Grading Guides - the Good and Bad

Yes, I know. When you select an issue you wish to collect you should do some indepth studying before you put serious money into the coins.
But as a type set collector that is not an option for me.
So along with other things I depend upon grading guides.

I just received my copy of Grading Coins by Photographs by Q. David Bowers.
After a quick look I see several disappointments:

1. The images are too small (that was someone else's opinion also).
I guess the intend was to show the coin as you would see it in-hand with just your eyes.
I would have preferred something at about 3x magnification.

2. The images aren't particularly sharp.
I see that a a combination of the small size and the printing method (half tone screens I believe its called).

3. The verbal descriptions are no better than the ANA guide.

~~~~~~~~~~

I'd rate the Bowers book at best third behind these:

#1 - Making the Grade from Coin Values
Good - Images at about 1½-2x
Bad - Book covers only 25 of the most popular issues.

#2 - ANA Grading Guide
1-1½x images
As close to the "standard" as currently exists.

No opinion on Photograde since my copy is from the mid-70's (I hope they've improved it since then).

I always considered Brown & Dunn as only marginally useful.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree that the grading guides could and should be more useful. I use the ANA guide, but there are instances where they use the same coin for two different grades while other times they use coins of the wrong subtype as examples of grade and they also pair the incorrect obverse and reverse together for some coins.

 

Well the pictures do help when they use arrows to highlight some of the high spots on the coins. Other than that you just can't use the pictures without reading the descriptions. I tend to use both books - ANA Grading and the Photograde book.

 

The only value pictures serve, IMHO, are to give the collector a specimen to use for authenticity of the coin collected and nothing more.

If coin grading were to rely soley on pictures, instead of in hand examination, then anyone could do it. Written descriptions and in hand examination are the only, and best tools for grading coins, pictures are for showing what you have.

 

My go-to grading book is the "PCGS Guide to Grading and Counterfeit Detection." If I'm waffling, I go to the ANA book, but I find this book to be just a hint too liberal on the grading for me. It's still a decent book.

I haven't seen the "Grading Coins by Photographs" book, but it doesn't sound like something that would be useful to me.

 

I like the ANA guide. I agree with Doug on the pics. The only time I use a visual is when it's explaining where to look for certain details on coins I'm not entirely familiar with.
Guy~

 

I grew up using Photograde (literally, my Grandpa gave me a copy for my 8th birthday and I've used it ever since). I do like the new photograde application on the PCGS website, although I wish there were text descriptions to accompany it.

 

I think it is an option for you, and I think it is a mistake to not do so.

More to the point, I know that many of the type set "mistakes" I've made over the years were a direct result of my lack of knowledge. For instance, I've been a copper collector for a long time and as a result I feel very comfortable grading and purchasing these coins. However, I'm nowhere near as experienced with gold, and as a result many of my "mistakes" were in gold type coins. Had I studied harder before I purchased them, surely I would have made less mistakes.

As for the topic of the thread, grading guides. Personally, I find them fairly useless. I'm a visual learner, not a verbal one -- I need to see it to understand it. I learned to grade not from any guide, but rather from looking, simply looking, at lots of coins. Had I chosen to learn from books, the "picture" type guides work well for me, and the written ones not so much -- but they all pale in comparison to the education I got from staring at graded coins....lots and lots and lots of coins, and I truly believe there is no substitute for this. You can't learn to grade from ANY book, IMO. It's only first-hand experience that can truly teach one how to grade.

But what's best for me might not be best for you, so I think we all have to find our own balance on how to best learn to grade (and value) coins....Mike

 

p.s. say what you want about their standards, but the online PCGS grading guide is hands down the best photographic grading resource I've ever seen -- and the Heritage archives as a close second. Neither of them compare, even remotely, to viewing lots of graded coins in-hand.

 

Maybe you do, bookworm.

For me the guides go in one ear out the other. I bought them, read them, and put them away. I never refer to them, and never have. It's all in this little pea brain -- rightly or wrongly. I'm just a visual learner...

I could not agree more.

 

Please say more, for the benefit of noobs like me.

Are the photos in the books bad photos, or is it just impossible to illustrate what the grading terminology means without a coin in hand?

 

I like the ANA guide although I also have the PCGS book. Photos IMO are useful for learning about strike but fairly worthless for 3-dimensional factors like luster and eye appeal. Best thing is go to shows and look at coins. Raw coins, holdered coins. Agree with grades, disagree with grades, learn from those more knowledgeable than yourself, have some fun along the way.

The best thing about this hobby is the ability to learn new things all the time. Even old-timers, if they stay open-minded, can learn and learn new things every day. But books are the starting point, or have been for me.:thumb:

 

By liberal, I mean that, for any given grade, their standards are more-likely-than-not to be below my standards.

For instance, in "The Official American Numismatic Association Grading Standards for United States Coins", spiral bound, edition 6, take a look at the Indian cents on page 92. Their F-12 would only be my VG-8 or VG-10.

On page 116, their VF-20 buffalo would be my F-12, and their EF my VF.

Perhaps these are the "new" grading standards, but they're not mine, and they're certainly not consistent with the buying or selling standards of the majority of dealers I know.

 

I am glad you brought that point up. I have always thought that photos do a great job at helping people understand both surface preservation, wear patterns, and strike. Photos of these elements in combination with written text can be very educational. However, they are abysmal at showing luster which really affects eye appeal. In addition, the written text is often just as abysmal in these areas.

For example, how many newbies can view photos and read descriptions of frosty and satin luster and actually understand the difference. Understanding the different types of luster becomes much easier when viewing actual coins. I don't know one collector who can understand the characteristics of artificial toning based on grading guides. They throw terms out like "crayon colors" and "floats on the surface" which leaves the uneducated reader at a complete loss. It is only after viewing hundreds of both naturally and artificially toned coins that these terms begin to have any meaning. This Roosevelt Dime is a perfect example of what I am talking about.



From the photo, it is hard to understand how the color "floats on the surface" of the coin. In hand, the described effect becomes very obvious. Many advanced collectors can't even describe artificial toning other than to say the coin doesn't look right. It is something that is very hard to put into words or photos.

In the end, I believe that understanding grading requires all of the above. Books are a great starting point, photos help many collectors understand the written text much better, but there really is no substitute for hands on experience. In that regard, coin grading is really no different than any other discipline of life. The formal education is nice but is rather meaningless without experience.

 

Well, it's actually funny that you say it was just these two series whose grading standards were changed. I recall getting this book a few years ago, flipping it open to the Indian head cent section, and saying to myself that standards were really slipping.

When challenged last night, I went back to that same section. I then decided to get some reinforcement. I looked at flying eagle cents, and they looked borderline. I then randomly flipped to the buffalo nickels, and found another grading standard inconsistent with my own, which I posted.

I'll admit, I haven't been through the entire book. I now have some motivation to do so. I just find it strange that I just happened to select the two series they changed. I did judge the whole book based on those, and that's why I haven't really used it much all these years.

Go figure.