Considering this coin, but have a question on a "light spot" 0

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

I am considering buying this classic head half cent.  The coin is uniform chocolate brown and has decent luster.  However, I am questioning the light spot over the "T" in "United".  I know that coins can certainly have lighter spots, but I am left wondering if this is a mark where the coin has been "touched up?" (coin is graded MS63)

Edited September 9, 2022 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[EagleRJO]

Hmmm, I seem to recall a sticky topic about posting pics of both sides of the coin when asking questions, with this guy Neophyte something being the last one to post there. [Duck, Swing & Miss ... couldn't resist. ]

Edited September 9, 2022 by EagleRJO

[AdamWL]

I don't think I'd let the light spot stop me from buying it.

[JT2]

NEO.... some of my favorite cents have the deep chocolate brown color to them.  I think they have a very pleasing look to them in this condition.  i wouldn't have an issue with the spot.... if you notice in-between the D of Unitec and the S of states has a hint of red as well as RB condition at the 6 o'clock area of the rev..  if she's a good price i would get her.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

Thanks for all there replies.

@EagleRJO Yes.  I agree that full obverse and reverse is the rule.  But, I have no questions on the obverse.  And... i really dislike posting pictures of coins that I do not own, and picking them apart critically.  I know that this coin will eventually end up in someone's collection, and I would never want them to stumble on this thread and see their coin being picked apart (should I not buy it).  I have completely removed photos of coins in other threads for this reason.

Edited September 9, 2022 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[DWLange]

It looks as though there may have been some debris masking that area from toning that was later removed. The coin (what I can see of it) seems nice overall, so the light spot shouldn't be a deterrent from acquiring it.

[RWB]

Fully agree. Nice coin (1833?) and worthy of being left alone.

[Coinbuf]

The light color is not really an issue and I think that Mr. Lange may be correct that some debris may have been there which kept that area from toning and was later removed.   What I am curious about is the denticle in that area, it seems to be missing in the photo.   This may just be a function of the lighting and photo and may not be missing at all.   If there is a return privilege then it may well be worth taking a look at it in hand as the overall coin looks very nice from this one photo.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

Thanks all.  I was thinking also that this was an area of removed "crud".  The coin looks really nice otherwise, and maybe I am just starting to be hyper critical (not always a bad thing).  The planchette is a little darker than the rest of my set, but I liked the luster and it is a nice MS63 IMO.  I just didn't want the small mark to "net grade" to XF (I net grade it AU).  Again, thanks for all the feedback.  Having a sounding board of experts is so nice at times like this.

 

PS - @RWB this one is a 1834.  Like the 1833 and 35, a relatively common date.

Edited September 9, 2022 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[CoinJockey73]

On 9/9/2022 at 3:30 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

Having a sounding board of experts is so nice at times like this.

And i was just about to chime in...

(Looks lovely to me) 

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

On 9/9/2022 at 3:38 PM, CoinJockey73 said:

And i was just about to chime in...

(Looks lovely to me) 

I was not trying to insinuate that i was not soliciting additional feedback.  Thanks for the vote.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

Well room... I decided to go ahead and pick it up.

@EagleRJO I added the pics of the obverse (just for you) 

[CoinJockey73]

On 9/9/2022 at 5:44 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

I was not trying to insinuate that i was not soliciting additional feedback.  Thanks for the vote.

I wasn't implying that you weren't , just making you full aware of where it's coming from. I wasn't even sure what i was looking at, but after reading the above comments, i share the same opine. I do like that deep chocolate though. Enjoy the weekend, everyone. 

(Both sides look fantastic, congrats!) 

Edited September 9, 2022 by CoinJockey73

[EagleRJO]

On 9/9/2022 at 5:57 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

Well room... I decided to go ahead and pick it up.

Nice! Now that I can see both sides (ahemm) I like the coin. 

MS-63 to MS-64 or slightly better? For me the differentiation between the MS grades is so minor sometimes and hard to pick up.

Edited September 9, 2022 by EagleRJO

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

On 9/9/2022 at 6:32 PM, EagleRJO said:

 

MS-63 to MS-64 or slightly better? 

Thanks much.  It's a MS63, but I think it's a nice one.  By EAC standards, it's probably more an AU53-55 (by my judging, but someone more qualified in EAC Grading can correct me).

[EagleRJO]

I don't see the wear at ANA focus areas for an AU. Am I missing something, or maybe I just haven't closely looked at many of those coins.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

On 9/9/2022 at 9:41 PM, EagleRJO said:

I don't see the wear at ANA focus areas for an AU. Am I missing something, or maybe I just haven't closely looked at many of those coins.

There is no wear.  Early American Copper is a little different.  I am not saying that this coin doesn't deserve a "commercial" grade of MS (I think it's a pretty solid 63), but EAC would never grade this MS, because there is not really any original red, there are a few marks in focal areas (i.e. the mark the the left of the L in "Liberty"), and the crud removal is also something that would come into account when EAC grading the coin.  This grading is called "EAC Grading" or "net grading" and there has recently been a great book published on this subject called "Grading Guide for Early American Copper Coins."  

 

 

[EagleRJO]

My understanding is that without the physical indicators of a lower overall grade, e.g. a minor circulation rub, that it would just drop that within a given overall grade. So you may still be good with an MS grade, just a lower one.

[Lem E]

On 9/9/2022 at 4:57 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

Well room... I decided to go ahead and pick it up.

 

Looks like a nice one. Congrats.

[J P M]

It is a very nice looking coin Neo. 

[VKurtB]

On 9/9/2022 at 5:32 PM, EagleRJO said:

Nice! Now that I can see both sides (ahemm) I like the coin. 

MS-63 to MS-64 or slightly better? For me the differentiation between the MS grades is so minor sometimes and hard to pick up.

I heard that! The first coin in the NGC grading contest set at the ANA show was a large cent that I had at MS64. NGC had it at MS67 (!!!!). It never occurred to me to go that high. I may have to send in my nicest large cents. 

Edited September 12, 2022 by VKurtB

[EagleRJO]

On 9/12/2022 at 12:22 PM, VKurtB said:

I heard that!

Yea, I just shake my head sometimes at such minor variations, and then add in differences between various graders with the more subjective current market grading.  I started a while ago just lumping them into MS-60 to MS-64 (BU) and then MS-65 to MS-70 (Gem BU) and I'm trying to zero in a little more.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

On 9/12/2022 at 1:33 PM, EagleRJO said:

Yea, I just shake my head sometimes at such minor variations, and then add in differences between various graders with the more subjective current market grading.  I started a while ago just lumping them into MS-60 to MS-64 (BU) and then MS-65 to MS-70 (Gem BU) and I'm trying to zero in a little more.

I am no expert, but I would break them up differently (commercial grading):

MS60-61 - Can be pretty marked up.  Most of the time, a nice 58 would look better.  A touch of wear? Sure, but a more attractive coin (in many cases).

MS62-63 - Much more attractive (generally), less marks, and this is where coins really start to "look" MS (IMO).

MS64-65 - Pre-Gem and Gem.  Generally attractive MS coins.

MS66 (and above) - Super gem.  Very few marks or distractions.  Most reserve the "super gem" title for 67 (and above), but I thought for the purposes of lumping-together - this makes sense.

 

In other news --- the 1834 half cent arrived today, and I like it so much better in-hand.  I am happy I got it, and it matches my other coins very well.  Thanks for all the feedback

Edited September 12, 2022 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[EagleRJO]

Yea, I will get there eventually, but doing it a little differently.  Currently working on breaking the MS ones into BU or Brilliant Unc (MS 60 to 62), Choice Unc (MS 63 to 64) and Gem Unc (MS 65 to 70) which are common dividers for MS coins descriptively including how NGC does adjectival grading discussed here ...

https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/adjectival-grades/

So, I would have described your coin as Choice Unc and how I came up with that it may be MS 63 to 64 which is "close enough for gov work". There are also less common further adjectival dividers for the higher MS grades but I'm not there yet, and may not even bother with trying to get there with raw coins for a while as the ones I am interested in are either non-existent in the very highest MS grades or would be so ridiculously expensive it wouldn't matter to me much.

Edited September 13, 2022 by EagleRJO

[Coinbuf]

On 9/12/2022 at 12:51 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

 

In other news --- the 1834 half cent arrived today, and I like it so much better in-hand.  I am happy I got it, and it matches my other coins very well.  Thanks for all the feedback

Awesome that it meets your approval in hand.  

[EagleRJO]

On 9/12/2022 at 3:51 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

In other news --- the 1834 half cent arrived today, and I like it so much better in-hand.

Yea, Nice!

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

I want to give my sincere thanks again to the group.  This set is a real challenge for me, and now I am over 50% complete.  I appreciate you lending me your eyes and experience to evaluate this coin.  I am very excited to keep moving the the right direction.

Edited September 12, 2022 by The Neophyte Numismatist