PCGS sub has arrived - Guess the Grade (Part 4 of 5)

We continue along in my PCGS sub.


This is part 4 of 5. Please guess the original grade and the new grade (originally PCGS and now PCGS).

Are they the same or different?

Here I am including two photos (both are PCGS TrueViews but the style of photo is different).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Calling @Beefer518
(You might remember this one)

 

64, 65

Unless that is a rub that I see.

 

AU55 on both. My credibility is shot anyway in this game.

 

AU55 to AU58

 

The appearance of slight rub on the woman's hair made me think twice. With the two obvious green spots (verigris?) I can't see it grading higher than MS 64. The hair wear should drop my guess to 58. I wanted to say the grade dropped but since I was dropped on my head when I was a baby I won't say that. After all of that dribble, I'm going with 63 both times.

 

I think this one started out as an AU-58 and was bumped to MS-61PL. I think it got the color bump and was given the benefit of the doubt that the rub is due to cabinet friction and not circulation. The fields have too much chatter to go any higher in MS. I think they gave the PL designation because of how reflective the fields appear to be in the first image, which I believe is the regrade.

 

@Morgandude11 @kSigSteve and others get your guesses in....I'll leave this up until some point Friday

 

I would say carbon. could be verdigris though,
Which photo @ddddd is closest to what you see in hand?
If I see it correctly the coin has deteriorated a bit?

 

I do, and I'll say this: A) My grade guess is now 1 point lower then my original guess (new TV makes things more apparent then the old TV) and B) I don't think the grade should have changed (but I'm guessing it did)

How's that for being evasive!

 

64 on both

 

Looks AU-58 to me, very pretty.

 

The heavy toning seems to be covering a lot of contact.
It was graded at AU58
Now bumped to MS62

 

A pure guess at AU. The mark behind the foot on the reverse causes me concern.
Still, a nice coin. It would enjoy a home in my collection.

 

AU58

 

AU 58 to MS 62. The coin appears to be a slider to me. The second TrueView shows more sharp detail, to the degree that one can rely on those beauty contest photographs.

 

A bit confused as to which Trueview photo is which. My first assumption is the top one is the old and bottom the new, but either way, I question why the photos of the same coin look so drastically different. I'd vote with @Morgandude11 on this one.

 

The coin hasn’t changed; PCGS just used different styles of photography.

Here is a video of it:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CFJAZ9WHEIv/?utm_medium=copy_link

Edit: I don’t know what the spot is exactly but to me it just looks like an area that toned differently (I’ve seen these on Morgans before too).

 

To clarify, the first TrueView was the first time it graded and the second is from now. Like I mentioned above, the coin hasn’t changed; only the photography changed. I included both photos to give multiple views of the same coin.

 

Reveal time....this one was UNC Details Questionable Color and now graded AU 58

Some may remember that I did a guess the grade when I originally bought the coin in the details holder. You can check that thread out here:
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/guess-the-grade-isabella-quarter-photo-video.372161/

The reasoning for regrading is that I did not believe the color was questionable. I've looked for an Isabella for a while and this finally fit the criteria for a coin that can join my box of 20. It is very close to prooflike and the color, while not monster, is appealing to me.
I thought it could go MS 63 (after all PCGS did call it UNC the first time and it hasn't circulated since) but they must have considered there to be high point wear (like some have mentioned). A straight grade of AU 58 still beats a details grade.