Yet another of my "is this a proof" posts

I'm starstruck with this recent addition, an 1873 IHC. I only have one other high grade [raw] penny from this series, a 1907 (RD, I am assuming) that has been posted here before but the fields on that coin are nothing compared to this one. This one appears, to me at least, to have very reflective fields and great detail. Definitely better details than the bulk of my IHC collection, so I'm kinda of at a loss to determine proof or business strike. What are your thoughts?

I'll post the same pictures again that have already been shared earlier, but I'm linking a video from my imgur account as well. It's not entirely in focus because... well, because I'm a nervous Nelly now that I think this could be a proof and don't want to handle it very much. So I put it on paper and gently tilted it back and forth.

Anyways, please feel free to chime in and share your thoughts. I'm eager to upgrade my IHC album and this coin just thrust me into it face first. Thanks!

https://imgur.com/a/VXFUknf

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

No this is not a proof.

But it does look nice and probably AU55 RB.

This one is the open 3 - the more common of the two varieties.

Still a couple hundred dollar coin. Not bad.

 

That whole open or closed 3 was driving me nuts! What's the real giveaway or tell on it?

Edit to add: The video really shows the reflective properties, which is what's throwing me off a lot. I know of "proof-like" Morgans but never knew the IHC to have fields like this one

 

See this from USA Coin Book.

 

Here's a screenshot from a previous post of the date. Does this still fit the bill for open 3?

 

That would be a closed 3 to me.

 

I thought so, too. Though I'm not very experienced in IHC's, so I have to kind of rely on others who are far more knowledgeable on them than I am. But those fields keep getting me thoroughly confused. The way they reflect on camera still doesn't do it justice.

 

https://imgur.com/a/VXFUknf
Nice coin with pic and video!
I'm not sure what variety this is but it's worth more than I have in my wallet.

 

I think I currently have a whopping $2 in my wallet, so you are not alone there!

 

best way i can think of to tell proof or not is to compare. i just did this with a 1939. did not have a cent proof of that era so i used some business strikes to compare. there were some differences, enough that i consider it a proof. the field had a lot to do with it also.

 

No idea about any of the questions. But it's very nice coin, the video is great.

 

It's also very slightly underweight, but still within tolerance at 3.018 grams. I am curious why the "TY" in liberty is so weak when it doesn't seem to have very much wear elsewhere. Could that small bit of difference in weight cause a weaker strike at just that one spot, or is there wear from circulation that I'm just not seeing? The feathers directly above that look pretty darn good to me.

 

Thanks!

 

Whatever, it's a very beautiful IHC.

 

Very Nice!

 

I have some IHCs that I think are proofs. I will post the animations and maybe we can figure this out. (Without sending it to a TPG, of course.)

The 1890 seems the most questionable, but it seems to be coated with something. The smooth spot on the reverse looks proof-like, though.

 

I agree with most, looks like a very nice business strike in my opinion would say 55 or even may go as high as a 58, the detail is amazing

 

All of those are very nice! And I'm definitely a fan of the animated pics, I'm just not quite there yet with my photography so I just did the video upload.

I think by appearance, mine most closely resembles your 1909. But the way the light moves across it is more like the 1879. There's definitely some highly reflective areas that simply shoot the light right back at the eye, while other areas seem to be muted from the toning. Even those spots still reflect though, just not as brightly.

I took some more pictures of this one next to my other IHC's in my 7070 and this one is by far superior in the level of detail. It's even got small hints of a cameo effect at the right angle. I don't know, I'm kind of torn. I absolutely want to say this is a proof but I'm just not quite certain about it. How else would it have mirrored fields and between the devices?

But back to yours... I would think those could all easily be proofs. Strongest mirrors in order for yours looks to be '03, '79, '09, '93, '91, then '90. But great detail on each one of those.