This one is very tough for me, as it is VERY 'hit' on the obverse (it's not showing up in scans, the actual coin looks much worse imo) and despite the ANA books guidlines, it's hard for me to say it is UNC... opinions? I'm still at odds with "mint luster" The book is very vague on the subject, yet Morgans either HAVE it or they DON'T This coin doesn't have it --- Opinions please....
Scans usually fail to capture a coin's luster. In fact, often a strong camera fails to fully capture a coin's luster. For those reasons, it's hard to say what your coin looks like in hand. That said, the scan indicates a complete lack of luster. Regarding the statement "Morgans either HAVE it [luster] or they DON'T" : I disagree. Like many things, luster is a "sliding scale"; coins have varying degrees of luster. Many things negatively impact a coin's luster, including wear, cleaning, and dipping. Morgans are a great coin for learning luster, because there are so many inexpensive coins with tons of luster. A lustrous Morgan can be had for less than $40 any day. Look at lots of Morgans and compare luster. Look at lots of slabbed coins and compare MS63s with MS66s and 67s. Compare cartwheel luster with DMPLs. One can learn much from Morgans.
When guide books talk about mint luster, they are referring to the original luster the coin possessed when released. You can tell original mint luster by rotating the coin in light and you'll see a cartwheel affect on the surface. I see some contact or bagmarks on the chin, neck and behind the eye on the obverse, a major hit on the eagle's breast, and left wing, plus the chatter on the right wing as well. I think UNC is a stretch, but without seeing this in hand, it is a possibility, on the bottom of the UNC scale. Like 60, maybe 61ish.
Books are great, but they have their limits. Can one learn to play piano by reading a book ? No; one must dive in and do it. Same with grading coins, or learning about luster. Read up; that's great. But get to a coin show or shop ASAP and find a dealer eager to teach and let you look at lots of coins. That's where the rubber meets the road.
I'm sorry to say that this coin completely lacks luster and it is rather dull looking. I'm not sure if it is the photographs, the lighting or what, but based on the photograph I would give your coin an AU grade.
I completely agree... but the bottom line is many grade this coin 60 to 61 but it has no luster at all... it's simply the ONE thing I have soooo much trouble with.. "can a UNC or MS coin have no luster?" ???
"can a UNC or MS coin have no luster? An over dipped one can. Don;t know if OD is what happened to your coin though.
Not sure about others and scans(or in this case pictures) do not show any luster at all, but others have covered all that. To me this coins shows some slight wear in places which would drop it to AU - then depending on hits and luster on where at in AU. I know O mint marks have weak strikes, but looks like slight wear to me. Just my humble opinion.
Basedon what I read in the OP's post the coin has no luster - and he bases that on an in hand inspection, not the pictures. Based on the pictures, as well as what the OP reports, the coin is a low grade AU that has been severely over-dipped - which is why it has no luster. But another comment that was made in this thread about a coin with luster having the cartwheel effect. Yes, that is quite true. But it is only true when the coin has full mint luster. A low AU coin on the other hand will often not have the cartwheel effect - but it will still have some luster. Even XF coins are required to have luster. But they almost never have any cartwheel effect. So, when you see an AU coin or an XF coin don't think that they have to have the cartwheel effect - they don't and they won't. The cartwheel effect is only present when the luster covers the entire face of the coin. That said, an AU coin can be correctly graded as AU when there are breaks in the luster present - but that coin may well still have the cartwheel effect. But the cartwheel effect alone does not make a coin BU. I often think that some people misunderstand this point. Also, when a coin with BU, AU or even XF details has no luster whatsoever it can no longer be graded period. The coin will have no grade because it has become a problem coin. Because the only way that a coin in those grades can have no luster whatsoever is when that coin has been over-dipped. And if a coin is over-dipped it is considered to be damaged - thus no grade. There are a few exceptions with some older coins. Now of course the TPGs, and those who adhere to the grading practices of the TPGs will disagree with that last paragraph. But I adhere to the grading practices of the ANA standards.
Yes, a MS or unc coin can have no or minimal luster. It all depends on the environment the coin was in. It just woulnd't get a high grade because of the lack of luster and therefore less eye appeal.
I would add that this coin could never be graded a 60 anyway since the TPG'ers state that this grade is never used anymore, all old 60's are 61's or 62's now.
The coin appears to me to have AU details. I cannot decipher if the coin has been overdipped from the photos provided, but that certainly is one way to explain an apparent lack of luster. I do NOT think the coin is UNC (or at least the way TPGs define the term) because there's too much field wear.
