1965 25c ddo fs-101 (26) opinions on grade

My coin is pictured on the left in the side by side comparison pics, pcgs coin on the right.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Kind of hard to give a grade from these images .
So I'll try another way .

Is there A die crack that runs from the upper right E in AMERICA through the upper R to the rim ?

 

Without passing judgment on whether it is or is not the variety you think it is, I like it as an MS66.

 

From the photos I think it's a beautiful coin. MS-65 maybe a 66. Looks like a variety of some sort but that's something I can't help you with.

 

Yes,

 

Your coin appears to be a doubled die, but it doesn't seem to quite match up with the reference photos. This is most noticeable on "In God We Trust"

 

The highest grade that pcgs has ever given that variety is ms64.With a population of 2 with none finer. Ms 64 is valued at $1400, I wonder what a 66 would be valued at

 

If it's true that the top pop is a 64, then it will be EXTREMELY hard to get higher than that, regardless what the coin looks like. The TPGS's only VERY rarely will allow a new top pop. They'll call in ANYBODY with an excuse to hold it down.

 

Agreed. I would also add the E and Y of LIBERTY as well.

Perhaps the OP could post clearer photos?

 

my iPhone camera is making it look different for some reason.. but when you look at it through a loupe or magnifying glass it looks like the one from pcgs.. I don't know if it's the lighting from my phone or what, but it's annoying as hell

 

iPhone cameras are wonderful pieces of engineering, but they are NOT designed for optimum close-up work. No camera phone is.

 

I've been looking at getting one of the USB microscopes but haven't ordered one yet.. anyone know of one of the better ones to get or anything to recommend?

 

Not to burst your bubble; I am NOT a fan.

 

Be forewarned that you're likely to get contradictory responses, so be sure to verify and take any recommendations with a grain of salt.

Some USB scopes are certainly better than others, but most are very limited in their true usefulness, particularly in the quality they can achieve. If you keep expectations low and just want something cheap or temporary, they're not so bad, but if you'd like to produce quality images I'd respectfully suggest looking into other options.

If he's willing, @desertgem can offer knowledgeable insight and better explain why such scopes are not all they're cracked up to be.

 

It could be Coneca DDO-002 .
It would also have to have, the RDV-005 Reverse .
http://varietyvista.com/Variety Master Listings/Washington RDVs by Die.htm#_1965

I tried to find some images of that DDO .
But no luck with images ..

 

NGC has some images of DDO-002 .
https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-varieties/washington-quarters/1965-ddo-25c-fs-102-2251/

 

But the 002 only has doubling on the word liberty from what I understand

 

Not being argumentative, but no electronic instrument can magnify any significant amount with a 3mp or even a 5mp chip without the software producing false pixels. The software uses interpolation to add false pixels to the image based on separated point of known pixels, so much of what is seen at greater than minimum magnification is possibly false image. This why so many of the 'possible varieties ' are by USB scopes. Just use a 10X glass loupe and be more accurate for the same price . My opinion.

Jim

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation


As per Books summon, this is the most recent post in a thread by me. It is a matter of truth of image. USB microscopes ,unless just magnifying a whole coin or slightly larger, "stretches the truth of what is there by interpolation. Actually most recent cell phone cameras with 16+mp chips and the built in magnification properties are far better than the normal USB, but they are hard to hold in focus unless someone makes/uses a stand that can hold them parallel to the coin surface. A glass magnifier/loupe doesn't lie if it is within its parameters of magnification. But also, the other lies can come from your own brain. It tries to see what you want to see, so it can 'photoshop' the image to make it so. Go by the image, not what you think you see. I use a 30 year old B & L stereo scope and then I just have to worry about lighting, an even additional problem to tell doubling or not on reflective coins. Hope this helps, Jim

 

My theory has always been and shall always remain, "ONLY OPTICAL MAGNIFICATION MATTERS". "Digital magnification" is pure nonsense. It just blows up the pixels bigger.

 

An oldie but a goodie. I've been trying to snag a nice stereo scope for a few auctions in a row around here (I like to check them out personally before bidding) but the late bidding always seems to go nuts. Eventually I'll grab one at a bargain.