http://cgi.ebay.com/1881-S-Morgan-S...mQQptZCoins_US_Individual?hash=item2304773e8e maybe just a bad picture...dunno,,, you tell me. looks overly dipped to me.... bad pic ? or grading ?
dipped? I disagree. I think it's a very attractive naturally toned coin. It's not white. The strike is excellent, but do you see what I see? There's virtually NO marks in the fields either obverse or reverse, and the cheek looks clean as well. Not a ding! I dunno, IIRC, the star designation is for a coin that is spectacular for it's grade. This coin may be one of the cleanest Morgans I have ever seen, so star... yes!
I agree, the pictures are terrible. However, the coin looks like it might be prooflike on the reverse - remember, the * also applies to coins that just miss the cutoff to the next designation, or have a strong qualifier on one side but not the other.
Mike, The star designation has nothing to do with the technical quality of the coin. It only means that the coin has exceptional eye appeal for the assigned grade. It does not mean PQ. Here is a link to the NGC press release. http://www.ngccoin.com/coingrading/stardesignation.asp Bully, The answer is horrible photo. Take a look at his other listings. All of the photos are washed out, have white balance issues, and are out of focus. Considering the quality of the coins this guy is selling, he needs to improve his photographic skills immediately. He is costing himself a boatload of money.
http://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/CertResults.aspx?CertNumber=3216070-003 Even though the scan is of poor quality, you can see that the obverse reflects the light of the scanner really well and shows the sheen and luster that the coin possesses.
Photographing Morgan Dollars with semi-prooflike sufaces and toning is extremely difficult. I have some Great Falls Collection Morgans that to this day I have not been able to take a photograph good enough for anyone to see. I am forced to use the original seller's photos. And you guys know how much pride I taking in my numismatic imaging skills. For example. I will now try to image this coin again and show you my results. No laughing when it gets posted please.
This was the best I could do, but I had to use diffused lighting to capture the color on the obverse. Notice that there appears to be no luster.
Sure there is, it's just not your typical Morgan dollar luster. But it is perfectly typical for a coin with Proof Like or Semi-Proof Like surfaces. No matter how many pictures you take, you cannot make it look like something it is not. To fully capture the luster and color of a coin like this requires a different technique than it would with an ordinary Morgan. I aint sayin it's easy, but it can certainly be done. You just need to use different angles.
It's truly a GREAT COIN and most agreeably worthy of the * . Quite honestly at $700.00 , somebody just hit a jackpot. IMHO
Doug, I said there appears to be no luster in my photo because of my photo technique. I know there is luster on the coin, and we can see that from Brandon's photo above mine. What I was trying to convey is that I have not yet learned how to properly photograph these types of coins without sacrificing luster. Maybe we are saying the same thing, IDK.
Dang, now I really wish I had snagged it ! Would have been my first 67 Morg..... but just couldn't get past that picture... I really couldn't see any luster at all, looked gun metal / haze gray, and the obv looked like it had water marks or something on it too. The flip side was the details (as noted), only mark on that coin I could see was on the rev field,,, and it was hard to see... How ya'll see proof or semi proof in that baby is a testimate to your experience and expertise ! <I'm not worthy, I'm not worthy. ; ) Next time respond quicker !!!,,, now I'll have to continue my 67 or higher hunt for god knows how long... Happy New Years Coin Talkers !
My personal opinion is that when spending that kind of money you need a more accurate picture. Maybe Doug and Paul see the potential for the coin, but what I see is a potential coin you are not happy with. I would not run the risk.
The coin looks to have PL surfaces on the reverse based on NGC pictures. http://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/CertResults.aspx?CertNumber=3216070-003
I would trust NGC's 'star' designation. They don't just give those out and I'm sure that they are a very, very small number of all of the MS graded coins. I've never seen a bad NGC star coin....
We are. One minor difference, I can tell that the coin is lustrous in your pic. But most probably would not see it that way.
I don't see luster in Lehigh's pics as much as I tend to think it's more washed out than the other pics that he didn't take. This intrigues me as Lehigh is one of the better here on this forum for capturing coins in pictures, andf I could possibly be the absolute worst. (but I'm trying to improve. The new SLR should help.)
While I would trust NGC's star designation to an extent, the number of stars given out for Morgan Dollars is considerably higher than any other series of coin. So high in fact, that a collector can be very selective with the example they choose to buy. No way would I have risked purchasing that coin with those photos when Heritage offers 1881-S MS67 * Morgans very frequently. In the first 25 of their archives, I count 11. Here is a link: http://coins.ha.com/common/search_r...hall&Ns=&Nf=&Ntt=1881-s&x=0&y=0&Ntk=SI_Titles This coin is my favorite of those 11. While many will not find this coin attractive due to the toning breaks, I bet the colors are very light and bright and blast of this lustrous coin. It has an original look that I look for in a toned coin. http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1124&Lot_No=8720#photo
