GTG: 1884-CC GSA Morgan Dollar

I'm still learning to grade, but really nice photo.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

62

 

64--too much bag action to go much higher--it would be a gift otherwise. I had originally said 65, but looking at it again, that would be hard to justify, based on surface preservation.

 

I will guarantee you it will get 65. Not one I would buy, mind you. But that is how they grade now.

 

Naw, I would be surprised if it did. The other one was a solid gem coin. This one is far too baggy to get a 65--if it does, it really doesn't deserve it, as it doesn't have the look of a 65. Surface preservation is way down, based on an abundance of bag marks.

 

I agree. But I have seen a lot of baggy 65s with a NGC ribbon. Some years in particular I can't make an educated guess on, like the 1881. It will look like a 63 but then I see ones with ribbons and it could be a 65 for all I know.

Edit:To NGC, not to my personal opinion

 

At the FUN show last week there was a big discussion about the GSA "band" guarantee. One very reliable source (Who SHOULD know about this!), gave us all misinformation.

I just called NGC rather than read the http/ and I am ashamed to have spread bad info about a great company Thanks, for the info and correction!

 

MS-64

 

I know I am about an hour early, but I have a few things that came up that I need to take care of. So here is the reveal. Several of you nailed it. It came back with a 65 ribbon. The photo's show her in the worst light. Most of what you see are only breaks in the frost and not bag marks. In hand she appears to be a very clean coin with very very minor hits in just a couple places. It was a no brain pick up when I first saw it. Had I seen it online I would have passed, but in hand inspection lets you see things you never get to see in a photo. Overall I am very happy with it.

 

You should be happy with it. I think they went more than a bit high on the grade, but it is a very nice coin. Then again, CC baggy Morgans get 65 grades all the time. I said 64---pretty close.

 

Strike is slightly off and way to many contact marks to be a 65 or a 64

so I will have to say 63 at best.

But from what I see coming out of grading companies the majority may win out with a higher grade. IMO

 

The grade is posted two posts before yours

 

Honestly, Justin, your skill causes a good meta teaching moment here.

Your first images are so accurate - and at the same time, so definitive of the problems with quality digital imagery - that even I saw a 63, and I was going to post that here. The second set, including the slab, are far more indicative of what the coin looks like IRL and to a grader.

Even so, with your first set in mind I'm having a hard time giving it 65.

 

The second set of photos show dazzling luster, not so apparent on the first set, and apparently apparent to the grader. Nice coin.

 

I would not have a coin like this graded as to many flaws looks like it was thrown around it would have been a nice one but not to me mint state but lots of face problems

 

I did not...64

 

As @SuperDave has said, the problem with high quality digital imaging is that it can magnify and create problems that don't exist. I am probably going to shoot a 1080p video of the this coin and show it in it's full glory. The coin is extremely lustrous with lot's of frost. This coin is a very tough one to photograph. There are a lot of points in the frost that have become smoothed out in the die and thus transferred to the coin through the striking process. The breaks in the frost look like bag marks in the images simply because they are reflecting light away from the camera.

I think this coin will be a great study tool to help me develop a method of lighting that shows coins similar to this in a much better way. Add to the formula of shooting through a sheet of plastic and it really starts to limit your choices for lighting styles. Had this coin been raw, then I would have chosen a hybrid between axial and off angle lighting to show the true surface of the coin. The plastic is the limiting factor in that choice. I will treat it as challenge to somehow hopefully overcome.

I do greatly appreciate your input and opinions.

 

If you're selling it, I suggest buying some scratch x 2.0 (car scratch remover) and buffing those lines out of the case. It really makes the coin more appealing. My .02

 

If the lines you are referring to are the ones on the cheek, then those are not on the case. Those are planchet striations.

 

I guess I am still an old timer at grading. I would never give a Morgan a 65 if the cheek wasn't clean and free of bagmarks. Regardless of what the rest of the coin looks like.

I suppose that's not realistic in todays market.