Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 2957070, member: 19165&quot;]Well, just for you&#039;ll I&#039;ll pull out the detailed breakdown: </p><p><br /></p><p>Strike: The strike on this piece looks quite full. It&#039;s an above average strike. 65. </p><p>Luster: The luster appears full and strong. In hand, I&#039;ll bet it is quite flashy. This is due to the semi-prooflike fields (the coin does not make it to PL, in my evaluation of your pictures). 64 </p><p>Eye Appeal: Unfortunately, that is secondary toning from an improperly rinsed dip, especially on the obverse. There is some widespread spotting on the reverse as well that hurts. The color here is a neutral-to-negative. 62</p><p>Contact Marks: This is what kills the grade on this coin. The reverse isn&#039;t too bad, and I&#039;d probably give the reverse a 63+. The huge marks on the obverse all over her cheek and in the fields in front of her face really bring the grade down. These are large and numerous marks in prime focal areas on the obverse. The obverse gets a 61 for contact marks. </p><p><br /></p><p>So, to put all that together: The luster and quality of the reverse is going to help, but the eye appeal and beat up obverse is going to hurt. I&#039;d probably put this overall at a 62, but there&#039;s a good chance its 61.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in