• 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.

Which do you prefer?

Started by SkyMan,

15 posts in this topic

SkyMan

SkyMan

Posted
Posted

As most of you know, I decided to put together a raw toner Dansco of Washingtons. Along the way, I ended up getting enough Washingtons to fill 3 Danscos. While for the most part, it is relatively easy to figure out the coin to put in the A, B and C Danscos, some date/mm are not so easy to figure out. Which one of these two 1940 Washingtons do you prefer? Why? Do you like them? The coins were imaged by Bob Campbell, and I think he did an excellent job.

 

bc1940_rWA2o4_zpsacvyhysl.jpgbc1940_rWA2r3t_zpsade3o44h.jpg

 

bc1940_rWA1o3_zps7b848877.jpgbc1940_rWA1r3_zpsa1b69876.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

Of the two, I prefer the 1940 quarter to the 1940 quarter.....the one at top. Better detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PocketArt

PocketArt

Posted
Posted

Both nice examples Skyman and enjoy viewing your acquisitions. I'm currently working on a BU set of pre-1965 examples.

 

IMO, 1st example wins best of show for condition and toning. Asside from the nick below Washington's ear on first example; along with the faint scratch above jawline, it is superior to the last example which has a somewhat distracting scrape above the motto.

 

The reverse of the first example has a couple of parallel scratches on right leg, and the second example appears flawless on the reverse. However, the scrape on the obverse of last example overides the prestine condition of its flipside and is enough to keep it less desirable from my judgement between the two.

 

The toning on the first example is very even and pleasent on both sides; nothing dramatic but balanced. I especially like the lavender hues on the reverse. Toning on the second example appears intrusive and subdues the rims. I don't particularly like the blast white contrast with this type of toning; but, it may look better in hand.

 

Just my two cents!

 

Rich

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkyMan

SkyMan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thank you guys for your thoughts. In hand, the scuff in the left obverse field of # 2 does not appear as obtrusive as it does in the image. Having said that, technically # 1 is cleaner. I would say the toning is roughly comparable as to attractiveness on both coins. The difference is that the toning on # 1 is predominantly on the reverse, while the toning on # 2 is on both sides. Luster is good on both coins, with the nod to # 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing