Definition of uncirculated

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by davidh, Aug 13, 2017.

Page 5 of 5
  1. baseball21

    baseball21 Well-Known Member

    Not to mention lighting and camera effects on the luster
     
    baseball21, Aug 15, 2017
    #81 + Quote Reply
    alurid likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Sure, sure, so then he goes and mentions it. :hilarious::hilarious::hilarious:
     
    V. Kurt Bellman, Aug 15, 2017
    #82 + Quote Reply
  4. RonSanderson

    RonSanderson Supporter! Supporter

    Thank you for the pictures. It's great that reasonable people might disagree even with these. The discussion may be that much more educational.

    I, for example, might have expected that the cotton bolls would also be marked or disturbed at the same time as the ear, if this is wear.

    If due to strike, I can envision the surface of the planchet being subjected to metal flow as it is forced into each recess of the die. Except, not at the ear, say, where the metal does not quite fill that cavity. Would that area be without luster because it was never subjected to the full forces and die contact that produced it?

    Kurt, if 3-D would help, here is a small simulation of it. I don't have an exact match for the Morgan pictures above, but I do have this nickel that is somewhat ambiguous, and never graded. Here we can see a similar flatness on the hair just above the braid. It is flat, and there are miniscule marks in it. Some folks have explained that the planchets go through a drying tumbler and the planchet surface is marked before striking. A weak strike would not erase those marks fully.

    As the coin moves the light plays off of that surface just like the others. The same applies to the weak rim at 1:00 and the tops of LIBERTY. Is this unbroken luster and MS, or do people think this is AU?

    My questions and observations are made with humility. I really want to learn because this is an area that confounds me a bit. Virtually everything I have is ungraded so I don't have the crutch of looking at a label.

    05c 1936-D full 01v.gif
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2017
    RonSanderson, Aug 15, 2017
    #83 + Quote Reply
    Bart9349 likes this.
  5. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    In my book, (which I haven't yet written, so no Amazon link) all Denver buffs get a little benefit of the doubt. Buffs were to Denver as Walkers were to San Francisco on strikes, UNTIL some point in 1937. There are both strong and weak among 1937-D's, but it's like in 1938 the Denver director said, "We can strike the bejabbers out of those if you just spot us all the dies." So they did.
     
    V. Kurt Bellman, Aug 15, 2017
    #84 + Quote Reply
    RonSanderson likes this.
  6. RonSanderson

    RonSanderson Supporter! Supporter

    For comparison...
    05c 1938-D full 01.gif
     
    RonSanderson, Aug 15, 2017
    #85 + Quote Reply
  7. rmpsrpms

    rmpsrpms Lincoln Maniac

    Hmm...on the first few coins, I don't see any rub. The pics are pretty good so we should be able to see it. The last pic is too small to see anything. I'm not saying it's not there, but it for sure does not show up in the pics. There are scratches on the highest surfaces, but in the case of the weaker strikes, those were probably on the planchet.

    So-called "luster breaks" are often confusing.
     
    rmpsrpms, Aug 15, 2017
    #86 + Quote Reply
    RonSanderson likes this.
  8. Kentucky

    Kentucky Well-Known Member

    That was before Rogaine...:)
     
    Kentucky, Aug 15, 2017
    #87 + Quote Reply
    Santinidollar likes this.
  9. Santinidollar

    Santinidollar Supporter! Supporter

    Hair Club could have also raised a few grades.
     
    Santinidollar, Aug 15, 2017
    #88 + Quote Reply
    Kentucky likes this.
  10. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Agreed. But if one knows how you can tell the difference between weak strike and wear. Also, the 1st 3 coins I pictured all have wear on the cheeks. And the 4th I called a 58, that's wear, not a weak strike.
     
    GDJMSP, Aug 16, 2017
    #89 + Quote Reply
  11. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Agreed fully on the fourth one. The first three I can't tell from a 2-dimensional photo. I need some "tilt" to be able to see what I'd want to make that call.

    Grading BU/AU/sliders from photos is like grading with "one dimension tied behind your back". Also, for me in particular, looking at Morgans requires MUCH MUCH caffeine. They put me to sleep.
     
    V. Kurt Bellman, Aug 16, 2017
    #90 + Quote Reply
  12. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    While that could be true it is not necessarily always true. Wear can occur anywhere on a coin and often does. Even the fields, which are the lowest point on any coin, can be subjected to wear while there is no wear anyplace else on the coin. Same thing is true of the high points, wear can be on this high point and not on another.

    Yes it is true that a weakly struck area will not have luster. For luster to be present the metal of the planchet must come into contact with the die for luster is created by the metal flowing across the surface of the die. But as I said above, wear can be differentiated from a weak strike. Color is one of the indicators, the color of the metal in a weakly struck area is darker than the areas that have luster. But the color from wear is even darker than that. Often you can even see wear in a weakly struck area. Then there is the texture of the metal itself. In a weakly struck area the metal will be somewhat bumpy, lumpy looking. But when wear is present it will be smooth and flat.

    In regard to the ear itself specifically on the the coin I called a 58. Do you see the hair curl that is directly behind the ear ? That hair curl has luster on it. And that hair curl is also higher than the ear itself. So, that means what we see on the ear could absolutely not be due to a weak strike, because if it was the hair curl behind which is even higher than the ear would show the same thing. A higher point cannot be filled to the point that it shows luster while at the same time a lower point directly adjacent to it is not filled and has no luster. Thus what we see on the ear can only be due to wear on that point.

    Now you're gonna ask how that happen ? How can a higher point directly adjacent to a lower point not get wear on it while the lower point does get wear on it ? It's actually pretty easy for that happen. Something, some object of some kind, came into contact with the lower point and created the wear but did not come into contact with the adjoining higher point.

    And for those who say that can't happen, you're wrong. You think it can't happen because you are visualizing a flat surface coming into contact with the coin. And yes, IF it was a flat surface that came into contact with the coin - it could not happen. But what if it wasn't a flat surface ? What if it was the curved surface of another coin, what if it was small object of any kind, what if it was a portion of raised surface on any other object ? There are a thousand ways that wear can occur anywhere on a coin, and not on adjoining higher points.
     
    GDJMSP, Aug 16, 2017
    #91 + Quote Reply
  13. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    That's why I started my comments with -

     
    GDJMSP, Aug 16, 2017
    #92 + Quote Reply
  14. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Still waiting for that industry-standard moving picture format so we can assess such things.
     
    V. Kurt Bellman, Aug 16, 2017
    #93 + Quote Reply
  15. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Yeah good luck with that.
     
    GDJMSP, Aug 16, 2017
    #94 + Quote Reply
Page 5 of 5
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page