Here is an OLDER graded ANACS 1826 Capped Bust Half which I'd like you to take a shot at grading. It might surprise you somewhat. Thanks for looking Bone
Actually Bone , that was the first thought that popped into my head when I saw it. The hair just looks weird to me.But if ANACS didnt say it than it most likley isn't .But you never know they may have missed it.
The curls look pretty defined (maybe tooled). But the seller seemed to think the coin was in the XF range as well, so... B
It looks like it has a very strong strike, which could make it look tooled. The old ANACS was the best TPG at detecting tooling, IMHO. Charlie
It's a very strong strike for a bust half, so that could be it, but without the coin in hand I just can't be certain if it's tooled or not.
Bone is asking for opinions because in another discussion I voiced the opinion that I think the coin is tooled - even if it is slabbed by ANACS.
I see no evidence of tooling. I think the odd angle and light position of the original photo has fooled people into thinking otherwise. By way of reference, here is a cleaned AU example currently being auctioned by Heritage: Here is an AU 58 that recently sold: http://coins.heritageauctions.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=405&Lot_No=7796&src=pr#Photo Here is a VF 35 from the Reiver sale: http://coins.heritageauctions.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=391&Lot_No=29660#Photo For those of you who think the original coin has been tooled, where specifically was it tooled? Have fun...Mike
I've learned to trust Doug's opinion even if I don't see exactly what he is talking about, maybe after a few decades at this I will be as well regarded. That said, where is the tooling Doug? I just don't see the evidence, what am I missing? I want to learn from this...
Bone and I had a good discussion about this coin. I freely admitted I could be wrong, especially since all I have to go by are pics. But I also said that even if I had the coin in hand I don't think I'd change my mind. That being said - the area that concerns me is the hair. The detail just seems way to sharp and deep for a coin with that amount of wear. Tooled coins always have a certain look about them, and sharp, crisp details in one area - when they don't exist anywhere else on the coin is one of the things that causes that look. And to me, this coin has that look. I freely admit, it jumped out at me at first glance - and over the years I've learned to trust my first impression. But - just in case I was wrong, because as everybody here knows I make my share of mistakes too, I went looking. I searched through several pages of Heritage records and pics looking for coins in a similar condition to this one. I checked white coins, dark coins, toned coins and dirty coins - all of them 1826. And in every case - not a single one of them had detail like that in the hair. Yes, there were coins graded higher that had it, just like the one that Mike posted. But not all of them did, the pic I finally settled on for a comparison was one graded XF45 by NGC - even it doesn't have that kind of detail. It is - HERE. Anyway, that's my reasoning in a nutshell. By the way, I think the NGC coin is overgraded.
I very much respect Doug's opinion, but I'm still not sold. Take another picture of the coin, with the light at 12 o'clock and as close to the camera as possible and post them, please. I just have trouble believing that ANACS missed tooling that can be seen in a photo, and I still think the odd lighting angle accentuated the hair detail...Mike
wow, that coin really does have a lot of detail in the hair. I mean that is some really sharp detail. Good eyes.