Attribute This

I think that's correct and the die breaks are a figment of my imagination. Unless it's like the S-205/S-206 die break which looks almost identical to the S-195 die break through ITED.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If this is a wrong photo, could the other New Find actually be the Bird coin? Could it be mine? It seems unlikely since it was purchased unattributed.

 

I think this is a wrong photo. It appears to be the Noyes Photo #27660 NC-3 DENMAN coin called AG3(VG7) Avg- with different lighting.

 

Bill Noyes is still around

 

I have no idea how to contact him.

 

Here are my images for all NC-2s I have found including the 9 in the Noyes book which I photographed with a digital microscope and enlarged so I could see them better. I highly recommend adding his books to your library.

^^^New Find - Not in Noyes^^^

 

^^^New Find - Not in Noyes^^^
(The above is a NC-3. Note the double leaves at(N)T and reverse of 97.)

Probably the #27660 Denman coin taken with different lighting.) Either of the two new finds may or may not be the Bird Coin, if he had a NC-2 rather than the one imaged.

 

The Heritage coin was catalogued by Noyes in a Supplement at the end of Book 4 and slotted in at #4 at G5 (VG10 details) and given photo #61346.This leaves the mystery of the Bird NC-2 coin and whether it exists and if so, is it the same one as my new discovery. So either 10 or 11 known. Note - Noyes did add a Bird NC-3 (different than the coin photo under NC-2.) in that same supplement.

I think my find has more actual detail than the #2 coin, but I also think the #4 coin has better detail than the F15 details, though it does have a weaker reverse.

 

This isn’t the same coin as yours

 

No it's not. As noted above, Noyes catalogued the coin in your photo as #61346 and rated it #4 in his census as G5(VG10 Details.) The question remaining is: Is there an un-photographed specimen once owned by BIRD or was it actually the NC-3 Noyes catalogued for BIRD in his supplement (Different specimen than shown as the NC-2.) If there is indeed a specimen he owned, is my new specimen that one or a new one?

If the one in the Photo was the one owned by BIRD, then Noyes would probably not have added it to his census.

 

My thought is that the pictures of the NC-3 coin were mislabeled as the Bird NC-2

 

Until I hear otherwise, I'm going with that making Ten known and Nine available to collectors including mine. (One is impounded in ANS)

 

I confused myself. Disregard this comment

 

I have touched base with Mark Borckardt and he has indicated he'll take a look as he has time around the move of the FUN show to Dallas. He has a few more resources than I do (he probably has Noyes contact info) and can give an opinion on how EAC would grade this new one.

 

It has arrived. This may not be better for details, but it shows the chocolate color better. Neither photo looks nearly as good as it does in hand.
Seller's photo - It looks like a digital microscope with LED lighting.


My digital microscope photo with LED and supplemental lighting. Better, but it still doesn't do it justice.

 

I have noticed that there appears to be a die break or rust across the bust drapery to above the drapery and then back to the rim at a sharp angle. It is consistent on all specimens with sufficient detail of the drapery.

 

I am an Addict, spending money I don't have for little pieces of copper. I borrow money to feed my habit. This is actually an upgrade.



Upgrades this:

 

I decided a good New Years Resolution is to capture Images of all my coins including those who haven't been enjoyed lately. I've made it through 1797 and am now working on 1798. I know I have a few errors and one was a third S-142 which I had mis-attributed as a more common variety which I have quickly forgotten. I'm almost through two of my four boxes of Early Dates and the boxes left have fewer well photographed already.

And a BIG BONUS is finding my silver rounds and a collection I purchased a few years back. I thought I knew exactly where to look, but I found it at a place I don't remember ever putting it. Under some genealogy material. Anyway, there are some nice non Large Cent coins in there.

 

Here's a little old school attribution investigation process. I picked this up because of my recent interest in counterstrikes. It is an incused stamp leaving a raised image of what I think is AP, but could be AY. It also has incused scratches which may or may not be concurrent with the stamp.


This did not have a photo of the obverse, so it is a good selection for attempting to identify a variety strictly from the reverse.

Step 1. Find diagnostics which narrow down the possibilities.


This is the Loop Punch for the Reverse of 97/99. This was first used in 1796 and ended with the Draped Bust series in 1807. It eliminates all Caps.



This stem should make elimination of many varieties possible. Most of the time, the angle here is less acute and often does not attach to the center of the berry. This angle is seen on some early caps with a more artistic design flair, but not on the draped bust series. I have not yet found a good variety after an initial search of the series. This is not unusual for an initial run through the comps, but it does peek my interest.



This particular stem is usually a good diagnostic for eliminating varieties because it is often missing or attached to the wreath vine at various points between the double leaves. This one is long and almost equally distanced between the upper and lower leaf pairs.