I'm not very familiar with the designation. Would this be considered Full Torch? It's a little blurry, but it's the best I could do.
Are you thinking FB or Full Bands? If so, this is not an FB coin. They are looking for the Horizontal bands to be full snd complete and separate on both the top and bottom as they go across the torch. I can see the band but they do not look separate to me.
The section between the leaves looks kinda smooth.... Should say lacking in detail as opposed to smooth
Learn Grading: What Are Full Bands and Full Torch? https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/6812/learn-grading-dimes/ From what I can see, the bottom bands are not fully separated.
The top bands are worn but look to be separate to me. The bottom band does not. There is a bit of glare to the left and a small glare, or nick, to the upper right of the lower band that your camera shows. A change in your camera angle could make a difference @furham. Good luck, as always thanks for sharing.
Needs better lighting but I think it is a complete design. However, this may be a proof dime ( S mint mark, and rims look squared). That means as a proof it would not qualify for FB or FT from either PCGS or NGC. The reasoning is simple: all proof dimes are produced with complete designs, ergo, they will not put the designation on the slab label. The exception pertains to impaired proofs, I suppose, but not too many impaired proofs are submitted for encapsulation. …imo…Spark
This is not a proof. It is a 1949-S and there were no proofs made that year. The S mintmark didn't appear on proof Roosevelts until 1968.
The separation in the bands must extend all the way across to be FB at PCGS. The entire torch has to be complete at NGC but, I believe, they are a little more forgiving on the lower bands. This bands are complete on the left side but the right is indeterminant and will require another picture.
As others have posted, I don't believe any of the TPG would label it as FT as the horizontal lines are not complete the entire way. JMHO
