A trio of Roanoke commemorative half dollars, one is a 63, one is a 64 and one is a 65....Can you guess which is which? All are graded by PCGS. I'd love to get a discussion going on what makes a grade!
All I know is you're the best! I've had dealings with HJB, long ago, so it's not like I don't know what in the hell I'm talking about. As far as those grades, I agree with Randy.
I disagree #1 63 #2 64 #3 65 No.1 has a lot of chatter Reverse No.2 has discoloration and Little chatter obverse No.3 is a weak 65
Line them up as the same price I think I might like the first a little more, but in my eyes I would choose 3, then 2, then 1. I think 1 might be the overall cleanest but personally dislike the little thing in front of his nose and the ding on the dress on the reverse. OTOH, US collecting kind of lost me with slabbing micro grades for BU coins, which is why I moved on over to ancients, so what do I know.
3-1-2..........quite frankly (on a given, day where the grader had pastrami for lunch) any one of those coins could top out at '65. With the given photogs, #3 might even have a shot at '66. Old eyes opinion, of course (coarse?)
My question to the OP is: Do you consider that a TPG/4PG should grade and encapsulate from a photo? If yes, I have nothing more to ask. If no, then what is the purpose of asking a person to grade from photo?
I personally never grade from a photo. The coin has to be in hand. But as a thought experiment? Why not? People buy raw coins and slabbed coins from nothing more than pictures all the time. Why not have a discussion on the difference between grades?
I am having a discussion. The point: the photos posted are not of a quality to begin to define details that would categorically be definitive between a 64 and 65. Maybe a 63-65. Maybe. The lighting is misleading, as to the quality of luster, and the grading and opinions would be different if market graded vs. technical graded, so which should be the basis of the discussion...market or technical? Thought experiments are enjoyable. I am all for such brain exercises. But, considering your field of endeavor, should there not be some basis to establish the discussion points, other than here are some pictures, what do you think?
sometimes, we learn when we stretch our minds to accept something that at first seems odd on the face but truthfully, we have been having discussions on this site about grading from photos for nearly 20 years... why does this idea offend you so, @charley ?
Why do you assume it offends me? It doesn't. Does asking questions translate as being offended? It is not an idea, it is fact that persons choose to grade from photos. The thread is titled "What's in a grade?". The OP then asks for a discussion on what makes a grade. What are the parameters and/or basis of the discussion? Why does one person list 1,2,3 and another person list 3,2,1? Is that not the discussion to be had....why? Truth in editing" added an 'i' before 's'.
I agree with your grades but in my opinion #2 has the best eye appeal of the bunch. I am sure someone will say that I am wrong though :-D
1...63 2...64 3...65 The first has a bit of chatter as noted by others. The last one just looks solidly gem.
I think I'm seeing image resizing artifacts (looks like a grid) that make it tricky to read fine details in the surface. Nevertheless, it looks like #3 has the most disruption on Raleigh's portrait. The scuff on the forehead comes through the most. I'll call that one the 63. It's harder to pick between the others. If I'm counting tick marks, #2 has one on the hat, #1 looks like it has one in the field by his nose and one half way down Mama Dare's dress. The strike looks marginally better on #2 and it also has really good luster along with an original look. I'll say it's the 65. #1 almost has a PL look to the reverse. All look like they're worth a look in hand.
First I'll say "there are no wrong answers" , because it's a learning exercise and as noted above static images don't tell much about luster which is one of the key aspects in grading MS coins. So if I don't "get it right" I don't care as my opinion could be totally different with coins in hand. Trying to grade from photos is always an exercise in making a decision with incomplete information. That being said I'll take a stab: #3: I think is the 65, has a nice strike and seems to have the best luster of the three. #2: 63? luster seems more muted, obv marks, toning doesn't look so attractive. #1: 64? significant contact marks on both sides, decent luster, neutral tone. Thanks RussHJB for setting up this little exercise.
AFAIK, 65 and above gets picky and I think luster does play a part. My deliberate quick look led me to believe the third was the best looking #1 the second and the middle in last place. Grading from photos is a little bit better than grading from a description (even one @Insider might come up with ).