable men. Pffft.
 

Holy Frijoles, Skip. Your popularity sure is taking a beating over this thread on CoinTalk. And they call me the troll. /eye roll

There are two camps on the "with parentheses" (S), (W), and (P) ASE's. Some people believe they are a legitimate variety and include them in a "Full Set". Other people believe that a non-mintmarked ASE is all the same thing because they cannot be discerned outside the slab, and the whole thing is BS (bullsnot). I am in the second camp. If there's no mintmark there, it's not a S, W, or anything else.

Oh I dunno, I still have fans over there. I get it that you are not one them, Larry, and that's quite okay with me. Look Larry, I actually do "feel for" folks like you, and @Insider, and @physics-fan3.14, and @RWB, and @GDJMSP over at CoinTalk, and a handful of others here and there. I know what it feels like when a beloved activity that you've sunk decades into becoming among the best at the practices of that used to be important, it then crushes your heart and it walks away from making or keeping you relevant. While you and those others were becoming among the best at grading the way it used to be, and maybe getting paid to do it, I was becoming one of the top people in the old-school photographic industry, and I was paid handsomely to do that. No more. The digital revolution, slowly at first and then all of a sudden, made my expertise nearly "irrelevant" in the marketplace. Knowing emulsions' characteristics gave way to megapixels and pixel patterns, and sharpening algorithms, and jpeg compression artifacts, and tons of other stuff I almost resent. But I couldn't stop that train any more than you 5 gentlemen I've named above can stop the march to TPGS-style "commercial" or "market" grading. The old ways are officially dead, and you can get with it, or get run over BY it. You still get to choose. I didn't.
 
So I did what a lot of people do when the field they were in "forever" goes "breasts up" and floats, and you're still in your 50's - I went into government service.

"Lemme tell ya', them guys ain't dumb..."

And a cast of thou.... okay, several.

Take a look at all the impact marks on yours, and compare it to the PCGS example. Night and day. Plus, even though I am personally not a fan of it, the toning on the PCGS piece matters a whole lot. Both the Franklin cheek and the bell above the clapper are pretty bad.

No, my stereo microscope came with LED’s individually selectable by quadrant, but I hate it. I usually use it under diffuse window light, and I never (unless I lend my camera and forget to reset it) use either Auto White Balance nor any white balance setting other than taking a reading off a 18% gray card or 90% white one, just like RWB does. You’re no better than that @GDJMSP clown over at CoinTalk. You both refuse to remain current and live in your ignorant 30-40 year old bubble. “Troll” enough for you?

We take our groundhog analogs very seriously here in the Commonwealth. Tread lightly.

Not to put too obvious of a point on it, but I trust absolutely nothing Chinese in numismatics. I even refuse to buy their panda coins. I doubt the genuineness of the coin, too.

Under those circumstances, you are doing the best thing.

The only Fiat currency is that which one has set aside for a small Italian car.

Hardly. I abhor YouTube. I do think that cointelevision.com has it , though. And the ANA might have it eventually, if not now.

Okay, if you insist. News to me.

That's unfair, but like most snark (and I know snark), it has at least a nugget of truth in it. @Insider is coming off a little angry lately, and that confuses me. He's actually a sweetheart. At some point in all our lives, when we devote our lives to a particular profession and/or activity, and it starts to obviously value change over continuity, that can ruffle feathers. Now I don't want to go all psychotherapist (or Psycho the Rapist) here, but I am starting to read a lot of angry stuff from a lot of people in numismatics, and while I do "feel their pain" (while simultaneously biting my lower lip), I'm inclined to offer the advice that Leonard Hofstadter' mother Beverly offered to Leonard: "Buck up, sissy pants". Yeah, it stinks. But it happens.

If I owned this coin, and was, for lack of a more appropriate term, "stuck with it", I would put in my son's literal Dansco 7070 album and forget about it for a few years. I believe age will help this one.

+1
 

I just did for you. Can’t stand seeing someone not able to do what they want to.

I am in the market for a physically large well made 5x loupe.