NGC slab is a little scruffy & has scratches not present on the coin. I used soft light without flash to adjust for this except on the last two pictures.
I will go with MS64. A Beauty with Fresh Fields. A coin with Minor nicks and Original Deep orange hues.
Btw, I picked this up, in part, based on the extremely low mintage. The Quarter Eagle doesn't seem to sell for much above melt, even in gorgeous condition in semi-key dates.
Hard to tell. In one set of pictures, it looks very clean, as in 65. The other set of pictures shows a fair amount of contact marks, as in MS 62. Which set of pictures represents the actual coin?
The first two photos had me thinking MS-64. The next two were out of focus. The last two show a lot of small scrapes and marks on the obverse which got me down to MS-62. I have seen some conservative grading for this type, especially from PCGS.
I think most of those imperfections are on the holder, but I still can't see over a 65 here. Can you post some fair and honest pictures?
MS-62 in my opinion, the pictures are a bit confusing but overall I was able to make a decision, good luck, nice coin.
H'mm, I'm at MS-63. The first photos are the "Barbara Walters" glamour shots and the final two are probably more realistic. But I think the last two shots are probably not doing the coin justice. Ah, coin photography! If I was basing my GTG on the last two photos, I'd say MS-62 but having become familiar with @GeorgeM 's taste, I'll say it's MS-63.
I gave it a fresh look and am changing my guess from around 65 to a 62. Would probably be closer with a bottle spin.
Here are couple of examples. NGC graded this 1900 quarter eagle MS-62 about 20 years ago. I bought this piece when I was high school in the mid 1960s. It was graded "BU" back then. PCGS graded this 1905 piece MS-63 about ten years ago. As I said before, I have seen a fair amount of conservative grading on these coins.