Toned Morgan Purchase (Part 2)

Alrighty gang,

Here are the results from the previous poll.

Total number of voters: 21

Votes for MS62: Grilledporkchop

Votes for MS63: 1337BaldEagle, krispy, mjackson, raider34, zachfromnj

Votes for MS64: cpm9ball, FreakyGsMom, Leadfoot, Lehigh96, Log Potato, Marauderrt10, rotobeast, TopcatCoin

Votes for MS65: Duke Kavanaugh, illini420, Lonestar, Market Harmoney, Shoewrecky

Votes for MS66: GDJMSP, rlm's cents

Below are my pictures of the coin. This coin has been the toughest coin I've ever dealt with. To get the toning and luster on this coin were extremely hard to do, and I was not able to do it on my point and shoot or my new camera. I got the color pretty darn good.

Here are the original pictures:



Here are my pictures:





Cast your vote as to what the grade is now. I have a feeling lots of votes will change.

The poll will end Jan 1st.

FWIW, I think PCGS got it right.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Looks like a 64 to me.

 

Carried over from first thread of part 2. (With forgotten poll)

No.
In this situation I was looking to get the colors in the coin over the luster. I can get one or the other at the moment with my current set up.
With other coins my set up works just fine but this is just one of those coins...
It took me a long time to shoot and edit the pictures I posted, and until I add another light to my set up that might be about as good as it will get.

I will comment on the grade of the coin and the luster of the coin when the poll is over.

I think at one time it looked worse than it does already. I think it may have already been dipped, which might explain the reasoning in capturing the luster with my camera with my current lighting set up.

 

The surface marks are all light, but there are a lot of them, plus, the luster still looks weak (and subdued by the toning). The strike looks about average, or maybe just a little weak for a '83-O. Much better pics, but I still say 63.

 

as i said in the previous thread, It was dipped and retoned. Still standing with my initial grade

 

The clarity in the new pics removes suspicious areas I called out in question in the first round but I'm sticking with my original vote of 63.

 

I am not sure I know where you are trying to go with this thread. If I were to grade based solely on your pictures, your poll does not go low enough. A coin has got to have some luster even to get a 62. Therefore, I voted 64 based on your comments and the eBay pictures.

 

I was a 65 and stayed there but I'm split now between 64 and 65.

 

Shouldn't the coin have more luster though?

 

I'm sticking with my original grade of 64.

Chris

 

I already answered that question.

Just to add on to that, I not only got the color, but the details as well. The luster is something I didn't get. Now how much there really is should be answered after I reveal the grade.

 

Thanks and slabs are a real badrear to photograph!

 

Nice coin, love the toning. Im guessing MS63. The bag marks on the face are much more evident in your most recent photo.

 

Doug,

I have a few questions for you!

Did you really move to Florida?
If so, are you suffering from heat stroke?
If not, why are you pulling our legs.

I can't ever recall you being on the high side of a guess your grade thread. I am going with Raider and downgrading my guess to MS63. I am interested to know your opinion of the grade, not your guess of what PCGS called it.

 

Aparently i didnt vote from the other pics, but i would have graded MS-63 from the original pics.

I would go MS-64 with the current pictures. Good looking coin, but does lack luster, almost like it's been dipped or clean in some way....

 

63 +1

 

I think his guess was for what PCGS called it, versus his actual grade.
(In the previous thread he had this to say)

 

come on, give us the grade already!

 

No, gotta keep that "suspense" going