Hi everyone. I have a 1905 Liberty Head $2.50 piece. Regrettably, besides this one, I've never seen any before in real life. But I've compared it (online only) to a number of similar coins and this one looks quite nice to me. I'm interested in, and would appreciate any comment you may have. Just curious about what it would grade as. @IBetASilverDollar, @Randy Abercrombie : This is the coin from the same album where I found the Indian Head Cent that I posted about a week ago (regarding the absence of the cartwheel effect). I had mentioned that I'd post this one for your comments if you don't mind. Thanks!
I like the way this one presents far better than the Indian head cent. This appears to be an honest and well struck quarter eagle. I am away from my coins and computer so I don't have anything I can reference which is what I like to do when I am looking at a photo. I do not see wear and believe this to be a nice mint state example anyway. This appears to be a very nice coin.
No, I don't believe so. But admittedly, I've never seen a proof gold coin before. However, I've seen proof silver coins, with their mirror-like backgrounds. If the same characteristics apply to gold coins, then nope, this is not a proof.
A proof over the years can lose the mirrored fields. Particularly if it were placed on a book. I think what likely caught @ldhair eye is the sharpness of the strike and the squared off rim.
Oh wow - then I'm not sure if it's a proof. I don't even know what a squared-off rim is (Hahaha)... I'll look it up. I need to sign off for now but I'll come back here tomorrow afternoon. Thanks for the info. as always.
It does not look like a Proof to me, but to be honest I really can’t tell much form that picture because the lighting or something is making the coin look odd. Here is a Mint State example taken in the type of light with which most collectors are accustomed to seeing.
Tough to tell much about the luster from the way that's imaged. Are you able to get photos of it that show the surfaces more clearly like the above image by John or like this one I used to own: where you can see the surfaces and the luster. Might have to play with the lighting a bit to get different images but I'm not expert there.
@johnmilton and @IBetASilverDollar , thank you for your tips and your time. Well, I tried taking more pics just now. Owing to the limitation of my Samsung phone cam (and probably to my photography and lighting skills also), I didn't get much better pics. Here's a couple more - the color is more true-to-life at least. Both photos are unretouched except for cropping. The one I posted initially yesterday was taken at night under incandescent lighting. Having looked at the photos you both posted, I would say that the luster on mine comes not quite as close to yours (and not nearly as shimmering).
The reverse photo is better but still tough to tell a whole lot. Kinda looks like it may have been polished as well from these photos similar to your IHC posted earlier. If it came from the same album that wouldn't be surprising. The details look mint state but there's not much luster there which leads me to believe it too was messed with
Thanks. I wonder if, in those days, cleaning was allowed. The album is quite old. On the inside spine, it reads "Made in West Germany". Thank you for your input. It's still a beautiful coin. I've never even seen an old gold coin before.
Cleaning has not been "allowed" at least with respect to maintaining or enhancing value for many years. Let's settle a definition. "Cleaning" is moving the metal around on the surface of the coin to make it appear better than it is. It can create false luster by polishing or what is call "whizzing" by creating a psudo luster with a wire brush. I do not call "dipping" in a mild acid "cleaning," and I some will disagree with me. Dipping mostly works on silver coins, and it takes an experienced eye to decide if it will help or imporve the sitation. Some coins are so ugly with the tarnish that is on them that dipping is only way to make them marketable to some collectors. Dipping removes a very small amount of tarnished metal; it does not "fix" the metal that is tarnished. Gold can also be dipped, but the results are less often helpful. Gold is a "noble medal." Usually it is the copper on the piece, which is on the surface, which prompts someone to mess with gold coins. Copper can also be dipped, but it's even more dicey. Most of time messing with copper and bronze coins results in a disaster in my opinion. Maybe I have confused your further, but the bottom line, collectors and others should leave their coins alone. They often do more harm that good.
@johnmilton , thanks - really - for the very detailed explanations. I have also read many articles (some professional, some from ANA, and most in coin forums like this one) about cleaning and I think one can write volumes on that topic alone, for sure. Appreciate your time.
Oh - you give me too much credit! Hahaha. My initial photo (the one whose colors look off) was illuminated by just plain ceiling lights. The second set I posted was during the day under natural lighting, with a small LED from a coin magnifier shining from the side. No professional equipment.
I am guessing AU53 "Details Cleaned" for a grade on this coin. I am sure better photos would prove me wrong.
Ok, what I suggest it to have 2 LEDs positioned at 10:00 and 2:00. That will being the luster out best.
