Yea I'd say VF35.
Very nice.Almost makes me want to start collecting gold but I know I shouldn't.:thumb:
Congrats on the find.
I'd say MS60-62 but I have no idea how NTC grades.
I agree with Speedy on this one....AU. B12
I'd say VF20.
Something that may help you on focusing a picture is to put a magnifying glass in front of the camera.It's a commonly use because it really does...
But I can give you a range of what the date is from looking at the hair.....1796-1804.;)
I think it's impossible to tell the exact date because It's so worn and badly corroded but you could get a closer pic of the date..that would...
Yes they are proofs and they get a dark color from dark toning like GD said. B12
Yes a pic of them would be great and there is a thread in frequently asked questions forum about uploading pics but I just hope you didn't get...
Shouldn't you be seeing some copper left if it was sanded off? Plus you can't trust pics like that.....so I wouldn't bid.
Yes Bruce is right,it's a counter stamp..not an error.
It doesn't have a lot of luster.So I'd say MS62.
Yea Bone is right...it's just the opinion of the grader but IMO they both look like MS64.
If just weakly struck then I'd say MS64 to.
Yup Michael is right....not an error.
The first one could be a lamination error or just damage and the second one could actually be a broadstrike error and if it is it will have value...
I don't collect a lot of proof sets but probably one of the reasons is because it has a low mintage.
Beautiful....juuuust beautiful.
Separate names with a comma.