physics-fan3.14

On 7/21/2022 at 1:07 PM, Walter Holmes said:

Here’s an example of mechanical doubling on a 1650 Liondaalder. Should be attributed as DDR. Any chance this would be accepted if submitted? 

No, absolutely not - because it is not a DDR. That is strike doubling. Almost all hammered coins were hit more than once (or, had hammer bounce, giving a faint second impression). The very idea of a "hub doubled" coin implies machine produced coinage, with hubs and dies. A DDR requires a second impression of the hub on the die with some rotation - and that's not how coins were made at this time. Each die was individually crafted. There was no such thing as a hub - and so there was no such thing as a DDR. 

Now, there are many known varieties where the die was changed to alter an element, such as a date change where the remnants of the old date were not completely eradicated, or a letter was punched wrong and then repunched (sometimes with a different letter). You get an A over E variety, for example, or a 7 over 4. Those are usually recognized if they are well known enough. 

On 7/11/2022 at 10:15 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

And of course, some lone bidder makes ME look moronic by bidding $6K and winning the coin for a total of $6,750. 

https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/1144362/1923-D-Saint-Gaudens-Gold-Double-Eagle-NGC-MS-66-OH

It's a NICE coin, I just think the price is too high.

The color on that coin is absolutely magnificent, and I'll bet the luster will blow you away when you see it in hand. It is a *very* attractive coin, worth a premium. 

Do you have a copy of Spink? There are many, many variations on coins of this era, as each die was handmade. Letter position, dot position, etc, will vary from die to die, not to mention year to year. 

I'll bet the truth is somewhere in between. In my experience, so-called "tru views" are always over saturated and shifted towards the red spectrum. 

I'm not entirely sure I understand how this holder works. So are there 2 films that are in contact with the surface of the coin on either side? That seems weird. Maybe I just need to see one in real life. 

I really like the concept of removing the god-awful prongs, especially on little coins. That has been my complaint with these holders ever since they introduced them. On some of my coins, the prongs cover up a significant portion of the coin! 

I have over 30 Bust Halves - and I've devoted the entire set to rainbow toned attractively eye appealing coins. 

On 6/1/2022 at 2:13 PM, James at EarlyUS.com said:

You can probably guess why it turned out NOT to be so, but it sure was close . . . .

 

Hey James, how about a rainbow toned 43S Steel toned with a rainbown... certified PL by NGC? (NGC MS-66-PL)

Yeah, I've got one. It's a bit hard to see the colors in this pic, but they are clear in hand. 

I was really happy to hear that QA had been suspended. 

I was really sad to see him post in this thread. 

What an absolute troll. 

On 5/24/2022 at 4:29 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Did Conder post ?  I don't see it.  

4 weeks is super-short to utilize a new holder design...very surprising.

Yes, read Conder's post that Just Bob posted. The NGC 8 was a very short-lived slab. 

On 5/25/2022 at 9:38 AM, DWLange said:

I seem to recall the W and T labels lasting longer than four weeks, though I don't remember whether it spanned more than one holder type.

Yes, from my recollection the W and T was used on multiple slab types. NGC 8 features the very small numbers below the barcode - which was only used for a very short period. 

Coin grading is both an art and a science. (Hence the title of my book )

There is some objectivity in the strike, luster, contact marks, wear, etc. 

But, there is some subjectivity in the evaluation of eye appeal. 

You have to have both for the current method of grading (sure, old timers talk about "technical grading" or EAC grading, or things like that - but you have to recognize that mainstream coin grading in the current market is not that). 

I hear ya Fenntucky, on trying to read books in other languages. I collect Moroccan coinage (and books about such), and all of the best references are in French or Spanish (as they were the Colonial powers which tricked the country into subjugation for a period). I studied Latin in high school, so I can sorta piece things together, but its tricky. 

I thought the whole point of the Bass Foundation was to keep the collection together and display it for people to see and learn? I know ANA doesn't own it, they just house it... but surely that is a major loss to the museum. 

Why is the foundation choosing to sell it? 

I'm not sure why this is a debate: No, they should be graded to the same standard as any other coin. 

In practice, this is not what usually happens, however. 

Because you created a thread in the "Ask NGC" forum. The thread doesn't show up until NGC answers it. It explains the rules up at the top. 

On 2/28/2022 at 11:20 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Nice coin, but the smaller fields and the lack of a mirror surface make the proof appearance a bit underwhelming.  At least to me. 

The biggest advantage is with the strike. Compare the strike on this coin to that of a regular business issue, and the difference is clear. 

If you need the hard copy, I can't help you. 

But if you need it for research, it's available for free on the NNP: https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/auctionlots?AucCoId=8&AuctionId=526815

On 2/23/2022 at 6:17 PM, VKurtB said:

I know you don’t need it, but others might. My remaining question is whether there still is a fixed number of inches standard, as there once was, or is it now subjective? Transparency about that would be nice. 

PCGS has clearly stated their requirements: 

https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-announcement-about-prooflike#:~:text=According to PCGS standards%2C a,striations may impede the reflectivity.

https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-adds-pl-and-dmpl-designations

NGC has never published their standard, and they have told me they never will. The last time I asked was 2018, so they may have changed their policy since then? 

On 2/23/2022 at 5:31 PM, VKurtB said:

The key is how well, and how far, you can read text reflected in the reverse fields. 

I own well over a hundred PL coins. I know what the key is. 

Give us a couple more pics of the reverse. Obverse appears to be there, but your pictures of the reverse don't show it. 

On 2/22/2022 at 8:47 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

I don't collect the series, but I thought many Morgan collectors target GSA.  Is that not accurate?  

Since I don't collect the series, I should not have a vote in the "include 2021>> vs not" debate. 

Sure, many people focus on GSAs. Many people also focus on commemorative medals, tokens, and trinkets. That's not to say that's a bad thing, collect what you want. What I'm saying is, you can have a perfectly complete collection without a GSA - but you might buy one as an interesting side note for its history, or to expand the story of your collection. Same with these things. 

No, they are absolutely not part of the series. No more so than the gold dime, quarter, and half were a couple of years ago. 

Collectors of the series might buy one as an interesting trinket to expand the collection, in the same way they might buy a GSA. 

Sometimes, a well written book actually generates interest in a series where there wasn't much before. 

I only have one Trade Dollar myself, a prooflike example for my type set. 

But, if there's a thoroughly researched, thought provoking new book on the series, I'd probably buy it.