It's tough getting a good pic with details of a bright coin. I took multiple pics with different lighting. The gold toned were with low power lamps, the quarter is really as bright as the pics show. Here are some pics of the SLQ, opinions?
Looks like a nice coin but to me at least appears to have been lightly cleaned. I would call it AU details lightly cleaned.
It's clearly AU. Blow up the image and you will see that Ms. Liberty's right (viewer's left) knee is flat. Keep in mind that this is the 1917 Type I issue, which is in general the best struck issue in the entire series and does not come with a poorly struck knee. If the color is accurate in the images then it has nearly certainly been dipped in the past since an AU coin that is 90+ years old should show some sort of darkening of color. This is not to say that the coin cannot be attractive or valuable, but it is what it is.
Hence my comment about wanting to see it in hand before dismissing it. The color accuracy plays into my opinion.
My coin photography sucks. It's tough to take a pic of a bright coin. As for the toning or lack there of, I can't say much about that, except that I have morgans and walkers that are graded PCGS MS-60 through MS-66 and they are as bright or brighter than this coin. As for the coin, it came out of a collection of a guy who's been collecting for 70 years and had to sell to relocate to a retirement home. He was not a casual collector, so I don't think he'd dip or whizz a coin. It's off to ANACS in a few days and they'll be the final arbiter. I like the coin and the guy who sold it to me, so cleaned or not, it gets a home with me until they wheel me to a retirement home or dump what's left of me into the ocean. I'm slowly upgrading my photo equipment and with a decent copy stand and some good lighting I'll be able to take better pics. I'll let you guys know what the outcome is as soon as I get the coin back and some better pics hopefully.
This coin has pretty obvious luster breaks in the fields both obverse and reverse. It's a nice coin, but it's not mint state.
Geeze, it is what it is. I just posted pics of a coin I thought you guys might enjoy seeing. Like I said, let's see what ANACS has to say about it. My feelings won't be hurt if it comes back as not MS. Here are some bright MS examples though: http://cgi.ebay.com/1917-1-Standing-Liberty-Quarter-Gem-BU-FH-Sensational_W0QQitemZ350230175407 http://cgi.ebay.com/1917-S-TYPE-1-STANDING-LIBERTY-QUARTER-FULL-HEAD_W0QQitemZ300410014370 http://cgi.ebay.com/1916-STANDING-LIBERTY-QUARTERS-NGC-MS65-FH_W0QQitemZ120553322669 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?VISuperSize&item=370353867848
The first one might be unc, the reverse is funky and looks cleaned to me. The second one has definitely been cleaned. The third one looks to be a nice MS coin.. but the pics stink. I can't get the 4th one to work. You can't go by brightness in determining if a coin is mint state or not. There is a lot more that goes into it then if it is bright or not. Luster is the first indicator. If their is a break in the luster the coin isn't going to be mint state. Believe it or not most all of the time when a coin is bright because it has been cleaned. Even a lot of coins in slabs that are white have been at least dipped.
I'm not convinced either of the first two coins are uncirculated. The 1916 clearly is, and the last auction did not come up....Mike
