I'm so bad at nickels. :oops:
So what's that shekel really worth?
I know you guys/gals love GTG's on the BTW's! :wacky: Tried like heck to show the luster, this was the best I could do. The toning is pretty true...
67 NoFS Nice coin!
65 NoFS I think there's just (barely) enough to hold it from 66
0 for 1 here
A little less dominant, but the 1936 York Commemorative: [ATTACH]
too many to care :panda:
I went with 66 No FS, but I can see 67 EDIT - I went 66 because of the reverse, but I also think I see tiny marks in the field to the right of...
holy heck! That's so cool! I'm adding this to my my Heritage Want List!
This in spades
Luster is muted, but it's there, just not booming. All I know is I was extraordinarily disappointed with the 62.
I'm with @SensibleSal66 ; 2 65's, 1 64
Thanks @ddddd for doing my heavy lifting! :D
This was a disappointing grade from ANACS. I was fully expecting at least a 65, with a shot at 66. I'm still fairly dumbfounded by the grade, and...
reveal coming soon... get yer guesses in now!
and I prefer @johnmilton 's coin over mine. Love the toning!
When I'm imaging my coins, luster is not typically what I'm going after. Usually it detail and color I'm chasing, and for those I tend to use...
Exactly on both points! Planchet marks also (IMO) have a certain look vs hits/pmd. Look at enough coins, and you'll be able to tell.
Luster pattern on these (and many commems) is unlike the pattern most of us are used to (think Morgans), and tends to be a circular pattern,...
Separate names with a comma.
