• 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.

1891 CC - What do you guess? [Grade Revealed]

Started by Colorado68,

26 posts in this topic

AHFreak

AHFreak

Posted
Posted

Wow..... Id sure like to see that coin in person. Its hard to know for sure without seeing a photographed coin in-hand to compare with pics, but I would say your pics look really really good.

 

Id normally give a coin like that a 63, but considering the factors at play, I wouldn't be surprised if it were a 64... Looks like a great coin.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colorado68

Colorado68

Posted
  • Author
Posted

You both hit exactly on what I need to do to make these photos better, capture the depth and better in hand representation.

Shot this with a ring light which gives even lighting but no luster.

Thanks for the feedback, its very helpful.

Will post the grade Monday

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted

The pictures make the coin look unusual, and do not adequately allow us to assess the coin's luster. Since luster is a crucial grading factor in AU and MS grades, we can't really grade the coin. Any grade opinion is mere speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raisethis2

Raisethis2

Posted
Posted

Just based on damage or the lack thereof, This coin looks like a solid

MS 64 + and maybe MS 65. The photos don't show luster but I'm certain it's there.

 

The ring light might be the way to go if the camera settings don't allow too much light in. I think you need to diffuse it or something. Just experiment. You're not too far away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted

I'll guess 64 on that one.

 

As for your picture - how many and what type of lights are you using? The coin looks overlit - try positioning the lights to create contrast. You want it well lit, but you need to have some interplay of light and shadow to give the appearance of depth and luster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colorado68

Colorado68

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

As for your picture - how many and what type of lights are you using? The coin looks overlit - try positioning the lights to create contrast. You want it well lit, but you need to have some interplay of light and shadow to give the appearance of depth and luster.

 

They were shot with a ring light. I agree, they are over lit and show no luster.

 

 

Here's another attempt... this is just natural light with a white reflector

 

_DSC1017_zps62ea91e3.jpg

 

_DSC1019_zpsc274388a.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
$ilverHawk

$ilverHawk

Posted
Posted

The strike is strong. Minor hits in the Obverse fields. Reverse looks good. The wheel marks are a problem that could result in a No Grade. With the CC forgiveness factor I say MS64.

 

Carl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colorado68

Colorado68

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The roller marks are really pronounced in that last set of pictures. Doesn't look like that in hand.

 

The coin is in an old NGC holder graded a 63

 

When I lay it next to all my other 63 & 64's it really jumps out as being a 64 so have been considering sending it back in to be regraded, off to CAC to try for a gold bean or, crack it out and send in as a raw coin.

So that's been my dilemma and why I sought expert guesses. Based on the grade and my rambling thoughts, what would you suggest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
The roller marks are really pronounced in that last set of pictures. Doesn't look like that in hand.

 

The coin is in an old NGC holder graded a 63

 

When I lay it next to all my other 63 & 64's it really jumps out as being a 64 so have been considering sending it back in to be regraded, off to CAC to try for a gold bean or, crack it out and send in as a raw coin.

So that's been my dilemma and why I sought expert guesses. Based on the grade and my rambling thoughts, what would you suggest?

 

EDITED: I stand corrected. Glancing back at the Heritage Archives, it appears that CAC has stickered coins with roller marks although most of them were small or faint. There was at least one prominent counter example, however. OP, try a CAC submission. I still would be surprised by a gold sticker.

 

To be honest with you, I do not think CAC would sticker the coin at all. I know that I will be in the minority here to opine that. CAC states that they sticker coins that are solid or high end for the grade, but the truth is, there are also considerations for eye appeal and CAC's personal tastes. I have seen coins that were solid for the grade that were rejected as not fitting CAC's taste regardless of how nice the coin might have been otherwise. This includes reasons such as the coin being too dark for CAC, rim dings, etc. I personally had a better date Morgan Dollar with roller marks on the cheek that otherwise looked like a decent MS64 that CAC rejected. Granted it was one coin (small sample size), ownership always adds a point or so, and I failed to include a note asking for feedback on the submission, so yes, I could be wrong. With that said, I don't ever recall seeing a coin with very prominent roller marks that stickered. If the marks are very prominent in hand, I think CAC will reject it outright. I think it would be interesting to submit and see. And to be clear, I am stating the roller mark information as OPINION and not as definitive FACT, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

 

With that said, I think the odds are better with reconsideration. In my opinion, the grading services seem to be forgiving with contact marks on Carson City Morgan Dollars so you may very well find that it is upgraded to MS64. Personally, I still think NGC was right the first time, and if it was mine, I would leave it alone. If selling it, I would argue that many would consider it a premium MS63, and I might even ask a slightly higher asking price hoping that someone would pick it up hoping for a gold bean or upgrade.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dadams

dadams

Posted
Posted

I'm not familiar with Roller Marks, but aren't they pre-mintage? Meaning would they really affect the grade other than detracting from eye appeal? First time I've heard this term!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
I'm not familiar with Roller Marks, but aren't they pre-mintage? Meaning would they really affect the grade other than detracting from eye appeal? First time I've heard this term!

 

Technically, they are not suppose to affect technical grade. Nevertheless they do have the potential to affect eye appeal and thus value. And realistically, this is what CAC really cares about. Would you pay a premium price for a coin with heavy roller marks when you can find a nice one that is premium for the grade in less than 10 minutes online for a similar price? I think a good number of collectors would be turned away by the marks, but I could be wrong.

 

Edited: And this is not meant to disparage the OP's coin in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colorado68

Colorado68

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I'd try re-submitting for reconsideration. Or crack it out and submit it anew.

 

Gold beans are very hard to get at CAC.

 

I decided to crack this out and submit as raw. It was in a fatty so at least I get a new clean holder.

 

Just finalized and it didn't grade the same.

 

Will post a new picture as soon as it arrives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raisethis2

Raisethis2

Posted
Posted

I'm guessing they buried you with a no-grade then.

 

They will no-grade a coin for "mechanical damage" ATS. That's what my experience has been. Bet you're coin got that result but hoping for the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colorado68

Colorado68

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just got it back today.

 

They gave it a + designation

Not the 64 I was hoping for but likely because of the roller marks everyone has pointed out.

 

 

_DSC2007_zpsnm7t2nu7.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colorado68

Colorado68

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Congratulations on the upgrade! Out of curiosity, do you plan to send it to CAC?

 

Thanks!

Yes, think now I'll submit it CAC.

 

Playing around, I tape over the grades on all my MS63-66's Morgans and sort them to see if they "fall into place" on their graded scale. This one always lands in the 64 pile, so feeling confident submitting it for a sticker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AHFreak

AHFreak

Posted
Posted

I get it, put the tape over the label... but how is it that you don't automatically know what the coin is, and the grade, just by glancing at the coin, even if you did try to avoid looking at the date, it would be to hard not to know which coin you were looking at. At least that is how it would be for me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colorado68

Colorado68

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I get it, put the tape over the label... but how is it that you don't automatically know what the coin is, and the grade, just by glancing at the coin, even if you did try to avoid looking at the date, it would be to hard not to know which coin you were looking at. At least that is how it would be for me...

 

Ok, a confession, and a bad one, I can never remember which dates have which grade except a couple, and those ones aren't in MS state.

They are last thing I look at when evaluating a Morgan. I know, probably a bad trait but can't help but focus on everything else.

Once I have the year I need for my collection, the date just becomes another number that gets lost in the peripheral.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing