1908 Barber Proof Quarter

submitted for your approval. after reading posts and threads about detailed coins that are straight graded I came across one. Tried to get best pics possible. With my phone cam. What do you think.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Love it! Barber proofs are among my favorites.

 

Some of those "hairlines" look like they are on the slab. For me, it's too hard to tell if PCGS goofed.

Chris

 

ANA GUIDELINES

Hairlines: MS-62 may have a few scattered or a noticeable patch.
MS-61 may have noticeable patch or continuous hairlining throughout.

Reverse nice. Obverse is 61 (completely hairlined surface). IMO coin is over graded and most of us would "detail it."

 

I thought the coin was also detailed as well. too bad the obverse does it look like the reverse.

 

I love proof barbers...I only wish I could afford more of them.

 

Me too.

 

Yeah that's the one. Nice imaging. I'm almost done with my Littleton 20th century type set. I need an AU Barber Half and a few others. This proof Barber is the first one in a long time. Is the 1908 Barber Proof really an R6? I couldn't find rarity ratings for Barber proof quarters.

 

I know nothing about Barber coins, just thought I would post the trueview pic of it. No hairlines in these pics, so it looks like all are on the holder. I really wish people would be more careful with holders.

 

Trust me it's hair lined. I'm tempted to crack it out and do a photo/video of it. Look at my last pic. No hair lines, but I assure you they're there.

 

IMO, that coin is 100% hairlined because the lines on a holder look completely different. Look at the Photo View. That coin looks like a "gem." In a majority of cases when a coin looks "gem" yet is graded lower the coin is lightly buffed.

Trouble with parallel hairlines is they are virtually invisible (even w/magnification) UNLESS the coin is turned and tipped just right.

 

In this instance, the seller was shocked when I told them it was a problem coin. They claim their great grandfather was the original owner of this BQ proof. When they decided to sell they got his coins graded. Don't know if any of its true, but interesting nonetheless.

 

No need to crack it; your first obverse image says all that needs to be said. They moved so fast grading this coin that they didn't test alternate rotations and lighting angles, and never saw the hairlines.

 

I disagree with this post! PCGS SAW THE HAIRLINES. You cannot miss them as the obverse appears lightly buffed. That's why the coin is only graded MS-62.

My beef is it should have been graded either MS-61 or "Detailed." PCGS does not necessarily follow the ANA's grading guidelines so my guess is there is no difference in PRICE between a PR-61 or PR-62 so they gave the submitter a break.

 

Like many lower grade proofs, it is highly hairlined. This is typical if the grade IMO.

 

And this is why you should *never* trust a PCGS "truview" picture. They are glamour shots - extremely optimistic, overly saturated, juiced pictures that show what the coin may look like in someone's imagination. If I bought the coin expecting this, and got the coin in the OP, I would be seriously pissed!

I agree. While I would prefer not to buy a hairlined proof, this is what I expect for the PR-62 grade.

 

I was not expecting the coin to look like how it does on the true view picture. as a matter of fact I bought it specifically because it was a detailed coin in a straight holder. there's been a lot of discussions about PCGS straight grading problem coins and this is a perfect example. I have no qualms about cracking it out and putting it in an all proof type set. specifically because it is hairline proof if it was a PF 65 or higher I would not do that.

 

I don't think you get it. Your coin is NOT A PROBLEM COIN. According to the ANA, a coin straight graded as either MS/PR-60 or MS/PR-61 can have continuous hairlining over its entire surface, with impaired luster, and unattractive eye appeal.
An MS/PR-62 can be impaired with a noticeable patch of hairlines. The reverse of your coin looks OK. The Obverse does not. The reverse is less important.

IMO, your coin is a "perfect example" of an excellent teaching coin (Impaired PR-61 over Original PR-63 or 64) and not a "detailed piece."

Now, only a collector's personal preference or budget would dictate him buying an impaired proof. IMO, buying a coin just to prove you know more than the professional graders about "market acceptability" is silly.

 

I don't think I know more than the experts and I did not buy the coin to prove anything. however, ANA grading guidelines with standing, if the coin at any point in its life has been cleaned lightly swiped or polished to me, it's a details coin. also, I am not that good yet at Discerning between hairlines from a polished die, and actual hairline scratches which to me on this coin looks like it has hairline scratches from a light cleaning. it was hard to tell that from the pictures. I'm not that arrogant to think that I know more than anybody else. I've Just Seen discussions about PCGS putting problem coins and straight graded holders that's all. and that wasn't very fair taking a jab at me that the only people that would buy this at this this price point with problems like this, or something to that effect come on man, really? this one is personal preference for a specific type set that I'm doing.