This Coin Is Beautiful, But Not FBL

Was browsing GC this AM and saw this coin:





The color is amazing on this one, and in my opinion, borderline MA.

However, I do not believe this to be FBL at all. There is extreme weakness on either side of the crack for both sets of lines AND the upper left set appears to be completely nonexistent!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I wouldn't want to try to judge FBL from this photo. The toning could be hiding part of a line that might only be seen from in-hand examination with a loupe.

Chris

 

Well, photos have fooled me before, but I would be confident on this one and the OP is correct and the coin should not have received the FBL designation. Almost looks like a market graded designation bump to me.

Mike

 

I don't understand how market grading can affect an attribute like FBL, FS, FB, FH, etc. It is either there or it isn't.

Chris

 

It can be tough to catch an attribute in an image. I'll bet NGC got it right.

 

Beautiful coin . From the pics I'd say no way , that's why it's probably the toning along with the lighting making it appear that the lines are broken . I agree with Larry .

 

I would want to see it in hand. I like it.

 

Based on the pics, I agree: not even close. But, I could believe the combination of toning and lighting might be hiding the bell lines. Doesn't GC only use one set of images per coin? It might not be possible to capture bell lines and color simultaneously.

 

GC images often suck IMHO. I wouldn't rely on the images for toned coins anymore than I would blindly trust the label.

 

I don't understand how attractive toning can bump up a coin's grade a point or two either, but they routinely do that too.

 

It's FBL or not. Bump up all you want on the grade

 

I understand your point and Chris's as well. I have seen so called full step nickels with ticks that interrupt the steps, but with the designation when the coin came with an otherwise unusually strong strike for the date and worth a premium. My point was, whether it should be or not, the strike designations are subjective too and not immune from market grading.

 

I think Great Collections' images are actually probably among the best in the auction business. They are certainly better than the "scan-like" images offered by Heritage, and they are just as good if not better than the images of Stacks/Bowers (formerly Teletrade).

 

I rarely if ever see NGC bumping technical numeric grades because of toning. PCGS, though, not only does it but openly admits and promotes it as part of their "grading formula" -- I have seen many, many MS64/65 technical coins in MS66/67 PCGS holders because they are "purdy" ... NGC has the star to denote eye appeal (not saying that it's perfect or always used when it should be either), but I find NGC to be less likely to bump numeric grades because of a little tarnish of the right shades.

 

Unlike the attributes I mentioned, toning is a subjective thing.

Chris

 

Posted mistakenly

 

I have purchased coins from GC to flip for 2-3 times my purchase price for toned coins because of the mediocre images GC used. Being better than Heritage doesn't say much IMO. The photos are no where near the caliber that you, Shane (Kryptonitecomics), Jeremy (airplanenut), Bob (Robec), or Todd (BluCC) are capable of producing.

Do you remember that 1946 WLH that you shot for Yoni that I now own? Go lookup the images that GC had for the piece. The images are better than most I see from GC for toned coins, but no where near being in the same league as your photos.

 

Strike designations can also be subjective.

 

NGC is less flagrant about bumps for toning, but they still do occur on higher quality toners.

 

This coin is the perfect example. Who knows what PCGs would have given it.