Best "guide" for grading coins

Your point is well made; however...

It is the words Collectors began to quit using ambiguous words like: "trace," "much," "some," "light wear," etc. long ago. With the publication of Photograde, we started to rely on photos. Ambiguous words are the way they are because EACH OF US has a different opinion of what they represent. For example: Please tell me what "Much of the mint luster is still present." signifies. When I was learning to grade and the way it is still done in Europe this would describe an XF coin. According to the ANA guide it is used now for an AU-55! below the photos which establish minimum requirements (?) for a particular grade. NEWS FLASH: In my experience the ANA Guide is rarely used by professionals. In fact, few of them EVER* used it. The photos (mostly of poor quality) are merely illustrations True, and those in Grading Coins by Photographs and on the PCGS grading guide are mush more realistic than the WORDS/PHOTOS in that other obsolete guide.

PS The intro of the ANA Guide is MUST READING for any collector both new and old.

* It is a shame because if all of us used one and the same standards (ANA Grading Guide), much of the grading problems would be solved.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I always thought the old Brown and Dunn book was the best ever.

 

ANA Guide is the best book, but on web I found very helpful also PCGS Photograde Online

http://www.pcgs.com/photograde/

petronius

 

Well, I can you the BEST book to buy for grading specs is the Red Book. I have them and the descriptions are excellent. That being said, depending on the rarity of the coin and the possible appraisal, I would send them into NGC for grading & certification. Sometimes you can do this for less than $20. Good luck.

 

Hello,

Most of what everyone says relates to US coins. ANA is the standard I understand for those but what about world coins? I understood there was no "standard" for those. So what books do you use to grade those? Thanks.

 

Those were a lot of interesting replies. However, I bet Murty is sorry he asked the question.

I've collected coins since the 1950's and for me at that time it was sticking a Lincoln or Indian in a blue whitman folder. Sometimes I'd say oh that one looks nice or yikes that one is ugly. Then as I got a bit older I realized that I should be looking for nicer coins. Once I learned the difference between the grades someone had to screw with the system and go to a 70 point grading scale.

I do think that the onset of TPG's was both good and bad. Today many people can't grade or won't learn and they only want to rely on 3rd parties to grade for them. So they are buying the holders and not the coins. I belong to two local clubs and my fellow members always tell me that I should be having my currency graded. Oh, my, I can't go there. I know, I know. A 67 is worth less than a 70. Its a good thing I'm getting older.

But I do have an ANA photograde book that was published in 1987. It has some decent information at the end of each listing that talks about weak strikes and other interesting features.

Enough rambling for me. Keep up the good work folks. I enjoy reading your posts.

Rich

 

Speaking for me only, I endorse fully what @GDJMSP has written above. Pictures are good AS A STARTING POINT, but only that. I don't use any book that has the words "Photograde" in it. I simply do not believe any photography based book can do anything but deceive the viewer into thinking that photos can teach grading. It is simply too simplistic. We grant 16 year olds drivers licenses to take to the interstate in the family Camry, but not a Dallara-Chevy on the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Even in the QDB article, he unwittingly falls into a trap - over-obsessing on ONE ASPECT of grading a key date Indian cent, the word "LIBERTY". Is that all there is to grading an Indian?? Gawd, I hope not! It is merely the first element and only that.

ANA Official Guides - ALL OF THEM EXCEPT THE LATEST ONE ARE COMPLETELY USELESS! This should go without saying. You need to BURN all but the latest edition. IF the 6th edition were still valid, why would there be a 7th? Think about it. Then you need to READ (as in "cover to cover") the sections of the 7th edition OTHER THAN the pages where the grades are described and the pictures are there. Why? Because THAT is where the guide explains the LIMITATIONS of the rest of the VERY SAME guide. In other words, you need to "put down the technical grading concept, and slowly back away." LEARN what market grading is and why it has taken over. You don't get to debate it - technical grading is all but dead, except as a step to teach newbs.

There are myriad elements that go into any coin's grade, and yes, they vary over time. Why? Because what collectors want and value changes over time. You need to stop obsessing over any single element of a coin's condition and get "holistic" about it. Then "gradeflation" will stop bothering you so much. As long as tastes change, so will grading.

 

Beware, in the rest of the world, "AU" pretty much doesn't exist. You go right from XF to BU.

 

Don't you need both photos (or in-hand examples or photo examples from experience/memory) and written criteria?

To me at least, if I only read descriptions, what I would envision in my mind as what the criteria is may look differently in-person and to others (especially on the grounds of eye appeal).

For example, if there's a weakly struck coin and I went by only the descriptions, then I'd think that coin would be a lower grade than what it "should" be.

Also, what about small scratches that are a few mm in length? On, say, a Morgan dollar it may not distract at all, but on a three-cent piece, it'll look huge, relatively speaking, and it'd deduct more from the coin's grade consciously and/or subconsciously. So, wouldn't the criteria depend not only on the written criteria, but the size of the coin?

And, if we throw in the different design elements, complexity, device and field ratio, wouldn't a given scratch, bag mark, what have you, deduct points based on the coin's specific given design? So, if it's a simple design with an off-looking toning mark right next to the bust of the obverse, eye appeal may take a hit. But if it's a complex design with lots going on, the same size mark wouldn't take as hard a hit on eye appeal, right?

 

And not only SIZE of any mark, but placement matters, too. Study the concept of prime focal areas in the ANA's course materials.

If one wants to learn how to grade the coins of any other country, one needs to immerse himself in that country's coins. You can't effectively learn how to grade Swiss coins by staying here. You need to go "all in".

Oh, and have a vorzüglich Tag.

 

I read one of ANA's guides. I do touch on placement a bit on the previous post.

Some of the questions I ask are rhetorical, though I am looking for granular answers, too.

For instance, isn't primal focus technically subjective, and the same as or similar to eye appeal?

If there's a scratch on the center bust that's agreed by all as a negative, but people see how much it should deduct as a grade differently, then at least for the TPGs they'll simply break the tie with a third grader. If we take the other grader's grade and get a different third tie breaker, it may end up being a different grade altogether. It's when we get into the higher grades that subjectivity seems to be a greater issue.

 

First off. I DON'T READ ANYWHERE IN THIS THREAD THAT ANYONE SAID YOU COULD LEARN GRADING JUST WITH A BOOK. The original question was answered. I think the Bower's book is the best guide, others think the ANA Guidelis best. One poor soul likes the Red Book! Hopefully the OP has been satisfied.

Now to answer those who decided to change the subject...

I think you just got the message from my original post! Are pictures helpful, yes. What is the best Grading BOOK; Bower's wrote it.

Someone help the new guy out.

This is very good advice; yet I believe the pictures in the latest edition may still be too strict. I'll need to buy a copy to see if they have been updated.

 

The Art and Science of Grading Coins

I believe the author is a member here...

 

Each subsequent edition of the ANA guide codifies the gradeflation since the previous edition, and sets the new standard. Compare the 7th edition with the 1st, and it will be very clear that the standards have changed.

I actually mostly agree with everything you have written in your post. I think that may be a first

The books provide hints and guides, the pictures illustrate the words. You have to read the words, look at the pictures, and then examine the coins. The pictures serve as a reference point. They are very useful to build a framework, fleshed out by the accompanying text. Once you have mastered the basics, applying that to a new series becomes increasingly easier - but you still have to learn the intricacies of each series. That is why, even at the TPGs, not every grader will grade every series. They specialize.

I strongly disagree. The Red Book tries to do everything, so it does nothing well. It is the most general of all "references," - you really need one of the grading guides that we have mentioned previously.

Once you understand the basic terms and method for grading, you can apply that to any series from any country. Luster, strike, marks, wear... they are all still factors for world coins. The number or descriptor you apply to it might be different, but the method is the same (and is the point I have tried to make in my book).

True. There are many different scales in use throughout the world. The American scale is more refined (that is, has more points on it), than many foreign scales, but the method is the same. A simple comparison can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coin_grading#European_grading_system

 

Thank you for your reply post. In reference to world coins, I have been using the grading system as described in the above link. It it concrete and a great place to start but it doesn't include things like luster, toning, scratches, etc. I believe this is close to the Krause book definitions of grading in the World Coin books. When I look at a coin I usually judge it by how much and how clear the design is after all that is what I want to see. I don't "down grade" unless the toning, scratches and wear obscures or "ruins" the overall design, but then I only grade for myself and not for resale. Is this grading thing only a disguised search for the "perfect coin" or for the purposes of making a buck? I personally like coins with some character and am not interested in the perfect coin.

 

Yeah, I never noticed, as I've always referred to the earlier editions. Shoot. My faith in the guide has been shaken..........

 

What you write here is true as it pertains to the grade text passages. The pictures have been lavishly updated in the 7th, and the text chapters on the diminishing relevance of technical grading are even more explicit than ever before.

By the way, the ANA course materials for their Numismatic Diploma program go another whole order of magnitude in "dissing" technical grading.

 

WHEN IS THE LIGHTBULB GOING ON? THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SAYING!

The Photos in the ANA Grading Guide are OBSOLETE. You and others have researched this and have PROOVED the fact! I have spoken to the folks who can make the changes and they are WELL AWARE of this "problem."

While grading standards in the coin market and at TPGS has evolved AWAY from the ANA, The ANA standards have remained constant. Anyone can have a standard and a standard should not change. However, if the standard YOU chose is not in step with the rest of us...

Remember back when all those ANACS MS-65's became MS-63's in order to get in step with what the coins were worth?