Need advice with an 1880-O Morgan

I am new to the forum, but have been reading threads for a month now. I started collecting coins January 1st of this year as a new hobby to explore. Even my wife has gotten in on it, and we have purchased several books, plus read pages and pages online. Her and I both guess coin grades, then come to an agreement, and this has made purchases fun for the both of us.

I have hit a point where I have a coin I don't know if I should send out to be graded or not. I recently sent 10 coins to ICG for grading, and half came back cleaned. I am trying to avoid that with this one. I am also new to coin photography (and find it as much fun as coin collecting), so please feel free to be critical of my photos. I enjoy learning, and have a long road to go.

So, here are some photos of the coin in question. I tried some different lighting to try to highlight flaws...







Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Welcome to the neighborhood!

I don't see any luster on the coin from your photos. For me, this would indicate that the coin has been harshly cleaned. Maybe it is due to the way you have illuminated the subject. I don't know. So, why don't you start by describing your lighting set-up.

Since you are becoming interested in the photography aspect of numismatics, you might want to purchase the book, "Numismatic Photography" by Mark Goodman.

Chris

 

Thank you for the response.

Here are some photos of my setup. I took LED strip lights and soldered them together into a square panel. I then took apart an LCD monitor and cut up the holographic panel layers to diffuse the light as much as I could. I have a hole in the middle I shoot through with my phone camera. I also have a variable power supply so I can adjust the light level.

 

Do these photos help?

 

Today's photos help. I think the coin would probably grade AU58. Nothing jumps out as being indicative of a no-grade coin. My biggest concern is the scuff on the obverse by pellet sinister (left dot).

Regarding the photos, your first set have very flat light, and as indicated by a few people, make it impossible to see the luster or read the surfaces. Your most recent ones are a little too far in the opposite direction. The lights are too "hard" to light the coin evenly, but do show that it's lustrous. They are also too low, which gives you really bright edges and dark fields, cheek, wings, etc. Raise them up a little and maybe diffuse the light a little or move them closer to the coin. With LEDs, you can use a white tissue over the bulb to do this. With halogen lights, do not use a white tissue, or it will catch fire and your white balance will be off from the flames, not to mention other undesirable side effects from having things catch fire that aren't meant to.

 

Thank you very much for the feedback. So far I have avoided any flames!

Am I heading in the right or wrong direction with these?

 

I'm seeing what I think is a finger print on the obverse at four o'clock. If so, an acetone dip might help, but let's see what others think.

 

Because I cannot get a ton of detail into a single photo with my phone, here are some close ups in case there are other problem areas...

 

Yes. Much easier to see that this is an AU58 coin.

 

What makes it grade so low? The quantity of scratches?
I bought 4 graded Morgans, NGC 61, NGC 63, PCGS 63, and NGC 65 to use as comparisons in an attempt to learn to grade.
This coin looks better than the 63s and 61 (less nicks, scuffs, and scratches), but has a few more scuffs than the 65. The 65 has more nicks with depth than this coin has. At AU58 it would not really be worth grading, which might very well be the case. I would hate to spend $50 to get it graded if it is only worth $50.
Either way, I appreciate the honesty even if it is depressing...

 

It has light wear on it. The coin is NOT an uncirculated coin. Morgans show wear in high points of the devices very obviously. This coin has some signs of wear in the typical places—cap, hair, and eagle’s feathers. In my opinion, I think 58 is optimistic—I would go AU 55. Grading Morgans has nothing to do with how many bag marks it has—more relevant in this case is that the coin shows evidence of circulation, and luster breaks. Even if it were MS ( it isn’t), given the fact that it is a common date makes grading not worth it. The Morgans you see, the more familiar you get with tell-tale signs of light circulation.

 

Thank you for the honesty, it will be a rough weekend for me. I have to come to grips with the stack of Morgans I have sitting here which look worse than this one, and the quantity of money I have into them.

 

Based on that second picture in the OP, I think the coin has seen a light cleaning. I don't believe you'd see a straight grade.

 

Money is relative. We have all had a financial education when starting out in this great hobby. I read your first post. Seems to me you have a fine start. The one thing you should keep in mind with Morgans: If the coin has not been graded by one of the big three, there's probably a reason for it. Meaning if it's raw, there is probably an issue with it.

There are definitely exceptions to that rule of thumb, but if a dealer sees a "raw" Morgan that he thinks will straight grade, more than likely he'll send it in to be graded because he will be able to liquidate it easier.

Keep that thought in mind everytime you see a raw Morgan. You should scrutinize those coins before buying.

Just my 2 cents.

 

If you are concerned about value, and don’t know the Morgan series that well (kinda obvious), stick with certified coins only, until you know the series better.

 

This is another coin I have. I put some arrows on key places I have been looking for wearing. Am I looking in the right spots? The hair looked worn to me on this one just above the ear. Also the feet on the eagle looked worn. I have other coins with much more detail in the fine lines of the foot segments. The leaves in the hair have a flat area around their perimeter. Some of the inner feathers have flat spots on their highest points.

 

I find photos with partial images of a small sector of the coin valueless. Good, clear pictures of the entire coin are far more valuable. I don’t evaluate or grade a coin based on a tiny shot of the hair, or an ultra closeup of eagle’s feathers. One needs to see the entire coin, and be able to spot high point wear, while looking at the whole coin.

 

These photos are likely of little use, as I have not figured out a good way to get rid of light reflections from slabbed coins yet...

 

Your images in post #6 tell me it's a slider. There's enough rub on the high points plus the fields to warrant an AU58. There are a gagillion 1880-O sliders out there and the tpg's know it....

Oh, and welcome to CT..

 

Thank you very much for this! Your post has been the single most helpful tidbit of information in the past month I have been playing around with coins. I have been under the impression that the grading scale was an absolute. If a coin looks a certain way, it would fall on the scale somewhere. A coin with less wear would go up the scale, and one with more would go down.

Well if I am understanding this correctly now, the scale acts kind of like the old chutes and ladders game. Bag marks are not a big deal between MS60 and MS65, with decreasing amounts tolerated. Any post mint damage automatically drops you down a "chute" to AU58. By definition, this damage would not allow you to go any higher on the scale. This would also explain why my graded coins don't look all that great, but still grade MS, they have bag marks, not post mint damage.

No matter how nice I think my coin in this thread is, it cannot be any higher than an AU58 by definition. Does it sound like I am getting it now? I feel like an idiot I did not pick up on this, but I don't recall reading it in any of the books I have or what I have been reading online.