how low will PCGS go?

Perhaps one could try optical coherence tomography - its resolution can be better than confocal microscopy.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

MIT FreeWare

Somewhere on the MIT page I found a freeware program I used to use that relied on your sound card as a digital storage 'scope and had (as we used to call it) FFT functions.

It lived on an old laptop of mine that has since been "used up".

But if you have a need there is free software that can take A to D with FFT......for free.

 

go Richard ... Go...

 

That's weird, I wrote this exact equation on my palm for reference data.

 

I apologize for leading the thread off subject, and for stimulating Ruben

[/posting off subject]

 

i have the same question i have a indian that i think is a 1877
you can make out the 187 but that last digit ?? looks like a 7 i think ? so would ngc grade this ???

 

Please show a reverse shot.

 

I don't think its close at all. Top pic does resemble a 7, but the last 2 kind of looks like the top of a 6. If you look at an 1877 pic you can see the 77's are always perfectly in line, while the 1 and 8 kind of lean to the left and drop down from the 77. This is just my opinion from what I have observed...

 

I don't see a second "7" in the images, but it would be necessary to see the entire obverse and reverse before determining if it will grade and/or what that grade will be.

Chris

 

That's a KEY factor in this discussion; thanks, Johnny. (Emphasis mine)

Yes, sometimes a coin can be ID'd by factors other than visible date. Perhaps there are other unique die characteristics, such as file marks or other attribution markers.

Same is true of mint mark. A classic example is the 1911-D $2.5 Weak "D". Though the "D" may be invisible, the Denver issue of 1911 $2.5s can be uniquely ID'd by die diagnostics.

Which leads us to the issue of desirability.

If the date / MM is invisible, is it wise to pay a premium ? For me, the answer is no. I simply can't enjoy the coin. But that's just me. Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.

 

Of course you did ! Everybody does. Can't understand coins without it.

 

Good information, I was just about to ask if the 1877 had unique die markers that can be used for identification without a date (like a 1916 SLQ). Thanks!

 

that is what I'm saying

 

In fact one of the unique features of an 1877 IHC is that the center of the reverse is very weak with notable lack of detail in the Ns in ONE and CENT but this is not enough to authenticate an 1877 IHC. The person I was talking to about this coin was certain it was an 1877 largely due to the weak reverse, but I cautioned him that it wasn't enough to authenticate this particular coin and that it could be an altered date. That said, this particular coin is worn beyond date recognition and therefore ungradeable and uncertifiable.

From what I can tell there are not that many US coins that can be verified without a date. The 1916 SLQ is more of an anomaly in this regard than anything else.

 

Large Cents are not typical. They can often be identified by markers even when the date is not visible like the 1916 dateless Standing Liberty Quarter or the 1913 dateless Buffalo. Now I don't know if there are any markers which could identify a 1877 in that condition, but if there are, they would know. A key date could probably get slabbed if they are confident it is authentic and identifiable.

 

both the 1916 SLQ and the 1913 type 1 Buffalo nickel are one year types. That's why they are identifiable by markers and don't need a date for authentication. 1877 IHCs on the other hand are smack in the middle of a series and many of the characteristics of 1877s are shared with some 1878s and some 1876s so there's no way to tell on those.

 

But you would need a mintmark that isn't worn off (or have the mintmark area unworn enough to determine there wasn't a mintmark) in order for a dateless 1913 type 1 Buffalo Nickel to be certified.

 

good point, but with the 1913 Type 1 Buffalo the very first thing to wear off of the coin is the date. A dateless Buffalo Nickel can have an incredible amount of other detail still intact as can be evidenced by the acid dated nickels we see.

I understand that your point was more in reference to a coin that is worn nearly smooth, but I also wanted to point out that a 1913 Buffalo nickel will be dateless long before it reaches that point.

 

I am still fairly new to collecting, but two of my favorites coin series have one year that can be identified on a dateless coin... as long as the mint marks are still visible. The 1851-o 3 cent silver, and the 1912-d and 1912-s Liberty nickel. I would agree with some of the others though... a dateless coin really would not satisfy me.

I am glad I found cointalk.com!! The discussions on here are wonderful. )

 

True.

True. But here's something important to consider... often, the die characteristics unique to a given coin require a TPG to drag out the attribution books and do a LOT more work. Normally, PCGS charges $24 dollars extra and adds 5 calendar days to the turnaround time for that service.

I doubt they would do that for a typical dateless coin unless the submitter checked the "attribute me" box.

Recall that TPGs grade almost all coins in 15 seconds or less. Attribution requires much more time in most instances.