Enough arguing! A Different Look at Grading

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

No, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it, Doug, and you also read the tone in my reply correctly. 6stepstucky originally posted about registry sets that the TPGs did it in some way for the collectors. I wanted to disspell that myth and point out that they did it with nothing other than profit in mind. Profit being the primary aim of a business, that is what one should expect from them.

 

Profits for TPG is not a problem at all.

Ruben

 

for the love of god lets find a way to make profits ourselves

 

Think about this, a computer is only as good as its software program. Software has brought computer use to a whole new level. It's the programming that makes the computer useful. I believe the programming my computer has now is better than the programming NASA used to put a man on the moon. And grading coins requires a set parameter for each numerical grade for an analysis. Make a program with the necessary requirements and the computer will be more effective and consistent than man. This can only be done on modern coins since there is a consistency in the dies and machinery used to produce the coins.

 

I should also have mentioned that this system is still under consideration while the necessary data is being gathered to make a conclusive decision.

 

it can be done on all coins in theory it just requires even more complex programing. the only thing is its still a few years away

 

For this to be done you will have to disregard all the coins that have a PL, DMPL, full split bands, or full head designation, and alike because I believe a software program will only recognize the strike and not the luster of a coin. And in older coins strike was an issue. If there is the technology to develop a software that can determine the luster of a coin, if a coins tone is NT or AT then I believe coin recognition will be possible for all coins.

 

dont bet any money on what i am saying but you will be able to FS FH and all of thaat stuff very accurately. the readout will be done through lasers PL and DMPL can be done too but it is will be slightly more tricky

 

like manned space travel, spock??? j/k

 

The technology is advancing faster than one might imagine. Face recognition software is a good example of this, but not an example of what it does for coins.

What does work better for coins are things like detecting the angles at which light refracts off of a surface and the help that it would give determining things like weak strike vs. slight wear. The things that are either too minute for the human eye to detect or too similar to discern are perfect for the computer and in these areas is where I see computers becoming most involved.

I am not advocating a complete switch and displacing the human element, what I think would benefit collectors is to use technology to help us determine what we can about the state of preservation, depth of strike, and so on.

Introducing newer technologies to help us become better at what we do is what man has done since the dawn of time. Computers may hold the best improvements in grading since the loupe. As with most change, many will be resistant, but in time they will see the benefits and try to adapt the technologies instead of trying to deny their usefulness.

 

I totally agree with you here Mike. These paragraphs sum up exactly what I was thinking when I first read this. Like I mentioned before, the human element is also very important. I think that both working together can make for an effective team; especially when dealing with 5-6 figure coins. I know there are lots of experts out there, but even they make mistakes. If I'm going to pay 20 grand for a coin(and no, I'm not that rich. but some are.), and had the option of a proven effective computer analization of the metalic composition to the microscopic level IN ADDITION to several experts examining the coin before giving the coin it's grade/problem status; I would feel more comfortable spending that kind of money. This could give me an integrated solution that was more representative of the product, and also help bring more consistency.

Here's an example related to my job as an avionics engineer. For years in avionics the Inertial Navigation System was relied upon as the primary navigation source(in addition to Radio Nav when it was available). The INS worked well, but it tends to drift after a certain amount of flight time and loses accuracy. More recently, GPS has been introduced into the equation. Now the GPS is extremely accurate, but works even better when integrated with the INS. It also has the ability to "realign" the INS when it begins to drift. Both of them used together produces a nav solution that is better than either one was separate. If "humans" are the INS, and "computers" are the GPS in my analogy. I could see this possibly working someday. You guys might think I have a weird metaphor, but it works for me... Anyways, don't let go of your dream Mike!!!

John

 

I must need to get a life because I read through every post here. After doing that I feel that I have earned the right to make these comments:

1. Coin grading is subjective, always has been and always will be. Not sure that is entirely a bad thing, doesn't it make it more fun and enjoyable.

2. I'm not sure I would like for this hobby to go in the direction of a computer telling us all what grade a coin is. I am certainly not knocking computers, but I don't want to have sex with one and I don't want one grading my coins.

3. But lets suppose it did go to computers and now we have computers grading our coins. All the TPG companies have it, but each uses a different software. Wouldn't we end up right back where we started with people thinking one company has a more accurate software than another? Joe's home tax prep software is better than Dave's, and on and on.

4. A TPG has a software they are using, but it changes to a newer version or changes to another company's software completely. Does that mean all the coins graded previously by their old software may not be accurate? What do you do now, send all of your coins back in to be regraded?

5. I truly admire the knowledge many of you have here, and I know I will never reach the level many of you are at. But that is okay, this is a hobby, I do this for pleasure and enjoyment as I think most people do. To use a comparison most coin collectors are into being a participant in dirt track racing, not NASCAR or Indy cars.

6. I just had a horrible thought. I'm going to the show in Orlando today. I get there and there are only vending machines with various types of slabbed coins. Such as some machines with Peace Dollars, some with IHCs, and so on. They are all slabbed and I see one in a grade and price I can afford. I put my money in the vending machine, get my coin, and drive back home. Gosh! That was so much fun.

 

Well, I still say that what it boils down to is this:

It depends on whether or not you view coins as products of a production facility or as artifacts from that facility. The typical collector viewpoint is as artifacts of that facility. The pertinent questions are things like : Did they strike coins well a particular year as a whole or not? Are most examples from that date and mint sharp or are they mushy? Did they have to use more or less pressure to strike them in 18XX?

Let me state again for the record that this is the current state of the hobby and how it views coins.

My point of view was more as a product evaluation and it is a totally different mindset. So different that maybe it would be best to find another evaluation term to describe it OTHER than grading. Maybe a term that would go hand-in-hand with grading as sometimes I think that in terms of evaluation of coins, more info is usually better, but a lot of times it can become cumbersome to suggest this be added to the current grading process or the info given when a coin is properly graded.

The end result of MY evaluation is that you could have a nicely displayed set of say, Jefferson Nickels and they would all pretty much look the same. An evaluation that can be spread across entire series of coins making a more uniform display for the collector.

Honestly, that's who I have been thinking of this whole time, the average Joe collector. Not the Barber Dime expert, but more mainstream casual colectors that might display coins. Displays that might spark new collectors, and who knows... some of them could become more serious collectors if they want.

 

A possible problem I see with the above system is the utilization of the best known example. Once a better known example is discovered all coins graded previously are at that point inherently over-graded.