A question regarding PMG/PCGS Unc grading

My understanding of the IBNS standards is that Uncirculated pretty much means "paper perfect", that is, there should be no evidence of (mis)handling on the paper, including the corners. Even one counting fold should disqualify the note from being considered "Uncirculated". In my understanding, more than one corner fold disqualifies the note from even an AU.

Here is my 1935 D Series $1 that I grade as XF. As you may see, each corner has some evidence of handling, and it's these corners that I have the question about.


Now, I decided to recently take a look at the PMG and PCGS paper money grading. Since they each have 10 different "Uncirculated" levels, I wanted to see what the differences were. I noticed that, for the most part, issues with the paper itself (corner/counting folds, roundness, etc) will disqualify the note from "Uncirculated" only if it affect the actual design. As I see it, the PCGS/PMG 60-62 are pretty much equivelant to the IBNS AU? And their CU is Unc?

I just want to know if my understanding of the PMG/PCGS grading is correct in this particular regard, that this XF note could possibly grade a Unc/New 61/62 with the two TPGs even with the issues with the corners. I saw a similar note on daveunis' Cool Serial Numbers registry at PCGS that graded New 62 PPQ.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Respectfully, grading notes from flat photos is nearly impossible. If you want a better idea of the notes condition, you need side lighting to detect folds and to show embossing. In this photo, the note appears to be undergraded.




This is the same note with side lighting exposing handling and folds

 

Awesome example of how lighting affects pictures @SteveInTampa!

 

Steve you are so right on. To get that side lighting effect even through the holder is admirable. Are you using a tensor light or some other "Bulb" to bring the relief up? Thanks

 

Just a simple, inexpensive LED flashlight.
Mine happens to ba a LEDLENSER, Home Depot, under $15...a must have for collectors.

 

SteveInTampa, thank you for the example. I think I have an idea of how to photo notes a bit better. I used an 800 lumen LED 5000k daylight approx. 12" from the note shining from the side.

My question concerns the corners and what I am deciphering regarding PMG/PCGS "Uncirculated" guidelines. Would these two corners be acceptable for their 60-62 grades. My question is not particularly would this specific note grade such...but the corners being as they are on any note. This note is simply an example I had available. Thanks!

 

Good question.

From what I understand and after reading the grading parameters, the note should grade in the lower 60’s. However, my experience tells me it would probably come back as AU.

Just for the record, I do not consider the note pictured as a candidate for third party grading. The grading fees and postage would far surpass the value of the note.

 

Agree in general with Steve, supposedly counting marks don't ding you bad, but I got a feeling 55/58 is what you'd get on a holder...

 

Thanks for the replies, guys. I've just never read the PCGS nor PMG guidelines and figured that they would likely be similar to the IBNS guidelines (that are also outlined in the Krause World Paper Money catalogs). And I became curious what kind of "nit-picking" they developed to fit Uncs into 10 different grades.

My understanding was that counting marks disqualified the note from Unc, but then I read the TPG guidelines fitting such marks into the 60-62 range. Looking through some "registry sets", I noticed some Unc-62 notes that appeared to have these marks (like the one I referenced above).

I mainly collect the harder heavier forms of money, but sometimes I get these pieces of paper in with lots I grab. I find an interest in U.S. paper money, but am more fascinated with other world issues and have been learning to grade them based on IBNS standards (which seem to differ from the TPGS?). The one I posted here I received n a lot I bid on particularly for one coin. So, I consider that I only spent $1 for it! It's happy in its BCW toploader and doesn't have any plans soon of taking a permanent vacation to be entombed.

Thanks again for the input!

 

The IBNS forum has a lively discussion about the differences in the IBNS standards and those of the US TPG companies.

 

Thanks for the heads up! I'll go lurk over there and see what I can glean.

 

I have a couple of 1957 SCs... one is PMG 66 and the other 68....I can't tell them apart. Could just be me but with coins, I can usually tell 2 grades apart. Gem Quality (>65) paper, it seems tougher.

 

The difference between a 66 and a 68 are very apparent, here,s some examples
From my collection.


But lets start with a 65 and move up from there, this is actually, in my
Opinion in between grades of a 65 and 66, what you looking at here is
The margins most 65,s are allot worse !! so i think this one got a bad wrap

 

as you can see in the above photos, the top margin is some what weak
Especially on the front and just a tad on the back.

 

Here,s a 66 that you can compare the above with, now what your looking for
Is even spacing, but the margins are somewhat smaller but more even
Thus a better grade

 

Now here,s a 68 the margins are almost dead on front to back, wider
Spacing on the back but still well centered.