I was wondering if I could get some feedback on how this would be graded and why. It has a really nice even glistening luster when rolled under the light. I was more interested in what defects cause lower grading. I included original and enhanced color in case one is better than the other. And BTW, which is better for this purpose? Original or enhanced color? Thank you for your input. My guess is somewhere around MS 62. No bag marks on the cheek, the eagle is clear, the fields are clear of any serious marks.
I am far from an expert on such matters and still a novice but from the pics the obverse seems to have full hairlines and there are not any apparent bag marks. The reverse clearly shows the breast feathers of the eagle and I don't see any bag marks there either. From my limited knowledge MS62 to MS63 but from the pics it is hard to tell the luster of the coin, but then agian it could be my computer. I prefer original pictures becuase some people "enhance" photos in a way that does not properly depict the item. Don't get me wrong I am not implying that you or anyone else who is a member of this forum would do such a thing but there are people who would.
To be quite honest - the pics are not quite large or clear enough. It is quite hard to accurately grade a coin based on pic as it is. But with the '79-S Morgan - little marks can mean a lot. It is not unusual to find very nice examples of the '79-S with Proof like or semi-Proof like surfaces. Because of this - when grading these coins one needs to be a little tougher than with some other dates and mints. The pics seem to indicate something at the eye, in front of the ear, on the chin where it meets the throat and on the throat itself. I should also say that the fields appear to be somewhat scuffed. Because of these what seems like marks I would not grade this coin higher than MS63. As for enhancing pics - I do not recommend it. For those with experience it is not difficult to tell when a pic has been enhanced. This sometimes leads those who view the pic to think that perhaps the person posting the pic is trying to either hide something or make the viewer think the coin is nicer than it really is. It is not necessary to enhance pics for people to see what nice coins you have. Most will make allowances for scans not showing luster - because they know it just doesn't happen. And when it comes to color - anyone who has ever tried to capture an accurate image of a toned coin knows it can be difficult at best. So just do the best you can - and let it go at that
I would say somewhere between 63 and 65. But as stated, without the coin in hand, we are only guessing.
When I mention "enhanced" I meant the auto setting my scanner uses. My scanner automatically does that on it's own. For "original" I have to click 'original color'. I just thought it might help to spot any flaws with two different settings. Enhanced does seem to tone down the shine a little and allow a more "glare free" look. Of course there is no reason for me to enhance or hide anything here, because I am trying to stimulate conversation about the grading process to help me understand it better, and learn more about what to look for. I understand and appreciate the fact that it is hard to determine grade from the scan, but the input and discussion is there and that allows me to contrast and compare it to what I was noticing and considering when attempting to determine a grade. In fact, I had not even noticed some of the things mentioned here, so to that degree, my attempt to get feedback has been a success. Thus I have learned. Plus, the coin is not currently graded, so it is not like I posted it for a "gotcha". I just wanted to get the analytical juices flowing, and learn a little more about grading my favorite coin; and that worked. Thank you for that. Please, don't stop now.
When I provide others with pictures of coins for sale I always provide adjusted images and very clearly state the camera that was used to take the shot, the resolution, and the adjustments which were performed in Adobe Photoshop. I NEVER make manual adjustments, but I will often run the automatic corrections for color, contrast, etc. in an effort to provide the best possible representation of a coin. Your goal should be to represent the coin as accurately as possible in a photograph. They key is to always state up front what has been done. In regards to grade, it is almost impossible to grade from these photos. I would however agree with GDJMSP that the coin most likely does not grade higher than MS63.
I agree with the MS-63. A few little marks here and there, but overall a very nice example. As one who sells many coins by photograph, it is quite difficult to really capture a coin. When most people think of "enhancement" they automatically think of someone who is trying to hide something. We know that you are only attempting to post different views of the coin. Altering colors and contrast can hide or bring out bag marks or scratches. Enhancing can also be done by different light sources or backgrounds. Enhancing overall is not a bad thing. It just has to be done in the correct format and under the correct conditions.
I can't tell with these pictures -- I think the brightness could hide some imperfections -- but I'd go with 63 based on what I could see.
mitchel - I wasn't trying to imply that you were trying to hide anything my friend - far from it. I was trying to answer your question about the enhanced pic and explain why it is usually better to not use them. I will agree that there are times that enhanced pics will show something that another pic will not. And in cases like that - it is best to say that the pic is enhanced for that reason only. As long as one does that - absolutely nothing wrong with it
I understand, I never took it to mean that you did. There is no voice inflection in the written\posted word, so some nuances are often missed. Thank you though.
