New Quiz: Can you follow instructions, EXACTLY?

There is a large blotchy dark area, and to the left of that there are two lighter spots. To me it LOOKS to be the result of a chemical cleaning.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think I see doubling, planchet chatter, and normal post minting hits, and a little ware on the high points, and some old attempt at cleaning.

 

A little up and to the left of the lowest star in the picture is a mark, possibly from a flaw of some kind on the die. This mark on the coin seems to extend in a steaky arc downwards and to the right, towards the leg of the figure.

 

I see stars and a Trade dollar.
Oh, uh-oh, oops. It's numismatics. Don't be funny.
I see western Europe after Italy has been chopped off.

 

Did you all read this discussion from page one?

 

I read the part where there are rules and we're not supposed to be funny. It's Europe though, right?

 

Even a Blind Person could have figured out that much....

 

There is a 5 pointed star between the elbow and leg.

 

Tooling isn't only tools that scratch, it is also tools the smooth like the bottom of a spoon. So my suspicion is "tooling' by a jeweler who is experienced working with metals.

 

No, I cannot (or will not) follow instructions exactly. It makes things so much easier.

 

I like easy. So, rather than read lame attempts at humor, I think I'm going to start handing out "ignores' so I don't waste any more time checking posts when I get an alert.

 

Repaired chop mark? Wow, I have never heard of that.
What methods are used to repair a chop mark?

 

I read the entire thread and all I have to say is that I'm exhausted.

 

Wait, if fluorescent can detect the 1st trace of wear on a coin why would it be FORBIDDEN by a TPG ?

Don't they want to look for wear ?

 

I would opine that the commentary may be an explanation of decisions made by TPGs in light ( sort of a play on words...sometimes I can come up with a zinger) of Market Grading, in lieu of technical grading.

Nothing prevents a collector or dealer from doing so, and that may be the point.

 

Milk and cookies.

 

I find this statement fascinating primarily because it raises more questions than it answers. Can @Insider provide any insight into why particular lights are or are not recommended, and by whom, for particular purposes? If the answer is just that "experience teaches us that it is so" then so be it but I for one would like to know the more technical reasons for it. Maybe a new thread?

 

No trace of wear is no longer the "standard" for Mint State so it does not matter if an AU coin is slabbed as MS. Dave Bowers put it in print what was going on in the market decades ago when he wrote that many coins that were formerly graded AU are now considered to be low MS. If you do not have a copy of Grading Coins by Photographs you should get a copy and read the introduction a few times.

 

I'm not a scientist or electrician. Perhaps information about wavelengths is on the Net. All I know is that incandescent light puts reflected glare into your eyes, Halogen is worse.

 

Huh. I thought I remembered Doug saying that halogen light was the gold standard for examining coins.

Fluorescent lamps produce diffused light, which doesn't cast shadows from sharp edges, and doesn't show luster very well. To see those features, the best thing is something approximating a point source. A clear halogen bulb comes close to that.

Just some thoughts from a guy who has more experience with light sources than with grading...