That is a gorgeous 1803 and it's easy to see why it CAC'd at 35. Nice catch.
No 38-O but here's my 39-O. [ATTACH]
My impression as a collector is that the "no L" is a little scarcer. On the topic of the grade, everyone here that proffered a grade said it was...
My grade is 40-45 but I think it slabbed 53.
I think it is 65 RD. But, the pictures are fuzzy and even blowing them up I cannot tell if there are high-point luster rubs on the obverse, which...
Yes to the bean
I got in late to this one but I was going to say 58 with a very weak strike on both obverse and reverse. I have a 1857 graded AU58 (see...
I gave it a 6, primarily because of the rim bumps/dings on the reverse. Not a problem for me in the grading of the coin but this is a subjective...
I'm going with 58 not FH. I see the same luster rubs as others. Did it market grade higher?
Gave it a 9. Like the CircCam look and this coin has very few distractions for the grade and what it is.
@kanga, don't we have enough regrets at our age? I see this as mostly a non-issue since it is apparent there was no intent to deceive. But, the...
I use digiCamControl to tether my Nikon D610 and it works just fine. It's a free download but the website does not indicate that it supports your...
64PL
65PL
Oh yeah. Here's an S-288 I picked up from a Heritage auction: NGC AU-50 but Mark net graded it EAC VF-30. (it's not that dark in hand or that...
@johnmilton; I like to throw my EAC grading "skills" out there so you smart guys can correct me and I can learn.
Market graded AU-Details. EAC grade AU-53, Net 35 and I'm giving the coin the benefit of the doubt since it's not in hand.
I had thought it looked more "solid" and "deep" than grease would create but I have zero experience in this area. Thanks for everyone's thoughts....
I recently acquired this 1874 IHC, ICG MS-64RB, that is label-indicated as "Struck Thru". I include a close-up of the reverse with what I believe...
Separate names with a comma.
