Tough to say by those pics because they don't show us any luster at all. What's strange to me is just how razer sharp the lines in the hair appear and yet you have weakness in other areas like the stars. Something just isn't right to me about that coin. Usually in AU examples (and even many lower end UNCs) you see a lot of flatness above the ear. This example is razer sharp except for the hair strands close to her forehead. I'm not an expert on this series but it looks questionable to me.
To me there are a couple of things that help with grading this coin. I always use the stars to determine strike quality; here the lower stars show strike weakness and misalignment. This is some of the reason for the reverse weaknesses. But the hair clearly shows some (but light) wear, so I went AU-50 because of the lack of luster.
It appears to be an AU53 to AU55 with grime and dirt. But, I think that it technically fits the grade. Cleaning coins is usually taboo, but I think that a mild soap and some water would help in this case. ONLY my opinion! The owner must decide.
I find it odd that the left reverse ear of corn is showing no kernels while the right shows the kernels very clearly. I know these can have strike weakness, and that ear of corn would be right around probably the highest point on the obverse. I've just never seen that big a difference in strike between the two ears of corn at the bottom on the reverse. Bottom 3 ibvers stars are weak. I also see some, but not much, flatness on the hair. I wonder if its been cleaned in the past. Most of the AU/MS examples I've seen have some lustre. I think overall it's just a weak strike in some areas. Maybe all that grime is keeping the lustre hidden.
Au 53-55 on the first an acetone soak would help it. Looks lacking in luster but could just be dirt or the pic The second looks xf 45 color seems strange too could be the pic
