GRADING is an integral part of collecting – YOUR VIEWS assist to improve todays thinking?

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by SwK, Jan 24, 2016.

  1. John Anthony

    John Anthony Ultracrepidarian

    Forget stars and pluses, I want the coveted "Winna Winna Chicken Dinna" designation.
     
    stevex6, Alegandron, Carthago and 2 others like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. IdesOfMarch01

    IdesOfMarch01 Well-Known Member

    Zumbly-SX6-gradedClaudius.jpg

    A++ for originality, graphics, and hilarious but subtle (satirical) humor!
     
    GregH and TIF like this.
  4. IdesOfMarch01

    IdesOfMarch01 Well-Known Member

    This is a fairly perceptive observation about grading, which can't be fully appreciated by most of us (including me) who didn't collect ancients prior to the advent of the Internet and high-quality digital photography. But as for current ancient coin collecting, I find I'm mostly in agreement with Doug's observation:

    Even so, digital photography still is not a panacea and surely not a substitute for actually viewing the coin in person -- witness the myriad posts on this site from collectors who are constantly re-shooting their coins to highlight features and subtleties that weren't apparent before they actually received the coin.

    At least for ancients, I'm not sure that any grading system will be of much value to a collector who has a few years of experience behind him/her. I frequently look at the grades assigned by auction houses and disagree with those grades, which are almost always too high. And ultimately, those grades aren't a factor in my decision to purchase a coin since there are so many other factors applying to ancients that don't apply to machine-struck coins.

    My own particular Claudius sestertius might be an example of this:

    5b - Claudius AE sestertius - dual BB.jpg

    CLAUDIUS 10 B.C. - 54 A.D.
    AE Sestertius (29.21 g.) Rome 41 - 54 A.D. RIC 99
    TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG P M TR P IMP Laureate head right. Rev. SPES - AVGVSTA Spes, draped, advancing left, flower in right hand, raising skirt with left, S C in exergue. Ex. Luc Girard.

    It was only after I completed my 12 Caesars collection in gold and silver that I decided to extend into AEs. Unfortunately, I missed this bargain at the NAC auction in 2010 where it went for less than the estimate, since at that time I hadn't started collecting AEs. Luckily, my dealer had obtained it and had it in his inventory at the time I started my AE collection.

    In hand the patina is entirely natural, with little or no smoothing, and less splotchy than the picture makes it appear. The reverse is quite detailed with the transparency on Spes's gown very well done.

    Despite the grade assigned by NAC ("Wonderful untouched light green patina somewhat broken, otherwise extremely fine"), this coin was overlooked by the bidders, or maybe, as SWK notes in his original post, AEs were simply overlooked in general at that time in favor of aurei and denarii. Maybe this coin would not have been overlooked had the grade been entirely omitted?
     
    brassnautilus, SwK, Bing and 3 others like this.
  5. Orfew

    Orfew Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus

    My only Claudius. It is not a particularly high grade. I loved the portrait and I was looking for a Claudius denarius...so I bought it. Though not a perfect coin I also love it for its imperfection. It tells a story and is a part of history. This coin came in an NGC slab. Eventually, the slab met a hammer. I do not like slabbed ancients. Mostly because the collector does not get to hold 2000 years of history.

    Claudius AR Denarius. 41-54 AD. Rome mint (18 mm 3.62 gr). Struck 46-47 AD.

    Obv: TI CLAVD CAESAR AVG P M TR P VI IMP XI, laureate head right

    Rev: CONSTANTIAE AVGVSTI, Constantia seated left of curule chair, hand raised to face. RIC 32 (R2), RSC 8 BMC 31. Ex: AU Capital Management LLC


    Claudius Joined 2.jpg
     
    brassnautilus, Bing, ro1974 and 4 others like this.
  6. 4to2centBC

    4to2centBC Well-Known Member

    I agree completely. Grading helped when I started out. It gave me a sense of bearing. I still include them in my descriptions out of habit, but they mean little to me when it comes to buying a coin.

    The First Meris I just got from Triton was listed as Superb EF. If that was intended to means EF of the highest order...........well, I think that is an inflated grade. I see wear on the obverse high spots. BUT if they meant it is a superb style in EF, then I would agree with the rating.

    Modern coins are largely identical in all respects but condition and rarity. Therefore condition becomes a dominant characteristic to measure and track (as does rarity) Ancient coins are unique to the particular die. Therefore style and centering enter the equation. This means a reduction in the importance of condition. Also, since style cannot be graded, then grading itself diminishes in value, when applied to ancients.

    My 3 cents.
     
    David Atherton and TIF like this.
  7. Mikey Zee

    Mikey Zee Delenda Est Carthago

    Wonderful posts and some very intriguing viewpoints...since I rarely agree with assigned grades, I go by my own rather conservative assessments---mostly eye-appeal and that the coin 'spoke' to me in some way.

    An old sellers photo from Heritage, before 'freedom rang' LOL

    I mostly agree with the designations but question 'choice' :
    claudius obverse.jpg claudius reverse.jpg
     
    zumbly, Orfew, Bing and 3 others like this.
  8. stevex6

    stevex6 Random Mayhem

    [​IMG]

    Ahahaha ... TIF, thanks for the laugh

    The Canadian flag and the faint outline of "Ralph" (picking his nose in the background) made me laugh out loud!!

    However, if I was Z-Bro, I'd complain to the SX6 grading company for only giving his cool coin a rating of interesting (brutal)

    :D

    => thanks again for the laugh, coin-sis
     
    zumbly and TIF like this.
  9. Gil-galad

    Gil-galad I AM SPARTACUS

    I think it's fun to grade coins for my own purposes but then I'm not obsessed about getting the best coin possible. I can't do it and nor would I want to spend that much money and run the risk of getting a possible fake. Although, that OP coin is very nice and is definitely real.

    In the grand scheme, grading is deemed to be subjective and worthless for ancients as no two coins are exactly the same and it's difficult to compare for grading as you can with modern coins.
     
    Mikey Zee, paschka and stevex6 like this.
  10. ro1974

    ro1974 Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
    Great coins :facepalm:, did is my Claudius Truimphal sestertius
     
    Mikey Zee, zumbly, GregH and 4 others like this.
  11. brassnautilus

    brassnautilus Well-Known Member

    Pretty sure Claudius was supposed to look like a retard, but you never see a portrait of him that way...

    I'm not saying coin portraits are never accurate. A lot of times we see remarkable consistency eventhough they were cut by different people/institution that have very little association to one another (craftsmen at Ephesus mint were just weird). I mean, to depict a princess like Julia Titi the way they did, if that wasn't accurate, I'm sure a lot of people would had lost their heads...

    That, however, isn't the case with Claudius. While more of his portraits looked like that on OP's example, there are many other busts of him that don't have similar characteristics.

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    So umm, when we speak of "art" value of these portraits, how much is there when they don't even resemble the real person?

    To be frank, a lot of times the only "value" in ancient coins I see are efforts put forth by generation of people to persevere it, so it's still there after thousands of years. This is why coins of precious metal are more "meaningful" than bronze IMHO, because it's much much much harder to preserve items made of material that retains its commodity value through time.

    Just my 2 cents...
     
    Mikey Zee, stevex6, Gil-galad and 4 others like this.
  12. ro1974

    ro1974 Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
    And my Claudius: CONSTANTIAE As
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2016
    Mikey Zee, zumbly, Gil-galad and 3 others like this.
  13. Valentinian

    Valentinian Well-Known Member

    I feel a sigh of disappointment whenever the subject of grades comes up. Not because the contributions are wrong, but because of where the discussion inevitably, if unintentionally, leads.

    US coin collecting drifted toward dull and expensive when grade took over and became a measurement of how worthwhile the coin was. Doubtless even long ago a higher grade coin was worth more than a lower grade coin of the same type-- I stipulate that. But the emphasis on grade changed the game, and not for the better. All the publications emphasized the highest grade pieces. You could hardy feel good about your coins unless they were top grade. An interesting and beautiful seated Liberty half dollar in XF was no longer regarded as beautiful--the grade was too low. Beauty (which we know was/should be in the eye of the beholder) was redefined to be a number on a slab.

    Now US coin collecting is sterile. You don't even need to look at the coin--just read the condition off the slab. Some collectors abandoned US coin collecting for the inability to enjoy what they could afford. A few rich collectors at the top, unintentionally but inevitably, determined what was desirable and the rest were trained by publications (Coin World, etc.) to devalue their own collections and feel bad they did not have the best.

    This even happened in ancients to some extent. Before the internet and digital images, collectors wrote articles for The Celator (the collectors' journal for ancient coins, since gone out of business) displaying their knowledge in their specialities. They were illustrated by their own painstakingly assembled collections and some examples were in low grade. It was the knowledge and thought that went into the article-worthy collection, not the condition of the individual coins, that mattered. That was encouraging to all of us.

    Then that began to change as authors found out that CNG would let them use a digital image of wonderful examples instead. So articles on <any subject -- snakes, temples, CONCORDIA--you name it> that would have been illustrated with examples anyone could afford began to be illustrated with top, expensive, examples. The subconscious message became that only top examples are worthy. The message to lower-end collectors that "I could have a coin as good as that" disappeared from print. Fortunately, it still exists here at CoinTalk. (Please, please, continue to show us your low grade coins with a comment about them. You will make everyone feel good!)

    I agree that ancient-coin collectors need to know about all the factors that influence desirability including grading. Grades used to perform the function that Ken described--they were a proxy for desirability before images were cheap. But the history of US coin collecting shows us that the more grade is discussed the more average coins are devalued.

    Recently we saw on this forum a spectacular sestertius that cost 100 times as much as a similar sestertius, fully legible and clear, but in lower grade. I hope most of our members would rather assemble an entire collection with love and care than own one coin worth that much. If you have the funds, go for it. Please show us your wonderful coins. But if you emphasize the grade over the history (as opposed to the history or type over the grade) you are unintentionally discouraging the rest of the forum members. It is not good for the hobby if fewer collectors want the myriad medium and low-grade ancient coins that most can afford.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2016
  14. IdesOfMarch01

    IdesOfMarch01 Well-Known Member

    My perspective on the artistic quality of a coin's portrait is generally independent of whether the portrait supposedly resembles the actual individual. Really, how can we know what an individual who lived 2000 years ago actually looked like?

    Instead, I try to see the quality of the engraver -- e.g., as Doug mentions in his post above, was the engraver able to capture the transparency in Spes's gown? If so, it's more artistic than those portrayals that don't capture this transparency.

    The same is true, at least for me, in portraits. Regardless of whether or not the portrait actually resembles the long-dead emperor or individual, some renderings/engraving are simply more elegantly and artistically done.

    I tend to agree with this sentiment, which is why I don't include the supposed grade of any coins that I post, unless it's relevant to the discussion or point I'm trying to make.
     
    Mikey Zee, zumbly, AncientJoe and 2 others like this.
  15. GregH

    GregH Well-Known Member

    Indeed, and by the time we get to the fourth century, portraits become quite generic anyway. But there are still plenty of fine style coins from this period.
     
  16. AncientJoe

    AncientJoe Well-Known Member

    I agree entirely, especially as I'm a "convert" from US coins after becoming fed up with the grading obsession. While I do have a number of EF+ coins, I would much rather have a nicely styled, nice metal VF over a poorly executed EF. This distinction is lost with grades and exacerbated by some slabs where anything "MS" sells for multiples even when it looks utterly terrible.

    I'm collecting coins which are historic and artistic with my primary goal to have all detail represented. If that can be accomplished with a lower grade coin, then I'll be very satisfied. That said, I'll upgrade coins if the opportunity arises, either selling off the duplicate or enjoying both for some time (but ultimately, I have a comparatively small collection in terms of quantity, and I intend to keep it that way to some extent).

    I hope my sharing of higher grade examples isn't discouraging at all - that would be the opposite effect for what I'm trying to accomplish. My first ancient was a $0.50 late Roman bronze and it took me several years to ever consider buying a coin over $100. Especially on this forum, we represent a range of budgets but I think our level of passion is quite uniform.
     
    Carthago, Mikey Zee, Jwt708 and 8 others like this.
  17. brassnautilus

    brassnautilus Well-Known Member

    Doug has a thread about mass production of an artist's rendition and how the artist should be credited. It's even more complicated in coins. People that cut the dies were specialists, maybe sometimes they were portrait artists but I'm sure for the most part they were just responsible for the actual cutting of dies.

    Is such a specialist an artist? Further down the line, there were also mint workers, who actually "produced" the items.

    Coming from a profession that does manipulation of material in miniature with the aid of instruments, I feel it's more of a craft, not an art. Majority of the people around me are engineers.
     
  18. Mat

    Mat Ancient Coincoholic

    And yet when someone does post those low grade coins, like Dougs "Snowed in" coin:https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-one-coin-quiz-on-my-snowed-in-upgrade.273698/

    It has gotten little replies. It's discouraging. It happens to my coin posts over the years & I have seen it happen to others on here too and still do.

    One can get 20 likes on the post, but 6 replies total? yeah...you can take the time "like" but not reply?, kinda sucks.

    Only time I ignore threads is when they go very off subject and go on and on with something stupid or consist of uncleaned LRB type coins or junk ebay AEs from ebay.
     
  19. Gil-galad

    Gil-galad I AM SPARTACUS

    On the contrary, I have a lot of low grade to mid grade coins and that's all I can get most of the time. I feel ok and even good about that as well. People here like a lot of my coins as well. Some don't of course and that's ok. As long as I like it and a few other people do, that's what counts to me. I learned so much about coins and history from my low grade coins.

    Don't get me wrong, I like high grade coins too.
     
    stevex6, zumbly and TIF like this.
  20. zumbly

    zumbly Ha'ina 'ia mai ana ka puana

    I think you brought out the slab tag-lover in everyone, TIF; I note with dismay that your tag got twice as many likes as my coin! On the other hand, maybe this is lucrative side business opportunity? Anyway, since it's mine now, I'll be printing it out and keeping it in the flip together with the coin. Thanks! :D
     
    Alegandron and TIF like this.
  21. TIF

    TIF Always learning.

    :D

    Steve raised a valid issue. It was undergraded and technically ranks as Cool, damaged. There are enough details to warrant the grade. However, your coin was sent in as part of a bulk submission and extra information costs, well, extra.

    Side business... hmm. Steve, are you in? I have labels for each SX6 grade ready to roll.

    In a year or two we can unveil new qualifying adjectives and regrade everything. Ch. Cool, Sweet*, etc. :greedy::greedy::greedy:
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2016
    paschka, stevex6, Alegandron and 2 others like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page