1812 half dollar, GTG

The more I look at this one I wonder if it’s an uncirculated coin that was stored in such a way that created the mottled toning and impaired the luster. I had some Morgans stored in those old paper flips in a tin can for about fifty years that looked a lot like this. Came back MS after an acetone bath.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

To be clear, are you saying you have not seen this coin in hand?

First, auction houses don't typically take oversized photos of AU CBHs unless the consignor specifically requests it. Heritage calls these photos "beauty shots" and they are reserved for high end coins, but are available upon request.

That should have been the first clue that the coin was graded in the mint state range. The fact that you posted the coin most assuredly means that not only do you disagree with the grade, you intend to blast the TPG for their reckless grading.

So when evaluating this coin, I looked for something that would cause you to claim it is a problem coin. Since I didn't find anything other than the funky color, I assumed that you were focusing on a net grade of what you consider and AU coin. The second set of photos make the coin look extremely lack luster and thus I downgraded what are very clean surfaces to the common net grade of MS62.

The beauty shot of this coin makes it appear to have good luster and color, while the slab shot is about as unflattering a photo as could possibly exist. My guess is that the true appearance of the coin is somewhere in between, and that in hand the grade of MS64 would be acceptable.

 

wow!
seriously?

Amazing and it must look great in hand

 

No problems

I agree about the color looks funky. I felt it was probably dipped at one point

Since there is clear wear on several high points, this coin appears AU to me, hence my reference to recent discussion.

Heritage’s full-slab photos are generally fairly decent at capturing the luster of capped-bust halves. There is little luster to be seen, consistent with being dipped.

For example, for another heavily-toned MS-64 1812 half:

1812 50C MS64 NGC. O-110, R.1....
https://coins.ha.com/itm/bust-half-dollars/half-dollars/1812-50c-ms64-ngc-o-110-r1/a/1140-741.s

1812/1 50C Small 8, O-102, R.2, MS64 NGC....
https://coins.ha.com/itm/bust-half-...1-50c-small-8-o-102-r2-ms64-ngc/a/1278-4287.s

The beauty shots generally drown out the luster to being out the color. I don’t really see strong luster in these pictures either.

 

I'll stay out of offering my opinion.

 

I just tuned in, but my first thought was some AU58 or much better...You gotta have it in hand to avoid a guessing game.

 

Was gonna guess 63

 

I agree that the beauty shots usually drown out luster, but I also find that the full slab photos do very little justice to many coins. They use a "cookie cutter" photography setup to facilitate speed and photograph as many coins as possible each day. And while this is incredibly efficient, anyone who has ever photographed coins knows that you need to individually adjust lighting setups in order to accurately portray the appearance of the coin. The Heritage setup may work great for some coins and horrible for others. I submit that the drastic difference between the beauty shot and the slab photo for this coin is evidence that the lighting setup was unflattering for this coin. To that point, the lack of luster in general in Heritage photos leads me to believe that they used many light sources but that they are all diffused. They are very good at showing both detail and color, but their portrayal of luster sucks.

Btw, I must have missed the recent discussion, wanna share a link and point me in the right direction.

 

Tease!

 

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/distinguishing-between-condition-and-grade.330053/unread

 

All of those pieces are fairly lustrous, nice coins for the period. Pre-1840 coinage will not look like an 80-S Morgan. The die prep was far different, leading to a much different look and luster.

Personally, I don't like the Heritage "beauty" shots on most early US silver. They don't get the lighting right. PCGS does a far better job.

As to the "grade", the first two are what we called sliders back in the day. They are technically very high-end AU's that will sell for UNC money. They were probably slabbed in the 2000 - 2008 run-up when the "grading" was very loose due to the hot market.

The last piece, 1812-102 is UNC. It's all there for a really nice pre-1820 CBH. There may be a bit of friction on the highest points, but I bet under a glass there's remains of luster. That, plus the 2/1, die state, and color is why it sold for almost 11K. I bet it looked awesome in-hand.

BTW, I put grading in quotes because that IS NOT what the TPG's do. They do not grade coins, they "worth" them. Thus, the "grade" on the holder is not an opinion of the coin's state of preservation, but rather an appraisal of what they think the coin is worth in the marketplace.