MA
MS 65+ ...also nice but appears to be a slightly lower grade than the other example
Floor is open
Coin 1 - Clad Dime (pg.1) - 2 (NT/MA) vs 6 (AT/QC) Coin 2 - Franklin (pg. 1) - 3 (NT/MA) vs 7 (AT/QC) Coin 3 - CBH (pg. 4) - 5 (NT/MA) vs 0...
Floor is open...
Summary: Rd. 1: 1955-S MS 64 1c (NO Star) --> Should it star? -->Yes: 2 vs No: 11 Rd. 2: 1885-O MS 65 $1 (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 4 vs...
MS 65+ on the one that went to NGC The other looks lower; I'd call it MS 64.
I'd pick the one with better eye appeal (the one that looks better to your eye).
I like your method! I'm a fan of keeping items organized and this was a great tool. For now, I'm ok just using the PCGS/NGC boxes for my...
This is one of my favorites: [ATTACH]
@Randy_K did you notice that you posted the same coin on page 1, over 6 years ago! It's a lovely coin and has clearly stood out even years later!
AU 58+ ...I'll guess it got the rare 58 plus :)
Next up (slab shots and then what the color looked when tilted under a light source): [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH]
QC ...I don't like the "glow" around the date and highlighting Franklin's face
Nice! I thought it was UNC. This might be a coin where a video would better depict it than a photo.
If you crack it and send in raw, then anything is possible (my guess would be 64). If you use their reconsideration service, then the coin is...
No worries! It's not the easiest thing to get the ideal balance between toning and details in a photo. From what I can see, the color looks nice.
From the pictures it doesn't look like it would upgrade. This might even be one that is more likely to go down a point to 64 than up.
I'll guess it went UNC (main picture is a bit pixelated, so it's harder to tell) ....MS 63
MS 64 ...I like it ....must stop staring at those gifs :D
Separate names with a comma.
