Opinions on this Walker

In my quest to find a toned walker for my 20th century type set, I came across a nice one on eBay:


Silly me didn't check PCGS's cert page for a TrueView beforehand, but here it is (cert # omitted because I might want to do a GTG):



What I got, I think, is somewhere in between, but much closer to the PCGS picture.

I bought based on the eBay photo and the assurances of the seller that it looked like the coin. I thought the label looked a little washed out in the auction pictures, so I suspected the photo was somehow juiced. And, honestly, the eBay pic looks almost like a gold coin, so that should have tipped me off to begin with.

My dilemma is this: I agree with the grade, and the price wasn't too bad given the rarity of toned walkers (very close to PCGS price guide on this one). But, I'm still on the fence as to whether I really want to keep the coin or not. Inside, under normal light, it looks good, but not outstanding; under sunlight or a grading lamp, it looks better, but still not quite what the eBay pic seemed to promise.

Also, the obverse seems to have some weird luster. It's hard to describe, but it looks like a halo around the portrait where it doesn't seem to cartwheel like I expect.

Thoughts, anyone? I am also taking this coin to a show this weekend to get an in person opinion from a couple dealers I trust. The seller is more than willing to work with me on a return (he stated as much in messages before I bought the coin), so I might do that. And what about the weird luster? Is that a Walker thing?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If you don't like it and the seller accepts returns, send 'er back. Not sure I understand your hesitation?

 

I buy the majority of my toners at shows. I would try to find a nicer one at the show you are going to. Not sure how big this show is, but id say the odds are good. Then simply return this one or try n flip or trade it

 

Sounds like you have some reservations about this coin, as you should, it not really looking like the color as posted on the bid site. In the long run, you will question your decision about keeping it and if you have doubts, return it, while you can and don't look back.

 

This is most likely what I will do. The show I'm going to is kind of small, so it's unlikely I'll find a nicer toner there, but, after Saturday, I'll definitely be at peace with whatever I decide.

 

Anybody have any comments about the weird luster? You can see hints of it in both photos, as a roughly oval-shaped halo around the portrait on the obverse.

 

I would personally prefer to buy such a coin where I can directly examine it in person, unless I have plenty of $$$ to spend.

 

I am with others in that if you do not like it send it back. Its the seller's responsibility to provide pictures how the can looks like in hand. If they juiced the pics to get higher bids, all you are doing by keeping it is rewarding questionable sales practices.

 

its a nice coin hope you not paying much

 

It's hard to tell from the photos, but I think I know what your talking about. I have seen a couple of coins in the past that had a oval type halo and thought it sure looked a little weird. I have no idea what caused this, maybe the die was polished and maybe that area is a little higher or lower than the rest of the field. Just guessing.

I played around with the above photos in Photoshop and I could make the gold Walker look like the PCGS photo (remove the color) and in reverse I could make the PCGS photo look like the first photo in that it looked like it was gold.

 

When I look at the PCGS picture, "toned" doesn't jump out at me. I think it's a great coin, but if you're looking for toning other than the normal dark periphery stuff I'd send 'er back and try again.

 

I agree here, except for me, I buy all my coins in person (unless new moderns) just because the slightest camera flash the wrong way or the slightest change in light and doubt can arise quickly.

I fail to see the hesitation myself, either way, a beautiful coin.

 

I buy almost all my coins in person, or from online dealers I trust. This one was an exception. I've gotten lucky with exceptions before, for instance with this Booker T Washington half, which is every bit as beautiful as the picture:



Edit: Of course, it was also listed with the PCGS TrueView as the auction photo.

 

In hand, it's definitely toned, and not unattractively so. I've purchased Franklins sight seen with similar toning. I don't think this toning is worth any premium though, and the coin doesn't really strike me as a super high end for the grade (just accurately graded by PCGS).

 

Yes! I think you're seeing exactly what I see. The weird part is that the luster cartwheels differently over that oval-shaped area than the rest of the coin. I'm at a loss as to what causes that.

Yep. I should have checked the cert page. I just saw the eBay image and was reminded of this:



Photo courtesy of @WingedLiberty at http://colorofmoneycollection.com/Images/1944_WalkingLiberty.jpg .

 

Or that, if they show proof from like PCGS, then were alright.

 

I wouldn't have bid on the coin shown by the seller. Solid yellow toning on silver doesn't look natural, and probably never is. I'll invoke Hanlon's law to explain the seller's picture. If the coin looks like it does in the PCGS picture, I like it much better. Looks like it has "original skin," which is muting the luster. Would prefer to see in hand, though.

The shape of cartwheels is influenced by the design on the opposing die opposite the fields. This is easily seen on uncirculated Barber quarters and halves, where you can make out the eagle's wing in front of Liberty's neck. The oval shaped area appears to correspond with a rough outline of the eagle.

 

If you paid close to PCGS guide, IMHO, you paid too much. I use the price guide x .75 or .80% as a rule of thumb...if this coin is an MS63 that would put you around $60 to 65.00

 

Several comments:

1. Looking at the seller's pictures, it is clear that he is using a very yellow light, or has a significant problem with his white balance. You should not expect that "golden color" on the coin in hand. When interpreting pictures, look for as many contextual clues as you can: the yellowish glint on the surrounding plastic and the washed out reverse label should indicate that the coin in hand will look very different from what the pictures appear to show.

2. I'm guessing the PCGS TruView is much closer to how it actually looks. The coin is not a "toner." It has some original skin, which gives it a neutral eye appeal. It is not terribly attractive, but it isn't ugly either.

3. The luster, as has been mentioned, is going to be muted by this skin. That's perfectly acceptable. The shape of the cartwheel is going to depend on the design of the coin.

4. I'd grade it 65, with a shot at 66, based on the PCGS pics.

5. If you don't like it, return it. If you have any hesitations about it, return it. If you aren't in love with it, return it. High grade Walkers are *extremely* common coins, especially if you only need it for type. If you are building a type set and "settle" for this coin, will you ever be happy with it? There is absolutely no reason to keep this coin unless you are crazy about it. It doesn't sound like you are crazy about it, therefore your choice here should be obvious.

 

All correct, actually. The seller claims the lighting is due to a flash; I've tried to tell him to not use a flash and light the coin with high CRI lights, but, meh.

It's a nice coin, just not for me for the purpose I bought it. I'd have passed if I had seen the PCGS pics beforehand.