Burks Posted November 20, 2005 Report Share Posted November 20, 2005 Picked this up at a coin show this morning. It really caught my eye because of the luster. Reverse is AWESOME. Very bright white on the reverse, obverse is still really bright as well. I apologize for the scans. The coin is all white, not grey like the scan shows. Don't worry about the difference in color. Scanner had trouble because of how shiney the coin is. It did capture a few very minor marks that are very hard to see with the naked eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostDutchman Posted November 20, 2005 Report Share Posted November 20, 2005 wow that's a really had coin to grade from that scan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted November 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2005 wow that's a really had coin to grade from that scan Yeah I know. For some reason it just won't scan it right. Like I said, the marks you see are see you are on the coin. No hiding that. Luster is there even though it isn't shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beautiful Coins Again Posted November 20, 2005 Report Share Posted November 20, 2005 After a quick look, I would give this one MS63 if there is full luster present and might go MS64 if I had it in hand. I see a few scratches (?) on her neck and above her cap and some minor marks on her cheek. I see nothing major on the reverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtryka Posted November 20, 2005 Report Share Posted November 20, 2005 The scan makes this one difficult as well as the fact the New Orleans Morgans so often have weak strikes, which is what I think is going on in the hair. I have an 01-O in 63 and an 03-O in 62, and this one looks a lot more like my 03, hence I voted MS-62. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted November 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 Sounds great. I put it between 61-63. I'll try to use my dad's camera this week and see what it can do. May be able to capture the luster better. For $21, I think I got a good deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 Sounds great. I put it between 61-63. I'll try to use my dad's camera this week and see what it can do. May be able to capture the luster better. For $21, I think I got a good deal For $21 I think you got a great deal, I would have paid more. I like my Morgans with nice clean unblemished fields, I would almost rather they have very slight wear than bagmarks in the fields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted November 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 Same here. I like the fields to be as mark free as possible. Obverse has one here and there, they are mainly concentrated on the face. Reverse has one blemish right above the eagle's head. Hard to see in hand. Next month I'm taking it to a coin show and having it checked over by a few people to make sure it hasn't been cleaned. There is a little "haze" around some of the stars, not sure if that means it has been cleaned or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stujoe Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 With the pic and description, I think I would go 63. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 Depending on the lustre, I'd go MS63 or MS64. It's a nice coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izzy452 Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 MS-63 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dacoinman Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Try using a piece of thin wax paper between the scanner and the coin. I have heard somehow in the past that this actually helps. I don't know though I have never used that method. Very nice looking coin though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted November 28, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 Try using a piece of thin wax paper between the scanner and the coin. I have heard somehow in the past that this actually helps. I don't know though I have never used that method. Very nice looking coin though. Interesting idea. May give it a shot tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stujoe Posted November 29, 2005 Report Share Posted November 29, 2005 I have not heard that one befroe. I would be interested in seeing the results... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted November 30, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2005 I have not heard that one befroe. I would be interested in seeing the results... Well I tried it today. Not pleased with the results but it was worth a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stujoe Posted November 30, 2005 Report Share Posted November 30, 2005 I would grade that pic EF, harshly cleaned! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dacoinman Posted November 30, 2005 Report Share Posted November 30, 2005 From that scan you would give it that high of a grade? LMAO hahahaha.... Personally I photograph my coins. I know that everyone doesn't have that capability. But it has been 10+ years since I scanned a coin, that I can't recall the most effective way to do it. I'll do a little digging around on the net and through my OLD notes to see if I have something on that subject matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted November 30, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2005 Thanks dacoinman! I appreciate the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggAndyy Posted November 30, 2005 Report Share Posted November 30, 2005 I went with a 58, the very tops of the cap and the weakness of the locks around the ear (at least on the scan) would force me to give it a 58 (a 63 with rub). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotten Rodney Posted November 30, 2005 Report Share Posted November 30, 2005 is that a finger print by the chin. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlueke Posted December 2, 2005 Report Share Posted December 2, 2005 I went with 62 because I can't tell how well the breast feathers are struc up on the pic. If it's just the lighting it could go to 64 , depending on how distracting the chatter on the lip is in person Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrcentavo Posted January 14, 2006 Report Share Posted January 14, 2006 au58 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stu62 Posted January 14, 2006 Report Share Posted January 14, 2006 If its an unc I'd go 63.I can't tell too well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numismatistnick Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 I think that it looks like 62-63 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burks Posted February 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 Just finished taking two hours worth of pictures. Actually got a halfway decent image with detail. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v154/burks/DSC01609.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v154/burks/DSC01615.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v154/burks/DSC016231.jpg Best I could get. Any closer or with more light and the image blurred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.