• 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.

GTG - 1898 Morgan (Grade Revealed)

Started by mikew148,

18 posts in this topic

brg5658

brg5658

Posted
Posted

If there are any marks or hits keeping this from an MS66 then I'm not seeing them. Those are some pristine surfaces. (thumbs u Honestly, if those images are accurate and the surfaces are that pristine, I wouldn't have a problem with MS67. (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
slcoin

slcoin

Posted
Posted
If there are any marks or hits keeping this from an MS66 then I'm not seeing them.

 

That was about my thought as well, although it would be nice to see slightly larger images to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SWNGC

SWNGC

Posted
Posted

Looks like a nice 64

 

I'm seeing a large mark midway between the ear and lips with another smaller one below it and again at the base of e nose and there appears to be abrasion to the nose and chatter in the fields beside the e and beneath the u.

 

The reverse shows a large hit in the middle of the breast, as well as marks beneath the eagle's left wing and above the word "In"

 

All is well hidden at first, but zooming image reveals surfaces are not as clear as they appear at first glance - big clue was how muted die lines appeared:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yonico

yonico

Posted
Posted

it looks a little better than MS66 to me. The cheeck exceptionally clean and the fields are mark free, virtually.

my only question: is the coin lustrous in hand? cause from pics i don't see much luster on the obverse and not enough on the reverse

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yonico

yonico

Posted
Posted
Does it maybe look a little more like this in hand???

 

 

this strong magnification is maybe useful with VAM's and other varieties, but it is too much for grading. i think 5x-8x should be enough to grade a coin.

any coin even if graded MS67 will show some kind of marks under 32X magnification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deerefan8420

Deerefan8420

Posted
Posted
Does it maybe look a little more like this in hand???

 

 

this strong magnification is maybe useful with VAM's and other varieties, but it is too much for grading. i think 5x-8x should be enough to grade a coin.

any coin even if graded MS67 will show some kind of marks under 32X magnification.

 

+1

 

Once the magnification gets to be more than 12-15x greater than the original size of the image, the pixels start to become distorted and what appears to be surface imperfections are usually just grainy areas that are the result of the higg magnification. In the original photos provided by the OP, the coin appears to pretty much flawless. Very few marks or scuffs. The only thing that might be holding this coin back is the lack of luster in a few areas. I would also agree that this coin is at least a 65, but more than likely received a 66.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SWNGC

SWNGC

Posted
Posted
Does it maybe look a little more like this in hand???

 

 

this strong magnification is maybe useful with VAM's and other varieties, but it is too much for grading. i think 5x-8x should be enough to grade a coin.

any coin even if graded MS67 will show some kind of marks under 32X magnification.

 

 

I agree, but those are by no means small marks that were revealed by magnification, but instead, large hits to the prime focal areas that will greatly impact grade. The point was that the initial images provided are so muted that these significant factors, as well as any others, were hidden to almost any eye.

 

FYI, this is not the same image magnified, but instead was taken from the less desirable images the OP decided not to post to the forum (click on the image and then check out the others that are next on his photobucket account )

 

Any chance we can get the real grade?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yonico

yonico

Posted
Posted
Does it maybe look a little more like this in hand???

 

 

this strong magnification is maybe useful with VAM's and other varieties, but it is too much for grading. i think 5x-8x should be enough to grade a coin.

any coin even if graded MS67 will show some kind of marks under 32X magnification.

 

 

I agree, but those are by no means small marks that were revealed by magnification, but instead, large hits to the prime focal areas that will greatly impact grade. The point was that the initial images provided are so muted that these significant factors, as well as any others, were hidden to almost any eye.

 

FYI, this is not the same image magnified, but instead was taken from the less desirable images the OP decided not to post to the forum (click on the image and then check out the others that are next on his photobucket account )

 

Any chance we can get the real grade?

 

well,

 

A. they are too largely magnified nonetheless

 

B. if the OP chose not to post these, why should i go through his photobucket account to find them? it's not like he's trying to sell me the coin, in which case i would like to see more images. but he simply asked for an opinion on the pics he DID POST.

 

any way, i still think this coin is MS66 in grade, and i would like the OP to comment on the amounts of luster on it. if there's enough luster i would think the coin can be 66+ or 67 even.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikew148

mikew148

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The hits are not visible without magnification. The hits on the tip of the nose and the cheek are the biggest but look nothing like the cropped/blowup images.

 

As far as my photo bucket images are concerned. I chose the image that best represents the coin in hand. I have many lenses, a bellows and a microscope that I play around with. All for different things. When I post an image of a coin for GTG you can be assured that I'm posting the one that looks as close to the coin, in hand, as I can get it. No conspiracy here.

 

I think a 65 would be a disservice to this coin and I'm thinking of sending it off to CAC for an endorsement.

 

SWNGC, I posted this coin as a comparison to the coin that you posted earlier in the week. I think 66 for that coin is not out of the question, although others disagreed.

 

Thanks for the opinions.

 

DSC_0254.jpg

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
Well, I'm glad to see I'm not crazy. :) At first glance MS66 was all I could see. Very nice Morgan! (thumbs u

 

If the luster is all there, the coin is an easy MS66. The problem, to me at least, is that the photograph didn't show luster (which was why I refrained from guessing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikew148

mikew148

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the kind words.

 

I purchased a new lighting setup a few days ago which should be here any day - thanks for the tip Brandon!

 

I'm hoping my images will take the next step.

 

 

Until then..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing