Grade this 1884-CC Morgan Dollar

I'm a total rank amateur newbie when it comes to grading Morgans, and, for that matter, being able to tell the difference between the different gradations of AU and MS.

I own a number of Morgans: some are nice. Of the nice ones I have, only one of them is a semi- (or, would you call this an almost-semi-) key date?

I should also add: I don't have the equipment, nor do know how, to take coin photos. These pix are with an iPhone 6 and a regular desk lamp. The actual color of the coin is silver -- which, obviously, didn't quite come out so well. But color ought not to effect grading, right?



Thoughts?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It is an MS coin, probably 64, so long as it is not cleaned.

 

Hard to tell from the pics. If cleaned than MS details. If surfaces are original and luster is there, as in not being dull, then possibly as high as 65. However I think it has more marks than what we can see. If luster is present than I say 64. If no luster, then 63.

 

I'm in the MS63/64 camp, too.
Unfortunately the luster is not visible, which depends on your photo skills

But I asume it's there.

 

I don't see any cartwheel luster, either. It's hard for me to tell if it has been improperly cleaned or not.

Chris

 

In other words, it was been narrowed down to anywhere from UNC Details to MS65. Not bad considering the pics we were provided with.

 

Wow -- thank you all. I will see if I can take a better pic (I do have a real camera. I'll try to give it a whirl tonight)!

 

High spots are the eagle's breast and the hair over Liberty's ear. Neither display any signs of wear from what I can gather. This appears to be an MS coin. It just hard to tell whether it is cleaned or not from the lighting.

And thanks for not mis-titling this a "GTG".

 

In case you don't already know:
It is better to use two light sources - one at 10 o'clock and one at 2 o'clock - placed at a 45 degree angle to the coin with the camera directly above the coin. That will show the cartwheel luster the best.

Chris

PS. I lived in Falls Church before my divorce.

 

Based on the images, I would guess it's a 64 shot 65. I'm assuming that there are no hidden issues that I cannot see and that the luster is there, but that it's just hidden do to indirect light.

 

There's no luster and flat features. AU

 

How can you tell? The lighting is so bad it is impossible.

 

I can see what I think is wear, even with the poor lighting.

 

The hair and breast feathers look good. I don't see this being an AU coin. UNC Details - Cleaned is the worst grade this would get, in my mind.

 

I don't know if these help. It's with a better camera, but I still don't know what I'm doing (or how to do it).

The color still isn't fully accurate. The best way I can describe it is:

• I'm fairly certain that it's not been cleaned
• there's maybe a tiny bit of luster (nothing remotely close to cartwheel), and a bit of toning

Here's "take 2":

 

These aren't any better. There is no luster.

Chris

 

Is there reddish toning? Does it have luster in your hands, or is it just kind of dull?

 

AU, bud.

 

These new images totally change my guess. The first set I assumed there was luster and it was shot under very flat diffuse light. I'm in the low AU camp.

 

AU 50. Dull surfaces, with no luster.