A while back vincent2920 asked me to take a look at a coin of his, I agreed. It's a 1913-D type 2 Buffalo. There are a mixture of digital pictures and scans, they were taken at various angles and settings to show the different aspects of the coin. The coin is dripping with luster and has vibrant irridescent toning - but I sure had a heck of a time trying to capture that in a pic. Never had a such a hard time with a coin :headbang: Multiple pics of the coin can be viewed here - BUFF
thanks for sharing :hug:thats a beautiful coin. When you say (heck of a time), I cannot imagine how good it must look in hand; I think you captured it well. stan
Are the scratches and other marks on the plastic? Some of the pictures look VF-20 and the others look almost AU... Take Care Ben
Two holes in the shoulder.. BONE... did you do that? thats a nice speciman, I wouldnt begin to even guess on these pics. Its up there though no doubt.
First of all I did this because I was asked to, the owner of the coin wanted opinions. But more than that this is an exercise to illustrate just how hard judging coins can be. I had the coin in hand, and the first night I looked at it I was convinced it was a gorgeous MS64. And it is, the coin has beautiful natural toning and just drips luster. And because of that I completely missed something. Oh I saw the planchet flaws alright, on both sides. But even the large lamination on the reverse is lustrous. But I got so caught up in looking at the various errors, the color, the luster, a good strike that I missed the obvious. And that's where the pics came into play. And that's when I decided to do this this way. I tried to capture luster and color - both hard to do with a slabbed coin, but I'd always managed before. I'm not the best with coin pics, but I usually do OK. But this one, this one about whupped me. I must have taken 200 pics of this coin, and not one of them really presents what it looks like in hand. But together you get the idea. Anyway, the other thing is to learn something here - to learn that coin pics may not always show you what you really want to see. In some of these pics, things are obvious. In others you can hardly see them at all. But it not my intent to hide anything with the pics - you just can't see them - so I showed you that. None of the pics were manipulated - they are honest pics. So anyway, let's see what folks can find. And please give your honest opinion of grade.
The coin is one that to grade right you almost have to see it in hand. I've looked and looked at this coin and I just can't decide...the one photo looks MS and the other looks XF.....but after looking at both sides of the coin I'm going to grade the coin MS62 My reasons--- The coin shows a soft strike---not a normal thing if I remember right for this date---the coin (and you also say) shows a good bit of luster in some of those photos and the toning add's to the eye appeal. But then the planchet flaws come into the photo and take the eye appeal down to 0--and that is the first think your eye goes to when looking at the coin. So while the Tech. grade may be higher I would say that a fair market grade would be MS62. Speedy
This for me is a really tough coin. I have had essentially zero experience grading coins with planchet flaws/lamination errors etc. Without any of these, I feel the coin would be either a high 64, or a low 65. However with these, I'm not sure how to grade it. Definitely one of the more interesting coins I have seen.
For a better photo of the coin you may want to try this. I always tell people coins look clearer if you utilize natural lighting. What I mean is unless your in a snow blizzard right now, take the coin outdoors, place it on a black surface, not in direct sunlight but on a bright day. Natural lighting will be much better for details with digital cameras and extreamly cheaper than light stands, all kinds of lighting fixtures and lamps. If you use something like a black bar-b-que grill's top the dark, black, non glared surface will tend to absorb excess lighting and only the coin will show up. Remember to not use direct sunlight or a highly reflective surface such a car's hood or trunk. If you did use a car make sure it is yours. If you use a grill, make sure no one is cooking at the time.
Seeing the first two images, I though high AUish. The next set looked MS64ish, so I'll average it out and say MS-62.
OK, my personal opinion, the coin has 64 details. And it would get it, but for one thing. The pic Img0707 really tells the story. The mark from the bridge of the nose and up across the eye is not a planchet flaw or die crack. The mark in the hair directly behind the eye, is not a planchet flaw. The round shaped mark at the edge of the hair, is not a planchet flaw. All of these marks are damage. And because it is damage, I really don't think NGC or PCGS would ever slab this coin. They'd slab with the errors, but not the damage. But ya wanna know the crazy part, even with the coin in hand and looking at it with 5x, I couldn't see 'em because of the luster and the toning - they just blend right in. I had to view the pics to, the scans in particular, to tell that it was damage. Of course once I did that, and knew exactly where to look I could see them. I gotta admit, I was flabbergasted. I never would have believed that I would miss damage when looking at a coin hand, but on this one I did. BTW, the coin was slabbed by PCI - AU58. But there's not a sign of circulation wear on that coin to be found - only the scratches. So I guess that's why they didn't slab it as MSXX. Either that or they missed it too and downgraded it for the errors.
I was reading my book on Buff Nickels and its funny---because this coin shows vibrant irridescent toning...the book states that vibrant irridescent toning is common on 1913-D TY1's...since this is TY2 that kindof jumped out at me. Speedy
Doug, looking at 0707, I can't stop looking at the directions of the marks. they all follow a path from about 4:00 to 11:00 or so. Are you sure that it has nothing to do with the same issue that caused the planchet problem at 4:00? I do see the circle as well, I am not convinced looking at this picture that it too has not been caused due to the planchet defect. Obviously there is something amiss with the content of the metal in this Buffalo. I disagree with the PCI grade based on what I am seeing in these pics and your description of luster. I have a bunch of laminated coins and there are other problems on a few of them someplace else on the coin. Very interesting coin thats for sure.
I don't agree with PCI either, I think they net graded the coin. But in regard to the marks, yeah I'm sure. When you look at it in hand you can see they are scratches - not planchet flaws. I had to use a lighted 10x to see it though. Also look at the reverse, Buffrevb.jpg, now look down at where it says FIVE CENTS. There is another planchet flaw there as well. The planchet is actually broken over to the mint mark and there is a die crack all the way across CENTS. And that's in a totally different spot and the flaw runs in a different direction than the flaw on the obverse. And there are two light scratches across the left foreleg and the holes in the shoulder. So yeah, I'm sure the coin received damage post strike.
