Morgan Grade.... what do you think?

Can you educate me on that? Please. Here is a black background in case my camera was picking up the white.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Have you ever seen 140 years old silver? Silver gets toned in months. This is tooooo white.

Not to mention the devices look mechanically cleaned. Those aren't bag marks on the cheek.

 

I was whizzzzing down the road one bright day.

 

MS64 +/- details depending on the grading service. I don’t think this 1878 will get the “CC bump” to 65 like some I have owned. I believe tangential lighting is accentuating the marks in the fields and especially on her face. Or, are those old acne scars?

 

Face looks like bunches of scratches. Low ms

 

She got lost in the Thiourea. Probably a 62 at most. Would have been a great coin at one time.

 

Agree with baggy and it looks cleaned.

 

The entire face's texture -- cheeks, neck, everything -- just looks wrong to me. I don't know what it does look like, but it doesn't look like a normal Morgan, or even a cleaned one.

 

I really think the problem is more the picture and the lighting than the coin.

 

It looks like a problem coin the way I see the pics. If there's luster there it's not visible to me.

 

When a coin is super clean and white (old silver) and has no luster even though it looks to be a high grade, then the cleaning has stripped that off.
You can see how this coin is flat/dull/lifeless looking.
It's the missing luster.

 

I completely agree with physics-fan π tangential lighting can cause many coins with small imperfections look horrible.

 

It is missing the cartwheel luster. Yes, you can have 140 year old silver still bright white. I have a 210 year old Mexican 8 reales with original luster and 100% white. The coins stored in bags don't tarnish as much because there is no air movement. The coins on the outside act like a shield, and they will tarnish.
As far as this piece goes, it has been dipped in Jeweluster (thiourea) enough that it has removed the microscopic flow lines where the silver moves over the die to fill the design. This is what gives the luster that looks like a record album when you move it around. This coin, although technically is uncirculated, is lifeless, and can grade no higher than MS62.

 

I agree with JeffB. My first impression when I looked at it on my S8 was that the texture on her face and in the field looked "off" but I couldn't pin it down. Looking at it on my laptop it looks like tiny wrinkles on Liberty's face. But I still won't hazard a guess as to the cause of it. Many here know a lot more than I do so I hope someone will come up with an answer. (Is this what "baggy" looks like)?

 

Well said

 

That coin of your is a darn fine coin. Let tone a bit. Then your in the ballpark for a MS 65. Keep your chin up

 

Maybe an @Insider can help...

 

It looked to me like a low resolution camera/microscope enlarged and perhaps software sharpening, but a few of the photos tend to show good surfaces in similar areas to ones that showed a lot of 'squiggles" and as someone said "beard appearing" structures. If a nikon micro lens, my apology.

 

Not on this one.

The images don't look natural. These coins are frosty, white, blazers when original. This is neither frosty nor white leading me to believe the coin is not original; however, it IS NOT WHIZZED.

As usual, the reverse is nice but the obverse is horrible. Depending what it ACTUALLY looks like as far as original luster, it can go as high as an MS-62.

Now, as I look at the image again, the hair over the ear looks rounded. Perhaps a little rub or cleaning? When I magnify the obverse, it is all beat up on the cheek. I'm MS-60 at the highest.

A better photograph is needed to be sure it's not a baggy, cleaned, AU.