Light strike or Wear?

[ozjohn 552]

I've  had this coin for a while and find it hard to form an opinion on its grading. The picture was taken using a macro lens in ambient light. I have to say the coin in hand looks much better with the king's eyebrow fully defined which is one of the first points of wear. The reverse looks to be of a high grade. Comments please.

Edited April 27, 2019 by ozjohn
More info

[Peter 615]

Nice H/C 

I think you have to look at the reverse for wear indicators.(Lions and beads below the crown) and from the image look nicely struck. Poor old Georges head always gets the bag marks. Maybe a dip in some acetone would enhance? MS grade but enjoy raw. 

[1949threepence 3,366]

I'd say GVF/EF - from the picture. As you say, may look different in hand. 

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Not knowing anything about them but looking at auction pictures are they all just low relief to the OBV ,ones described as UNC or A/UNC dont look any worse than the one above.

[Sword 1,330]

It's often not easy to tell if the loss of details is due to weak strike or wear. I would hold it against the light and see if there is loss of lustre or discolouration on the high points. If so, there is probably wear.

[VickySilver 775]

Looks to be a bit of friction on high points on obverse, but over a mushy strike although some nice looking underlying lustre, particularly on reverse that almost makes it look to be of better metal than 0.500. I'd put it in AU55 category.

[ozjohn 552]

It seems this coin has generated the same uncertainty on this forum as it has with me with grades from gVF to MS. Thanks for your comments much appreciated.

When I looked at the coin the other day under a LED ceiling light the kings effigy appeared almost fully defined hair, beard eyebrow etc which does not agree with the photo.

I'll try photographing again at an angle to see if it picks up these details and post the result.

[ozjohn 552]

After rephotographing the coin I think the actual wear on the obverse is very small apart from the scratches and given the quality of the reverse I think high AU/low MS is probably the correct grade however due the the strike quality the photo of the obverse the coin is not a thing of beauty although it does look a lot better in hand. The right hand photo was taken at a small angle and does not enhance the effigy to any great degree. 

One thing I did notice is the middle bar in the E of REX which looks like the forked tongue of a snake and quite different to the E in George and DEI.

[jelida 1,196]

These weak strikes and worn dies are often an issue for my pennies too. In terms of actual circulation,  I feel the amount of real wear is likely to be indicated by the better side, in that the general effects of circulation (“shove ha’penny” and local damage aside) should be symmetrical. I would agree that in terms of wear the reverse of your coin is AU to MS. Logically in terms of wear the obverse will be similar. Of course the sharpness of the strike is always a factor in the overall desirability of a coin.

Jerry

[ozjohn 552]

Quite right. A high grade coin does not always equate to a desirable coin.

[VickySilver 775]

I agree with Jelida mostly, but will note that the obverses of many including the OP coin do suffer from strike and at least to me seem to have more issues with marks and wear. I really like well struck and toned or marvelously lustred silver from the era 1920-1926 (why I jumped on those "duck tailed" specimens when Rasmussen had them a couple of years ago. I think I got someone to post my specimen 1924 from a couple of years ago, but may send it out if you are interested. PM me.