Comments about 1921 Peace dollars 0

[RWB]

Many collectors want to have a 1921 Peace dollar as an example of the only high relief circulation coin that is reasonably affordable. Finding a really nice example is a challenge, but not impossible, especially if some idiosyncrasies of this one-year issue are understood.

First, fully 90+% of the issue were struck with insufficient pressure to adequately bring up the design. Thus most coins lack detail at the center, top surfaces of inscriptions and other details. Second, the best detailed coins were struck from new dies and will not have significant luster - coin surfaces will appear more satin-like. (Luster develops during die use and is not present on new dies.) Third, authentication and grading companies seldom consider detail when "grading" 1921's - this means that a coin receiving a high numerical grade might have lousy detail, but a high asking price. Fourth, wear can be hard to separate from the normal satin-like surface, especially on legitimate AU-58 coins.

Suggestion for a "satisfying" purchase: Best detail, minimal marks, limited wear. Ignore the numerical grade unless you get the first three.

The attached photo will give collectors a goal to look for.

[Zebo]

To go along with Roger's post - how do you think this one stacks up with his "what to,look for"? Guess the grade (revealed later)

 

[MarkFeld]

In fairness, Roger’s “what to look for” should apply to strike, but not luster and overall appearance. As I recall, some people were of the opinion that the coin he posted might be a Proof, but either way, it appears to have been cleaned (or polished). The strike, however, is exceptional.

Edited December 8, 2019 by MarkFeld

[numisport]

Roger that photo looks animated. Is that your coin ? Is the photo enhanced ? Proof coin ? It's not in your Renaissance volume

[RWB]

The comment about "cleaned" is consistent with those who have limited exposure to early pieces from new dies. There is a persistent false assumption that "luster" is a component of accurate "grading." It is not. But that is a different discussion.   The coin has not been "cleaned" or otherwise altered.

[Personally, I have vacillated between "satin proof" and "circulation strike." The rim suggests circulation, but detail and clarity suggest medal press manufacture. There is at least one other coin with similar detail. All 1921 proofs also have similar rims. Reeding is sharp but not conclusive by itself. The situation is further confused by the presence of sandblasted pieces being called "proof" when they were obviously not made on a medal press. (See the Ray Baker family coins.) The Philadelphia Mint did some sandblasting, but fraudsters out side the mint also sandblasted some nice 1921s. (This was identified by Wally Breen in the early 1960s.) ]

The coin was photographed with a combination of axial and diffuse lighting. This technique brings out detail but without the harshness of pure axial lighting with a beam splitter. Obviously, this is impossible if the coin is in a slab. (Comment - a coin will photograph better outside of a slab than in one. Plastic distorts the image, adds reflections and defect shadows, lowers contrast, reduces sharpness and resolution, and limits lighting options.)

Edited December 8, 2019 by RWB

[MarkFeld]

4 hours ago, RWB said:

The comment about "cleaned" is consistent with those who have limited exposure to early pieces from new dies. There is a persistent false assumption that "luster" is a component of accurate "grading." It is not. But that is a different discussion.   The coin has not been "cleaned" or otherwise altered.

[Personally, I have vacillated between "satin proof" and "circulation strike." The rim suggests circulation, but detail and clarity suggest medal press manufacture. There is at least one other coin with similar detail. All 1921 proofs also have similar rims. Reeding is sharp but not conclusive by itself. The situation is further confused by the presence of sandblasted pieces being called "proof" when they were obviously not made on a medal press. (See the Ray Baker family coins.) The Philadelphia Mint did some sandblasting, but fraudsters out side the mint also sandblasted some nice 1921s. (This was identified by Wally Breen in the early 1960s.) ]

The coin was photographed with a combination of axial and diffuse lighting. This technique brings out detail but without the harshness of pure axial lighting with a beam splitter. Obviously, this is impossible if the coin is in a slab. (Comment - a coin will photograph better outside of a slab than in one. Plastic distorts the image, adds reflections and defect shadows, lowers contrast, reduces sharpness and resolution, and limits lighting options.)

I and others can only judge the coin from the images provided. Based on those images, it appears to have been cleaned (or polished). And I believe that my “exposure” to “early pieces from new dies”, is sufficient.

Edited December 8, 2019 by MarkFeld

[RWB]

The purposes of the original comments and photo are to aid collectors in making decisions about 1921 Peace dollars, especially as relates to detail.

Fortunately, I do not have a financial interest in "grading" and other such things. That independence permits me to be completely honest and follow facts, not "accepted assumptions" non-empirical "grading standards" and other nonsense. Readers, including Mr. Feld, may opine however they wish.

As anyone will acknowledge, a photo is only a single image and conveys a small portion of the full range of data. Maybe one day we'll have high resolution, multispectral holographic images for everyday use....but not quite yet.

 

[MarkFeld]

11 minutes ago, RWB said:

The purposes of the original comments and photo are to aid collectors in making decisions about 1921 Peace dollars, especially as relates to detail.

Fortunately, I do not have a financial interest in "grading" and other such things. That independence permits me to be completely honest and follow facts, not "accepted assumptions" non-empirical "grading standards" and other nonsense. Readers, including Mr. Feld, may opine however they wish.

As anyone will acknowledge, a photo is only a single image and conveys a small portion of the full range of data. Maybe one day we'll have high resolution, multispectral holographic images for everyday use....but not quite yet.

 

No one even hinted that you weren’t being “completely honest”. And just because, based on photos, I have a different opinion about the coin than you do, doesn’t mean I’m being any less honest than you are. Your implied insults are duly noted.

[Timely]

Cleaned or not, the detail is superb & obvious!

[MarkFeld]

46 minutes ago, Timely said:

Cleaned or not, the detail is superb & obvious!

Absolutely!

[RWB]

RE: " Your implied insults are duly noted." There were no 'insults' direct or implied; any such perception is just a defensive expression itself, but it hardly matters.  :)

Being "in the business of coins" always introduces bias. It is often not intentional, but comes with the business territory. No sale or auction catalog is going to describe a piece as "a dog" or point out all the defects - it's assumed that's part of business and part of the potential buyer's responsibility to ascertain. There are many business individuals who can surmount that.

My comments on the 1921 dollar, to emphasize again, are intended to help collectors have access to information so they can make their own decisions, and be comfortable in supporting their decisions with facts.

[MarkFeld]

1 hour ago, RWB said:

RE: " Your implied insults are duly noted." There were no 'insults' direct or implied; any such perception is just a defensive expression itself, but it hardly matters. 

Being "in the business of coins" always introduces bias. It is often not intentional, but comes with the business territory. No sale or auction catalog is going to describe a piece as "a dog" or point out all the defects - it's assumed that's part of business and part of the potential buyer's responsibility to ascertain. There are many business individuals who can surmount that.

My comments on the 1921 dollar, to emphasize again, are intended to help collectors have access to information so they can make their own decisions, and be comfortable in supporting their decisions with facts.

Roger, label these words of yours whatever you wish: “financial interest in grading”; “nonsense”.

My opinions and comments about the coin’s strike and (what looks to me to be) cleaning or polishing, were to help collectors, as well. This will be my last post to this thread.