Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2365515, member: 1892&quot;]What part of &quot;<i><b>I&#039;m not particularly happy with the seller for presenting an end-stage toner like this</b></i>&quot; did you miss? The fact that I try (not always succeeding) to phrase even anger in the form of reasonable discourse? But I&#039;m only angry with the seller because he presented the coin in a fashion which non-experts could misinterpret. <b>He did not lie</b>. The coin has that color. And if you grok toning, images like that get immediately dismissed in your mind. You <b>know</b> they&#039;re extreme-case samples. Just like you <b>know</b> to dismiss a seller&#039;s claim that the AU coin he offers is an MS64.</p><p><br /></p><p>By all means, out the dealer. I&#039;ll say it again, <b>I&#039;m not happy with him</b>. He showed images only an expert would evaluate properly. But it isn&#039;t like he lied about the grade or something similar.</p><p><br /></p><p>And why isn&#039;t the lighting I mention - or Doug discusses - &quot;reasonable?&quot; Especially when it&#039;s <i><b>the</b></i> way to evaluate toning, <b>in the same fashion you&#039;d want appropriate lighting to evaluate grade</b>? End-stage toning doesn&#039;t need it for evaluation - if you know, you know it on sight under any lighting - but mid-stage toning can be far more deceptive than these images are, it&#039;s that stage where the &quot;wild&quot; toners lie and you could commit <b>stupid</b> money on an improper coin if you&#039;re not aware of it. </p><p><br /></p><p>Grade a coin under a single 60w incandescent - no other illumination - at your desk, and then take it out onto the porch in Noon sunlight and grade it again. You&#039;ll see two different coins with two different grades. This is why experienced in-hand graders new to grading high-resolution images consistently undergrade the coin; it isn&#039;t customary to throw as much candlepower - in such a carefully-prepared and aimed fashion - at a coin when you grade in-hand. It should be, because that kind of imagery presents a bunch of actual detail the grading &quot;expert&quot; misses with their accustomed grading procedure. I hand-grade coins under as much light as I can throw at them without blowing out highlights, as should everyone. <b>Learning how to grade from high-res images taught me </b>that addition to my hand-grading procedure. Few seem to realize (look at the example we&#039;re discussing here) just_how_important lighting is to the evaluation of a coin. Heck, if I could work out an axially-lit grading setup using beamsplitter glass, I would go to that process for hand-grading. Aside the fact that my eyes would need to be precisely vertical above and square to the coin, which is how axial lighting captures color so well.</p><p><br /></p><p>I really don&#039;t care what you or anyone else thinks of what I posted here. The OP now knows enough about how toning works so he&#039;ll <b>never</b> be deceived by this kind of image again, and that&#039;s the only goal. If my choice of verbiage offends, I&#039;m unhappy with myself because that gets in the way of teaching. But it&#039;s difficult to phrase &quot;you&#039;re wrong and need to learn more&quot; in happy-happy-joy-joy fashion. </p><p><br /></p><p>I am always open to suggestions about how to become a better teacher.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in