• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Opinions please!

Started by BRIAN339,

14 posts in this topic

BRIAN339

BRIAN339

Posted
Posted

I am mostly a paper money guy. I am begining to find that I have a passion for coins aslo.

 

Please tell me what you think about this coin and why. I need to learn because I plan on spending some money to beef up my collection.

 

Thank you!

74284.jpg.f1ecf4fea674e203907b86c8df06bcfe.jpg

74285.jpg.c2d26e5181033c9447d8c186e45ae06b.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thebeav

thebeav

Posted
Posted

It may be that that photo was taken under only incandescent light and the actual appearance is difficult to determine.

It looks to be PCGS certified, (is it?) so that answers some questions right there.

What questions do you have exactly ?

 

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TomB

TomB

Posted
Posted

I don't care for the splotchy toning pattern at all. Given the limitations of the image, if it is a proof then that isn't so bad, but if it is not a proof then it would look mighty odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BRIAN339

BRIAN339

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I just recently purchased this on fleabay. It is not in a PCGS holder as far as I know.

 

I cant wait to get the coin but I always overpay. I was hoping for some opinions ahead of time.

 

Is it a cameo? What would the grade be? What do you think its worth?

 

That kind of thing.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BRIAN339

BRIAN339

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't care for the splotchy toning pattern at all. Given the limitations of the image, if it is a proof then that isn't so bad, but if it is not a proof then it would look mighty odd.

 

It is supposed to be a proof or so it was described.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillJones

BillJones

Posted
Posted

I'd say it's a Proof.

 

If it's graded PR-63, brown or less and priced in that range, it's worth a shot if you like it. If it's any higher than that I'd stay away because of the uneven toning.

 

I've been very disappointed with the looks of many Proof Indian cents in the PR-64 and lower range. Heck, I've been disappointed with some of the PR-65s and even 66 coins I've seen.

 

Therefore if this piece is low grade Proof (63 or lower) it's worth a shot. Most of the low grade Proofs are really ugly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
robec1347

robec1347

Posted
Posted

Definitely a proof. I have a strong feeling that held under the light just right that the background color shimmers with neon colors. I doubt very much that it would be labeled cameo. Most of the ones I've seen similar to yours aren't. Easily looks to be a 63 with chance at 64. Also has a better than even chance of being designated RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coindude

Coindude

Posted
Posted

One of the new guys here was trying to sell that coin, I believe it's in a lower tier holder if in any. I saw what you paid for it and I think you got a deal on it. Is it a cameo? Not sure there, but I know from some of the pics that were shown that there is definite contrast. Enough to get the cameo? Who knows. These classic proofs are tough and with the colorful toning that is has it would be very difficult to tell unless you have it in hand to tell if it would get a cam designation or not.

 

All in all, I think you got a good coin at a good price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgrinz

jgrinz

Posted
Posted

Yeah I saw that in the marketplace too and was NOT too enthusiastic about the coloring - It didnt look natural to me - Maybe a dipped and retoned ??

 

The holder is just a generic 2 1/.2 x 2 1/2 plastic type not a graded slab.

 

The price for the coin I think even with its deterrants was not a bad price - I will let the OP say what he paid if he wants too.

 

Details are pretty nice though except for the actian happening around the right side of the date.

 

THis coin is NOT a cameo

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conder101

Conder101

Posted
Posted

I don't think it's a proof (The rims aren't full, the top surface of the date and lettering is rounded and rough, and that rough pimply surface on the devices doesn't look normal.) and I don't like the toning. I think it had been in some kind of chemical dip. The devices surface looks similar to that seen on Bay Area counterfeits and they often have proof like fields from the polishing done to theh dies to remove the EDM rough surfaces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
robec1347

robec1347

Posted
Posted
I don't think it's a proof (The rims aren't full, the top surface of the date and lettering is rounded and rough, and that rough pimply surface on the devices doesn't look normal.) and I don't like the toning. I think it had been in some kind of chemical dip. The devices surface looks similar to that seen on Bay Area counterfeits and they often have proof like fields from the polishing done to theh dies to remove the EDM rough surfaces.

 

This IHC proof, owned by a forum member, also has the the pimply surface with rounded numbers and lettering. The rims were covered by the PCGS gasket so they are not visible in order to compare. I can't speak for the toning

 

1900IHCobv_015.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing