A comparison of Morgans,, An 1878 and the 1890 I posted a few days ago..

[MAULEMALL]

 

With the post of the 90 I had asked for opinions and a grade..

Grades ranged from 63 (Bill) down to AU 55 (Most everyone else)...

 

Please give the 78 the same perusal Please..

 

 

[RUSS BEGA]

the 78 sure looks nice lots of chatter on the cheek so 62?

[lkenefic]

62 looks about right for this piece...but I'd be concerned about the blue-green stuff in the denticles...am I seeing toning...or am I seeing the start of PVC damage...

[RUSS BEGA]

62 looks about right for this piece...but I'd be concerned about the blue-green stuff in the denticles...am I seeing toning...or am I seeing the start of PVC damage...

 

i had'nt noticed it before but now i'm suspicous...

[cpm9ball]

There is also tinges of red in the denticles, so I don't think it is PVC contamination. It looks like it was toning that has been dipped away.

 

It looks AU58 to me.

 

Chris

[MAULEMALL]

the 78 sure looks nice lots of chatter on the cheek so 62?

It's an NGC 63 7/8 Vam 36 I believe...There is no PVC..Just the toning...

 

Knowing that,, What would you say about the 1890..

[RUSS BEGA]

on the 90 i'd say a 63 maybe a 62 depends on how good of a day ypur having

[cpm9ball]

If the '90 were graded the same, I would say that you should never crack either out of its holder.

 

Chris

[MAULEMALL]

If the '90 were graded the same, I would say that you should never crack either out of its holder.

 

Chris

Why.. Of all the answers given in the thread on the 1890 most everyone overlooked the answer Bill gave.

The Correct answer I might add.

[cpm9ball]

If the '90 were graded the same, I would say that you should never crack either out of its holder.

 

Chris

Why.. Of all the answers given in the thread on the 1890 most everyone overlooked the answer Bill gave.

The Correct answer I might add.

 

Sorry, but I don't see it as just a weak strike. There is a lack of detail in the hair, not just above the ear, but also on the forehead, temple and on the tresses at the base of her neck. There also appears to be rub on the top of her cap.

 

Here are three obverses of mine that are raw. There are some similarities AND differences. How do you think these compare to yours?

 

Chris

 

PS. By the way, yours looks like a VAM7.

[MAULEMALL]

Chris your pics are horrid...

I sat at my computer for about a half hour trying to think of a way to say that so that it wouldn't sound so offensive but really the only way is to come right out and say it...

 

sorry..

[cpm9ball]

Chris your pics are horrid...

I sat at my computer for about a half hour trying to think of a way to say that so that it wouldn't sound so offensive but really the only way is to come right out and say it...

 

sorry..

 

You don't have to apologize. I don't claim to be a photographic genius, and my lighting set-up is far from adequate. However, the photos still show the detail that I mentioned in my last post. How do these examples of the 1890 compare to your coin?

 

Chris

 

PS. Tell me what you don't like about the photos. Maybe it is something that I can easily correct.

[MAULEMALL]

They are out of focus..They are very blurry on my monitor.

They also look washed out..I guess that has to do with the lighting..

 

I can't really do any comparison to those photo's..

 

Have you tried a scanner??

[cpm9ball]

I don't have a scanner, but the focus is probably due to the plastic window of the 2x2. Even still, and without my glasses, I can still see the differences. Oh, well!

 

Chris

[MAULEMALL]

I don't have a scanner, but the focus is probably due to the plastic window of the 2x2. Even still, and without my glasses, I can still see the differences. Oh, well!

 

Chris

Chris you also have the benifit of the coins in hand..

I wouldn't attempt to give an opinion on the coins posted or on the similarities or differences.

 

 

[cpm9ball]

I don't have a scanner, but the focus is probably due to the plastic window of the 2x2. Even still, and without my glasses, I can still see the differences. Oh, well!

 

Chris

Chris you also have the benifit of the coins in hand..

I wouldn't attempt to give an opinion on the coins posted or on the similarities or differences.

 

 

In that case I retract my opinion about your coin, because, after all, it is only a photo and we shouldn't be expected to offer opinions about coins from just a photo.................right? If that is what you believe, then why did you ask for opinions in the first place?

 

Chris

[MAULEMALL]

I don't have a scanner, but the focus is probably due to the plastic window of the 2x2. Even still, and without my glasses, I can still see the differences. Oh, well!

 

Chris

Chris you also have the benifit of the coins in hand..

I wouldn't attempt to give an opinion on the coins posted or on the similarities or differences.

 

 

In that case I retract my opinion about your coin, because, after all, it is only a photo and we shouldn't be expected to offer opinions about coins from just a photo.................right? If that is what you believe, then why did you ask for opinions in the first place?

 

Chris

I was speaking of the pics you asked me to compare the coins too..

 

The pics you posted offer insufficient detail.

 

If you could get some better pics for comparison I will be happy to offer an Opinion as you asked.

 

But to be honest, The pics you posted appear on my screen very blurry and washed out...

as an example

The coin that is marked DMPL shows no aspect for PL much less DMPL..

No mirrors are discernible.

 

I am not saying they aren't there,I am saying that the pics don't show the characteristics and I can't make a comparison..

 

I respect your honesty as regarding your opinion..

I hope you will do the same for mine.

 

Patrick