Attribute This

Comparisons Subject to COMP order

1. T too far left
2. R too far left
3. BE too far apart
4. LI too far apart

Subject has wider spacing and to the left of Comp 2.

5. 8 centered between 1 and first 0 and the whole date is slightly right of Comp 2.

Confidence level - MEDIUM HIGH

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

1. Spacing almost a match. But Bottom of T above tail of R.
2. T slightly left of Comp 3.
3. Date almost a match, but thinner than COMP 3 or any other Obverse 3 for that matter.
4. 0 over 9 too weak.

Confidence level - LOW MEDIUM because of the possibility an early weak strike might account for the unusual appearance of the date.

 

1. IB too far apart
2. R too far right - Clockwise rotation.
3. T too high.
4. Date too thin.
5. Second 0 too low.

Confidence level - HIGH

But the 8/7 position looks familiar.

 

1. E slightly too far left.
2. R slightly too far left and rotated clockwise.
3. T slightly left and higher than Comp 5.
4. Date slightly thinner.
5. Second 0 too low.

Confidence level MEDIUM HIGH.

 

This one gets two COMPs. The first I just added and is the finest known at EAC VG10 and in Die State I. The other COMP is from the Holmes sale and shows the Die State II with the Rim Break sort of blending with a crack. CUD or not is disputed.

I will attempt exclusion like the other obverses, though it has become my default attribution.

I will also look closely at the State II Crack/Rim Break. I'll continue this after playing with photos.

 

I will return, but I've suddenly lost my ability to concentrate.

 

My apologies for leaving this thread unattended. Several items have come up during the investigation of my "half NC-2" which have distracted me. First is the following:

1800/79 1C Style Two Hair, S-192, B-6, R.4, AU55 NGC. Breen Die State III with an arc crack from IC of AMERICA through the fraction, and a branch from that crack to the tail of the adjacent R. The 1800 overdated large cents include five die pairs with Style One Hair and six die pairs with Style Two Hair. The present example is from the S-192 die pair, a relatively common variety with a low Condition Census.

This is a recent post and refers to 5 die pairs with Style 1 Hair. It might be an error or a new discovery I am not aware of since my latest information is Noyes and or The Holmes Sale depending on the date. I am aware of S-190, S-191, NC-5 and NC-6.

Second, I found this coin listed as NC-2 Die State I without the typical rim break/CUD in the right field.
The position of the 8 rotated clockwise and close to the 1, particularly at the bottom, have now given me second thoughts about the NC-2 possibility. My coin does have the attributes of the 1 being distant from both the hair and curl as well as being a somewhat compact date. The rim break/CUD I thought I saw making me lean toward NC-2 no longer seems sufficient.

The right side of the 1 still lines up with the junction of the hair and bust, so this will eliminate many. I'm still working on the hypothesis that this is an overdate showing parts of the 7 above the 8 and a light 9 under the first 0. But I must consider the possibility that all of that is simply PMD. But I must also consider the possibility of NC-1 again since it meets date parameters including more even spacing of the date along with the compact date and 1 lining up with the junction of the hair and bust.

At the same time, I'm at the point of photographing my collection and happen to be in the 1800 overdates.

So it might be time to give the overdates of 1800 a more thorough study than the typical attribution project.

 

1795 S-75

 

I'll see yours:



Oops! S-74.

 

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1800-79-1c-s-192-bn/36155

More distractions. This is the finest 1800 Obverse 2 I could find, but there's a problem. Obverse 2 looks right, but this is Reverse Q. Now PCGS either combined photos of different coins or this is something new.

 

Nevermind. Stem under E missing. These are closer than many would think. Q used on S-206 and S-207. It's like F is close to P.

 

I'm finding out researching the overdates of 1800 that my questions never end. Now I'm stuck with Obverse 4 (S-196) and 6 (NC-2) looking the same on some coins but not others. The reverses G (S-196) and I (NC-2) are fairly easy to tell apart from a stem or no stem to the outer berry under E(D).

 

NC2 Obv: Right side top of 1 has a triangle coming out. The 8 has both horns very distinct.

 

Somebody bring me back.

Because of the Type 2 curl even spacing of 180 as opposed to Obverses 1 (Type 1) Obverses 4 and 6 with 8 closer to 1 and rotated clockwise and T too far right on Obverses 2, 3 and 5 along with what appears to be a CW rotated R resulting in the right tail of R below the bottom of T, it might be a new Obverse. (Obverses 7 through 19 eliminated because the 1 is too far left)
Subject


To add to the insanity, the spacing of TED STA with all uprights of TED out of parallel with each other, and widely spaced along with(S)T high rotated CW AND what may be a CUD like feature hints of Reverse W.
Subject


Reverse W

Unfortunately, even if it were a New Die Obverse and Reverse W, this is not good enough for a discovery coin because it leaves too much uncertainty from corrosion.

But what do you do when everything appears to have been eliminated except the CRAZY?

 

I guess I'll have to admit defeat on this one. I cannot attribute it. But at least I can preserve the best image of the details before moving on. This will replace my NC-2 attribution which I have now excluded along with the rest.

 

Now on to my S-195 assortment.

I have 10 images and 8 coins so a couple are probably duplicate images.

 

I've highlighted the diagnostics of Reverse F. Those in Green are Die characteristics along with the tips of the stems. The other Yellow are Die State diagnostics.

Among the overdates of 1800, the stem on the inner berry is almost parallel with the top of ONE which is different than every other reverse and is usually visible on even heavily worn coins and most corroded coins.

The other primary diagnostic was shared with me by Conder many years ago and is the intersection of the stem, inner vine and ribbon almost at the same point where the S-195 and other overdates have the stem intersecting below the intersection of the ribbon and the inner vine.

The thin bar often described appears to vary too much from strike and wear to be useful on the lower grades much of the time. A secondary diagnostic is the lowest inner berry on the left points toward the middle of the C(E) rather than to it's left side. This occurs on Reverses O and P, but not on other overdates.

 

This is an image that can be enlarged by clicking on the image.

 

This is an interesting look at the effects of photography on the presentation of a coin. It is one of my favorite since it has great detail, but a problem which kept it within my budget.

This is an old attempt using just lighting from the digital microscope.



And this photo was taken moments ago using the book-light lamps with the digital lamps low.



To be honest, the digital lighting makes it look pretty, but the new image makes it look like it does in hand.