1907 Barber Quarter

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by TypeCoin971793, Apr 22, 2016.

  1. Paul M.

    Paul M. Well-Known Member

    That only matters if you're going to sell it. And, if you are, I'm assuming you'd have it certified, anyway. Either way at $30 or $30+grading fees into it, you're coming out ahead.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Treashunt

    Treashunt The Other Frank


    I collect them, as ken @green18 knows, and I agree with AU-58
     
    green18 likes this.
  4. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I also agree with the AU58 grade but that wipe could easily land the coin in a details holder for cleaning and you would be lucky to get low AU of high XF money for it.
     
    Paddy54 likes this.
  5. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    Thank you, but I disagree. I doubt you were actually able to see the wipe from the pictures. I don't think it would details at a TPG.

    To illustrate my point, How did this coin get a "problem-free" EF-45 from PCGS, where it sold on eBay for $300? image.jpeg image.jpeg
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  6. ExoMan

    ExoMan Well-Known Member

    IMHO .... 1) The 1907 quarter was a great buy at $30 and is easily worth more than twice that amount. 2) Despite the light but abrasive, obverse scrubbing, it is AU and has good eye appeal. 3) It could warrant a details grade. 4) The 1861-O (one of the Confederate varieties - speared olive bud - noted on PCGS holder?) should have garnered a details grade. 5) Ultimately, the AU 1907 quarter does not have sufficient value to warrant slabbing, and the cost, even if it is slabbed, would diminish the profit of the purchase. 6) This coin would best be in a 7070 album!
     
  7. SuperDave

    SuperDave Free the Cartwheels!

    It's in a problem-free slab because it's a problem-free coin. :)

    The striations are clearly incidental to circulation. There's no evidence whatsoever of anything failing to be removed in a deliberate wipe, and had the "wiper" managed to remove everything distracting it would be hairlined far worse than it is. I suspect there's still original luster in the tighter areas of your coin.
     
  8. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    I disagree. The hairlines were caused by a harsh mechanical cleaning. If the hairlines were caused by circulation, then we should see a lot less "cleaned" coins.

    If the coin was not cleaned, the color would not be blast-white. This coin is blast-white, meaning the patina has been stripped. The hairlines attest to how the patina was stripped, which was by scraping it off with the bristles of a brush. A dipping would not leave hairlines.

    I had a CBH that was harshly cleaned and looked exactly the same. I know what I am looking at.
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  9. Robert J Trudell

    Robert J Trudell New Member

    As a new gu on the block I'm not familiar with some of your terms, such as wiped. What does that mean and how does it effect a coin.
     
  10. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I only said that the coin "could easily" end up in a details holder. This is based upon my personal experience in submitting raw Barber Quarters to NGC for grading. For example, they called this coin cleaned.

    [​IMG]

    I'm not sure how your Seated Half example bolsters your point though. It is clear that you think that Seated Half should reside in a details holder. And I can show you hundreds of coins that look just like that coin that do, in fact reside in details holders. Therefore, your example points to the inconsistency/subjectivity in grading more than it does to predict the fate of the coin in the OP using anecdotal evidence.
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  11. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    My point and intent exactly.

    I don't see what is wrong with your coin. I would like to see it in hand to see if I could pick up what NGC saw.
     
  12. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    They do that to me often. I have sent coins that have absolutely no signs of cleaning yet they come back in details holders. I sold that particular coin at a loss, but I should have cracked it and resubmit it.

    Hope yours makes it into a problem free holder, but even if it doesn't, you are still going to make money on that coin. You got a very nice deal on some scary photos. I don't think I would have pulled the trigger on that lot.
     
  13. joecoincollect

    joecoincollect Well-Known Member

    I see more of a problem with the 1911 example. This coins is too white and detailed to have such a lack of luster, hence it was graded cleaned. The 1907 looks great. I noticed a slight, superficial scratch under "in" on the obverse. It may just be a soft scratch on the luster and didn't penetrate deep enough into the metal to warrant calling it a scratch. In any case, it looks like a 55 to me based on obverse. It's pretty lovely for 30
     
  14. longshot

    longshot Enthusiast Supporter

  15. longshot

    longshot Enthusiast Supporter

    Wiped means a coin was improperly cleaned. You can see the parallel lines on Liberty's cheek and neck in the original post. The coin was probably rubbed with a cloth. Not real bad in this instance, but "hairlines " like this reduce a coin's value.
     
  16. SuperDave

    SuperDave Free the Cartwheels!

    If you think this coin is blast-white, you need to recalibrate your monitor. It's not even close.

    You had one cleaned Bust Half, and now you're an expert? I've handled hundreds of cleaned coins and am just beginning to get an idea what I'm talking about.

    Here's a test. What's your opinion of the originality of the surfaces on this one?

    IMG_0442e.jpg
     
  17. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    The coin wasn't super lustrous as it had been dipped and the toning you see is from the Dansco I had it housed in for over 5 years, but to equate the absence of luster with harsh cleaning when there are no signs of mechanical cleaning is just wrong. Here is the uncropped photo of the obverse.

    [​IMG]
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  18. Paul M.

    Paul M. Well-Known Member

    That's almost not fair. ;)
     
  19. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    It is much closer to blast-white than the grey it should be. The patina has been stripped.

    I can see how I implied that. The CBH was one of two coins I have owned that had been HARSHLY cleaned, and I observed how a harsh mechanical cleaning affected the color and luster. Everything I observed I see on the above half dollar. As for cleaned coins in general, I have handled hundreds in my lifetime, and I have looked at pictures of hundreds more. I have learned what an original coin should look like for a given grade, and any deviation means it has been played with. The above half should not look the way it does with the white surfaces and the numerous hairlines.

    Ooh, fun. A challenge!

    The luster does not look natural for the grade, like it has been muted somehow. It can't be oxidation, as the coin is blast-white. There are lighting setups that can mimick this, and I don't know if that is what is going on here. If I was a buyer, and these pictures were all I had, I would say your Morgan had been overdipped. In-hand, it could be a bright, lustrous coin, but that is not what your pictures imply.
     
  20. SuperDave

    SuperDave Free the Cartwheels!

    IMG_0442a.jpg

    Images can be deceptive. Everything you see in my first image, I did in the Gimp, and it was a rush job because I was creating this and didn't care much about surface quality:

    404.jpg

    You'd never know it wasn't an easy MS67 if I were more careful about the alterations and addressed the front edge of the profile and the eye (which should have been an instant red flag to any experienced student of photography, which is why I left those details there). Images are deceptive, and the first skill necessary for successful evaluations of coins based on images is to know how to evaluate images.

    My experience in coin imaging suggests to me that the OP coin's woes are being greatly exaggerated by digital imagery. If you've shot enough circulated coins, you'll know that you can make almost every single one show hairlines from certain lighting angles, differing for each coin. Silver coins hairline jouncing around in your pocket. My thinking is further reinforced by the complete lack of visual distraction in the narrower nooks and crannies which shouldn't have been successfully cleaned by a brushing which appears this minor in such clear images.

    However, the most important takeaway is, this is only one set of images under one lighting circumstance, and neither of us (to the extent we disagree) is proven right.
     
    Paul M. likes this.
  21. noname

    noname Well-Known Member

    Awesome price
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page