Attribute This

It's been a tough year and a half.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This is a good test case. Not too easy, not too tough, and with a twist at the end.

 

Nice,especially the reverse rotation still has some meat.

 

I'm not sure of the reverse rotation since the photos were taken at an angle (probably to maximize detail.)

My first step was to manipulate the image to eliminate these distortions by aligning the x or y axis to it's longest point. Then I cropped the image and saved it with vertical and horizontal distances being equal. Then I rotated the image to match standard orientation for comparison to comp dies for known authentic and attributed dies. These are the manipulated images which should be closer to the coin in hand.

 

S-108

 

These three Photos support that:



But this is the twist that makes me wonder about the obverse:


Is the top too close to the drapery or is there another explanation?

Where is the crumbling under E of Reverse Die State C and D (only states of S-108)? It looks like Die State A of S-79, S-107 or S-106.

Reverse Sequence
1795 F S-79 A
1796 U S-107A
1796 U S-106 ABC
1796 U S-108 CD
1796 S-111 U E
1796 S-109 U EF
1796 S-110 U FG



I don't have a satisfactory answer.

 

The large dentils and the position of the 1 support the S-108 obverse. You are seeing the results of severe damage or a minor double-strike

 

The odds definitely favor a damaged S-108. Other known alternatives are excluded. But a fake, reproduction, counterfeit or least likely new obverse die are there until I see it in the copper.

If that doesn't help, it goes in the "probable with nagging question" group which keeps growing.

 

It arrived and unfortunately, what I thought was distortion from taking the photo at an angle was actually post mint flattening.

~Perhaps the earliest elongated coin~

But seriously, this is the best close-up of the date and does little to take this out of the category of S-108 with a nagging question about the 6 position.

 

How the heck can you guys ID these with so little detail?

You amaze me

 

In this case, the reverse berry location is diagnostic which narrows it down. The outside berry under a pair of leaves where they diverge and under S is diagnostic. 1795 Reverse F used on the Reeded Edge variety and then as 1796 Reverse U on S-106 through S-111, though not in that order.


From there, the location of the 1 to the hair and curl makes elimination fairly easy.


If you have good comparables of known specimens, it's much easier than using descriptions.

 

https://coins.ha.com/itm/large-cent...0-2193.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

I need a place to speculate. The above appears to be a match for a coin I've had difficulty settling on whether it's an early S-191 or Early S-190.


They appear to to have reverse A recutting at U(N) and (C)A and low S(T). But they do appear to have a stem at the second berry under E(D). Reverse A, when used on NC-1, has no stem there. I need to check the early S-191s, if I can find one. The Auction piece is called S-190 Die State I.

The nagging question on my mind grows greater now that I have another similar coin appearing.

Similarities are no clash of dentils over ST damage to the inside of the left loop, but a complete loop. No crack through ICA.

 

I just going to have to believe ya

 

Easy resolution. They are both S-190 early Die States, probably I.

The Reverse of NC-1 is Reverse B, not Reverse A. I switched them when I re-labeled my comps to reflect Reverse H was actually an earlier die State of Reverse B. Now I see a useful diagnostic gem hidden in the Reverse H description I can use for S-191 early die states.

Heritage (with MB description) is right as usual. The 1793 NC-6 misattribution error is definitely the rare exception much like the Bird 1796 NC-2 photo is the rare wrong photo error in Noyes.

I wish my error rate were as low.

 

I have not posted in a while now. I'm somewhat depressed from once again losing my comparable photos making ID more time consuming. I just don't know if I have the motivation to recreate it yet again.

Thanks for following me on this journey.

 

Is the 6 a little lower?

 

Within 24 hours I accidentally found my comps under "One Drive?" How they got there I'll never know. I didn't even know I had One Drive.

 

Is this beautiful or ugly? YES!



$125

 

@Marshall . What year is it ? Is that a cud ?

 

It's a 1798.

The CUD helps with the ID much like John Wright's Worlds Worst 1804.

But the Die State is still questionable until I get it in the copper and get better lighting for other diagnostics. It was properly identified by the seller by the way so no cherry pick. Just a fair price for a difficult coin to find.