I haven't seen one of these in a long time. The diamond has been reengraved adding design detail to the slightly worn coin. Then it was buffed to blend the alteration. Many would think the coin was a red Unc!
That is the difference between a pro (Insider), and a hobbyist collector (Me). I never would have caught that alteration.
manny9655, posted: "Insider, I'd like to see more of your quizzes. Why did you stop posting them? A few members called me a "know-it-all; hated my image quality, and did not appreciate my method of responding to answers with more questions. I'll think of a new one soon.
In this case, would the reason for the Details grade be "Graffiti" or just "Damage?" I'm assuming, of course, that it would get a Details grade. Thanks.
JeffC, posted: "In this case, would the reason for the Details grade be "Graffiti" or just "Damage?" I'm assuming, of course, that it would get a Details grade." Great question. Things have changed DRAMATICLY in the authentication business since the 1970's. In the early days, this coin would have been returned as a fraudulent alteration: reengraved diamonds! Today, coins as this are slabbed with a "details" grade. I don't like it. An even worse case is the Micro "O" Morgan dollars that managed to slip into the VAM listings for years. When they were discovered to be counterfeits there was so much MONEY involved that the industry has accepted them with open arms.
That works also; however, I make this distinction. Tooling usually does not accentuate a design detail. "Chasing metal from the surface to make a "raised S mintmark" is tolling but it has a particular name. A "spot removal" is tooling but it has a specific name. That is the case with the diamonds. or adding hair detail. This is an extremely rare alteration (I've seen 2 in 50 years): The cap detail has been added to this circulated Bust half dollar. IMO, many would miss this one too:
