1907 Barber Quarter

So, was I right about the coin in the picture not looking "right?" I get your point about evaluating the pictures, but weren't we discussing how to determine surface quality from undoctored images? I'm not a student of photography, so I don't know the first thing when it comes to detecting photoshopped images (unless they are REALLY bad). Without the digital alterations, the coin looks like an original MS-62. With them, the luster looks completely unnatural. Now if you did put more effort into it, like you said, then it might have looked much more genuine.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The presence Hairlines isn't the definitive way to tell if a coin has been cleaned. It is the overall appearance of the coin respective to its grade (eg. Color, luster, etc), and hairlines are a clincher if the appearance looks wrong. The severity of the hairlines is another way to tell, but that is a little more subjective.

 

Fair enough. The point I was making with the doctored images is the unreliability of digital imaging, when presented as one single set of images under one photographic circumstance.

I would not be surprised, based on the color, if I considered the OP coin to have been chemically cleaned if I had it in-hand.

 

That is why I often give a coin the benefit of the doubt unless I see the coin in-hand.

 

What do you think of this 1897 Barber Quarter? I'm leaning towards a strong VF to weak XF..or? Not the best pictures though..
Thanks for any inputs [emoji4]







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

XF

 

I'm leaning towards a lot of worry about a barely-circulated coin with thick crud clinging only to the tightest areas. Not exactly 100% sure, but nine out of ten with that look have been more or less harshly cleaned.

 

Looks like EF details, cleaned to me.

Next time, you should create your own thread if you want to ask questions about your coins.

 

Well Miss Congeniality you're not!

 

I'm sorry if I hijacked someone's thread. I tried to look for a Barber-thread, but found only this.

The previous owner of the coin claimed it has not been cleaned, but I wasn't quite sure. I can also see those smudge-areas around the highest points. Here are some more close-ups.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

From your images I say yes for sure the coin has been cleaned. But if you're happy with owning it, then who's to say ......as for posting most of us here are friendly ,and are willing to offer help to other collectors .
Some of us here" thank god who are fewer" need to learn this is a place we all come to share and learn. Or maybe they should find another place that best suits their self appointed know it all attitude .

 

By the same token, hijacking threads - even though it doesn't seem to be frowned upon here - is almost universally-reviled elsewhere on the Internet and such conduct ought to be (gently) corrected for the sake of that same goal of education. Could have been done a lot more tactfully here, I'll agree.

 

Vocal infections were not properly captured in my text. I was trying to have a helpful tone, but I can see how many have interpreted it as being said with venom.

 

I think it is better to start a new thread but it's no big deal to me. More folks will see the coin and reply. That should bring more information. It's easy for a new coin to get lost in a large thread.

 

55 but perhaps 58 if it looks as good in-hand.

What don't I find stuff at those prices?

Heh,