What You Need To Know About: Eye Appeal By Jason Poe Of all the aspects of grading, eye appeal is the hardest to define. That is why the 5th in my series on the aspects of grading is sure to be one of the more controversial. It is by far the most subjective, and each person’s opinion is equally valid. Strike can easily be quantified, marks can be counted, and wear can be measured. Luster, while more subjective than these, can at least be categorized. Eye appeal, however, is basically determined by how much a person likes a certain look – I like Rembrandt, you prefer Van Gogh (or heaven forbid, some modern “art”). You may think Dali is the coolest thing since Sputnik, I disagree. Neither of us is wrong – and the same goes for coins. A discussion of eye appeal is thus going to draw far more controversy than a discussion about strike or wear. Very little that I can say about eye appeal is going to be new or groundbreaking, so I am simply going to try and present various points and open the floor for discussion. Most discussions of eye appeal need to be divided into two categories, uncirculated and circulated coinage. On uncirculated coinage, there are two camps: white is right, and toning is cool. The White camp prefers their coins bright, looking like they did when they came from the mint. Even on centuries old coins, this camp likes the coin to be lustrous and clean. There is nothing wrong with this – but one must be aware of the drawbacks: bright white old coins have often been dipped, cleaned, or treated to restore them to their white state. Dipped coins will have less luster, and can be reduced in grade. They may also appear stripped and naked (a description that is hard to explain, without seeing the coin in person). An original white coin will have a patina, a natural skin on the metal, which can be quite eye appealing. (An eye appealing white coin – notice the strong luster covering the coin, as well as the strong strike). The other side of this debate is the Toning crowd: they like their coins with attractive, colored toning. These coins can often be quite spectacular, showing various shades of the rainbow in complex patterns. But toning can often be quite ugly – the vast majority of coins don’t acquire smooth rainbows. Instead, they are brown, spotty, dull, or otherwise unattractive. These coins have negative eye appeal – and will likewise receive a deduction in grade. The difficulty is that while most of the numismatic populace doesn’t like this sort of look, there are definitely some people who appreciate the originality of the coin. They would rather have an ugly, darkly toned, or spotted coin that is original than a white coin which has been dipped. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that! For more information on toning, what causes it, and what it looks like, see my article here: What You Need To Know About: The Science of Toning (An eye appealing rainbow toned coin, which earned NGC’s star designation) Other aspects of a coin which play into eye appeal can include die polish lines, cameo effect (for proof coins), water spotting, prooflike or semi-prooflike reflectivity, or various other characteristics. Many people don’t like die polish lines (even though they are mint made), and will subtract grade for them. A very strong cameo may add to the grade. Prooflike coins are often incredibly eye appealing (in my opinion!), but they show marks more clearly, so it’s a tradeoff. Water spots, depending on the severity, can often significantly detract from the eye appeal. (A proof coin, showing eye appealing strong cameo contrast) Many of the same points can be made about eye appeal when discussing circulated coins, but here the issue of originality becomes even more important. For AU coins, a certain amount of luster is expected, and toning similar to UNC coins can be present (the coins can also be white and not look too out of place). However, lower circulated coins almost certainly will begin to take on a darker look, as the dirt of circulation begins to fill in the crevices and substances the coin comes in contact with accelerate toning. A white (or even light colored) VF coin looks garish, and an experienced eye can tell it has been cleaned. The most desirable circulated coins have a smooth, even look. Eye appealing circulated coins are natural, original, dark in color, and smooth. Excessive marks detract from the eye appeal, even if they are expected after circulation. For my own personal use, I like the look which I call “gem cameo circulated” – coins with smooth, even, dark grey fields, dark highlights in crevices, and lighter high points. The 1812 Capped Bust Half dollar shown below illustrates this look perfectly. (An eye appealing circulated coin which draws extremely positive comments from a number of different people every time I show it – even though I consider many of my coins more attractive) So how can someone use eye appeal to grade a coin? This aspect is most reliant on experience. Over time, and discussion with fellow collectors, and looking at coins, a grader learns what the majority of people like – and your opinion often conforms to that of your peers. The majority of us can agree that the spotty coin is less desirable, and the coin with clean smooth surfaces is more desirable. But how much should the grade be reduced for the coin with ugly toning, and how much should it be increased for a coin with fabulous toning? Should the grade be changed at all based on eye appeal, or is the grade solely dependent on other factors like marks, strike, and luster? There is no definite answer on this topic. I personally believe that eye appeal plays into the grade – there is a measurable change on the surface of the coin, so it must factor into any technical aspects. Certain groups prefer to grade based on “surface preservation”: the presence or absence of corrosion, films, spots, or toning. Surface preservation also includes cleaning, dipping, polishing, or otherwise altering a coin’s surface. Imagine three coins with exactly the same strike, marks, and luster. Now imagine that one of them has ugly spotty toning, one of them is blast white (but original), and one of them has multicolored rainbow toning. How differently would you grade them? Most experienced numismatists would probably deduct a point (at least) for the ugly one, call the white one the middle grade, and add a point for the rainbow one. It is not unheard of for a two point bump for absolutely spectacular toning (i.e., a coin which would normally grade 64 being slabbed as a 66). Is this right? Unfortunately, only you can decide for yourself whether you agree with this or not. I would highly recommend that you all read the excellent related article by TomB: What You Need To Know: One Numismatist's Experience with the Toning Premium An important point in a discussion of eye appeal concerns NGC’s Star designation. On certain coins, NGC includes a * in the grade description. Un fortunately, this star has two different and distinct meanings. On some coins, it means the coin posseses exceptional eye appeal. On some other coins, however, it simply means that the coin just missed the next higher grade or designation (coins with some cameo contrast, but not enough to garner CAM will receive the star, for example). Coins which are reflective, but not enough to be called fully Prooflike will also receive a Star, as is shown below. The star designation is subject to some controversy, however, because not all starred coins are created equal: many ugly coins have received the star, many incredibly attractive coins have not. Most of the coins which have received the star are quite attractive, such as the almost-prooflike Walker shown below, or the gorgeously rainbow toned Morgan dollar shown above. Because of this, the Star is often subject to large price premiums. I myself am largely in favor of grade designations such as the star over wild gradeflation based on a coin’s eye appeal. A single point bump up is acceptable, more than that is excessive. (A 1943D Walker which earned NGC’s coveted *, both for exceptional eye appeal, as well as being very close to a higher designation (in this case, PL)) The best way to learn about eye appeal is to view as many coins as possible. Learn what you like, learn what other collectors like and why, and learn how the TPG’s treat eye appeal. Eye appeal is all about experience. I realize I just wrote nearly three single-spaced pages in Word without saying much, but hopefully this stirs some good conversation about eye appeal and its place in grading.
Thanks for posting this Jason -- there are a lot of good points here (and I enjoyed TomB's article as well, which I had never seen). Describing eye appeal is about as easy as picking up jello but there are certain things most of us can agree on. Also like the images, especially the Franklin.:thumb: Eye appeal varies from series to series and it is important to learn what goes into eye appeal for a specific series.
Good write up. I myself tend to fall into the white coin & the circulated cameo look. There has been some toning that I have liked but not nearly as much at the other two I mentioned. Sadly with my budget, several of my coins I had to get with some problem attached. And the funny thing is there is times when I feel like I like a problem coin moreso then a blast white or toned coin. Sometimes it gives the coin character. Dont get me wrong, some problem coins like harshly cleaned with a steel wool pad, drilled holes and huge dents suck but some with hair lines, a toned in light scratch like a half dime I have, doesnt faze me and getting it at a decent price compared to a problem free is even better.
No need to be disdainful toward modern art. I've been teaching art at the university level for over 20 years. I can draw and paint photographically (as can many of my students; it's not that big of a deal). While I love Rembrandt and all the masters throughout history, I also love and teach "modern art," which happens to cover a very wide spectrum of many styles, including photorealism, which you'd probably like. I'd be happy to discuss "modern art" with you anytime.
Thanks for the comments. And oval- that's exactly what I'm pointing out: there are many different styles of art, and everyone likes something different. Mat - certain problems with a coin can be overlooked, if you can get the coin for an affordable price. Just as long as there is still good eye appeal (like you said, toned over scratch or something like that). The alternative is, of course, a lower graded original coin, but that is a choice that every collector must make.
nice write up! :thumb::thumb: personally, i don't like toning and would not pay a premium for it. at the same time, blast white, while pretty, usually comes from dipping/cleaning. i guess that's why i like circulated coins so much. and i agree with you on the circulated cameo look... there is definently something appealing about it.
