What about this 1883 Morgan?

[stumpy041486]

I know the pics suck, but it's the best I could do. I don't know how to take the pics without the flash showing up on the coin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bsshog40]

Well I know this is in a PCGS slab, but unless what I'm seeing are in the pics or on the slab, I'm seeing hairlines??? Otherwise, very nice looking Morgan. Looks like a nice PL with some cameo on the reverse.

[Coindude]

Those mirrors are pretty darn impressive, the contrast is medium. I wonder if this coin might be a proof? DMPL at worst, and because of the incredible mirrors hairlines will show up easily, so I say 63 on speculation.

[prudden]

I'm tempted to call it a Proof. If not,it's an incredible DMPL. 65. Pics are a little confusing and if I see hairlines it may be in a Genuine slab.Covered all my bases,guys?

[michael]

from the photos

 

 

proof 62 overdipped and somewaht hazy and cloudy a little below average eye appeal

 

with little to no flash or blast in other words not much "life" in the coin

 

sorry

[L1ncolnF4n]

I'm not seeing these hairlines, to me it looks like they are on the slab as they seem to almost be shadows on the coin, but maybe I just haven't had a lot of experience with Morgan's. My gut said 66DMPL but I feel it might be a proof as well. Don't know if it would CA as a proof.

[dean1345]

PF64

[$ilverHawk]

I don't think the photos due it justice. Nice proof. I agree with dean. Gut call PF64.

[robec1347]

My gut was PF66, but I'll go with PF65. Whatever it is, it's a beauty.

[prudden]

I'm not seeing these hairlines, to me it looks like they are on the slab as they seem to almost be shadows on the coin, but maybe I just haven't had a lot of experience with Morgan's. My gut said 66DMPL but I feel it might be a proof as well. Don't know if it would CA as a proof.

 

Not sure about the hairlines,either,but there could be some in the fields in front of the face.Very faint,so might be on the slab.

[michael]

i see medium+ to not quite heavy hairlines on the obverse cheek and left fields of the coin

[James_OldeTowne]

PF-64 CAM.

[stumpy041486]

 

Michael got it right, but I disagree with your statement about not much "life" in the coin. This coin is a beauty in hand to me with lots of flash. Anyone think it will upgrade?

[L1ncolnF4n]

YA! I can't see less than 64 out of the photos...but in hand may look otherwise. It's a very borderline CA too. I might consider NGC as that ridiculous mirror could possible warrant a * if your lucky.

[James_OldeTowne]

I had guessed 64 CAM. The new images make it look a point lower in grade, and also lessen the cameo effect. So, I think it might upgrade by a point, but not on the designation.

[michael]

your're right sight seen might be different with regards to eye appeal as i cant see it in hand

 

my opinion with this proof morgan is to leave it alone as is in the older green holder as i think it is only a proof 62 no more no less

 

let some other genius who sees it...... if you ever sell it........ think it is an upgrade in the older green tag holder and pay you more

 

i see a proof 62 and in my opinion based on the photo i think my opinion is correct but again i have not seen the coin in hand sight seen

 

 

[Ahab]

I think it could very well upgrade. If it were mine I'd crack it out and send to NGC.

[kryptonitecomics]

Not great pictures but I thought it was a PF64......I can't see it being less than a 63 regardless of the number on the holder (thumbs u