Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Precision grading
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="physics-fan3.14, post: 4502996, member: 19165"](I am going to completely ignore Sheldon's non-numismatic pursuits in this thread. I don't think they are relevant to the discussion). </p><p><br /></p><p>There are two aspects to grading - there is the technical aspect, and there is the valuation aspect (often called "market). </p><p><br /></p><p>There is absolutely value in saying "this coin has this level of wear." Or, "this coin has a number of contact marks in a prime focal area." Or, "this coin has full details from a strong strike." These are objective, quantifiable, measurable properties. This is technical grading. </p><p><br /></p><p>Then there are more subjective appraisals, such as "this coin has strong luster." The attractiveness of the luster is subjective. However, you can characterize the luster as being "creamy," "flashy," or "satiny." The strictest technical scales do not include luster in their grade, but some technical graders do. </p><p><br /></p><p>The most subjective aspect of grading is eye appeal. Eye appeal is not a technical item - it is solely the opinion of the grader. The quality of the luster feeds into this eye appeal aspect of the grade. A certain appearance of a coin which I find attractive, you might not like. Generally, experienced numismatists have a broad consensus of positive and negative eye appeal - but there is nothing technical about it. </p><p><br /></p><p>I think everyone can agree that there is a need for a grading scale. It is a convenient shorthand to describe the physical condition of a coin. I could satisfactorily describe a coin with a paragraph, but if I say that a coin is "VF," you instantly have a good idea what the level of preservation is going to be on that coin. </p><p><br /></p><p>I think the problem that some people have with "grading" is that they expect a 64 to have a narrow set of characteristics. People might struggle with the idea that eye appeal can bump a grade up or down. It is quite common to get a technical 63 with great eye appeal, fantastic toning, etc., and find it in a 64 holder. It is quite common to get a technical 65 with unattractive spottiness and find it in a 64 holder. </p><p><br /></p><p>The reason people struggle is because they forget that the TPGs are *not* grading a coin. They are assigning it a value. This coin is considered to be worth more than other 63s with comparable contact marks and strike, and so it will be assigned a 64 grade. This coin is worth less than an average 65 because those spots are ugly, and so it will be assigned a 64 grade. </p><p><br /></p><p>To understand modern grading you also have to remember two things: there were grading scales before Sheldon, he just expanded their use. And there have been 7 decades of evolution and refinement since Sheldon. We call it the "Sheldon" scale, but we just as easily could today call it the DeLorey scale.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="physics-fan3.14, post: 4502996, member: 19165"](I am going to completely ignore Sheldon's non-numismatic pursuits in this thread. I don't think they are relevant to the discussion). There are two aspects to grading - there is the technical aspect, and there is the valuation aspect (often called "market). There is absolutely value in saying "this coin has this level of wear." Or, "this coin has a number of contact marks in a prime focal area." Or, "this coin has full details from a strong strike." These are objective, quantifiable, measurable properties. This is technical grading. Then there are more subjective appraisals, such as "this coin has strong luster." The attractiveness of the luster is subjective. However, you can characterize the luster as being "creamy," "flashy," or "satiny." The strictest technical scales do not include luster in their grade, but some technical graders do. The most subjective aspect of grading is eye appeal. Eye appeal is not a technical item - it is solely the opinion of the grader. The quality of the luster feeds into this eye appeal aspect of the grade. A certain appearance of a coin which I find attractive, you might not like. Generally, experienced numismatists have a broad consensus of positive and negative eye appeal - but there is nothing technical about it. I think everyone can agree that there is a need for a grading scale. It is a convenient shorthand to describe the physical condition of a coin. I could satisfactorily describe a coin with a paragraph, but if I say that a coin is "VF," you instantly have a good idea what the level of preservation is going to be on that coin. I think the problem that some people have with "grading" is that they expect a 64 to have a narrow set of characteristics. People might struggle with the idea that eye appeal can bump a grade up or down. It is quite common to get a technical 63 with great eye appeal, fantastic toning, etc., and find it in a 64 holder. It is quite common to get a technical 65 with unattractive spottiness and find it in a 64 holder. The reason people struggle is because they forget that the TPGs are *not* grading a coin. They are assigning it a value. This coin is considered to be worth more than other 63s with comparable contact marks and strike, and so it will be assigned a 64 grade. This coin is worth less than an average 65 because those spots are ugly, and so it will be assigned a 64 grade. To understand modern grading you also have to remember two things: there were grading scales before Sheldon, he just expanded their use. And there have been 7 decades of evolution and refinement since Sheldon. We call it the "Sheldon" scale, but we just as easily could today call it the DeLorey scale.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Precision grading
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...