Here is an older article concerning grading of US coins. Photos and analysis is given on most series. Interesting reading. http://coingrading.com/others1.html
Noticed that some of the software (don't recall which) have pictures of graded coins. You enter a pic of your coin in the database and can compare the professionally (?) graded coins with yours...thus establish some kind of grade. Also saw a CD that you can do some kind of comparison. Are these programs helpful or considered reliable ways of grading? I realize that they would not suffice for professional grading and establishing a market (i.e. P.C.G.S. or ???).
The generally accepted method of grading US coins is A.N.A Grading Standards as well as Photograde. Of course grading will most likely always be subjective, and therefor no matter which "guide" is used, the asigned grade will always be the opinion of the person(s) doing the grading. JMHO
I have seen some of these programs before. They are helpful to a point. But computer images and photos do not give eye appeal. This is a tremendous factor in grading. Now some will not agree, but take a mint state coin graded 66 on preservation that has ugly toning, and a 65 that is blast white, and the 65 will sell 100 times faster. There is a newer grading service that uses a computer to grade coins. PCGS is looking for ways to incorporate this technology also. It will give insight into technical grading, but that can only be the base line.
It might also be of interest to some of you that not a single one of the grading companies currently in business uses the ANA grading standards or Photograde standards. They all individually have their own standards. That is why there is such a great difference when you look at 2 coins side by side with the same grade that have been graded by two different companies. So if you wish to learn to grade coins the same way the grading companies do - then you need to learn their individual standards. It can however be very useful to understand how the ANA grading standards compare to the standards used by PCGS for example when it comes to understanding values for these coins. Interesting that you mention computer grading - who is doing it ? I have not heard of this recently. PCGS tried using a computer program to grade quite a few years ago and gave up on it. A couple of other companies have tried as well. So far not one has met with success.
Well PCGS is still attempting to figure out a way. I think the idea is sound, but not sure how to implement it. The grading company that attempted to use this formula is called compugrade. I met some of the graders at the Las Vegas show about two years ago. I am not sure if they still exist. With the buy out of bowers and merena and the collectors universe holdings it will be interesting to see what transpires. You are quite correct on the grading system. I have taken the ANA class twice. I highly recommend it for anyone interested. I have also participated in the PCGS grading challenge. There are too many differences to list in one column. But I for one, would not want their job.
I believe that the absolute strictest grading practices belong to the Early American Copper guys. These guys can be harsh sometimes. What a breath of fresh air!
I may be off on my dates - but I believe compugrade went out of business in 1991. I'll check and see if I can't confirm that. But you say PCGS is still trying. Interesting - I had not heard that. I know computers have advanced greatly in the past 10 yrs. but they still have not yet reached a point where they can be used to grade coins. Especially not with the market grading system now being used. It is just too subjective. Perhaps if a pure technical grading system were used this may be possible. But even then that would preclude such subjective analysis as eye appeal. I just don't ever see a computer as being able to do that. Sure would be neat if they could though
Well that is exactly the obstacle. An article was recently written about PCGS and their attempts to use computers to assign a technical grade and use the graders for the eye appeal. I will look to find that article. I for one would welcome anything that would tighten up the system. The coin world article on coin grading was a perfect example. It would have been nice to see more indepth studies. But remember that anyone that takes a stand against certain grading companies stand to be ridiculed. The tragic gross incompetence was at last summers ANA show in Charlotte.
Well join the club then pal I have made it a personal campaign of mine for years now to bring about reforms within the grading industry. It's nothing formal really - just a quest I am on. In a nutshell - I would like to see all the grading companies follow one set grading standard that does not change. In addition I would like to also see all of the grading companies charge $1 extra for every submission. This one dollar would go to a special fund that would finance ongoing and permanent testing such as that conducted by Coin World. This testing would be performed by an entity who's sole purpose was to oversee the grading companies and ensure that they were indeed adhering to the grading standard. Each grading company would receive a seal of approval to place on their slabs. If however they stray from the path - this seal would not be given and it would be publicized that this particular grading company was no longer following the set standard. It wouldn't be long then and they would go out of business. If this was done - we wouldn't need computers to grade coins.
I like the title of this thread: "The Art of Coin Grading". Since, no matter what standards are used, the application of those standards is subjective, making coin grading an art rather than a science.
What are your views on the ANA's attempt to get certified graders? It seems like a step in the right direction to me, but is still receiving a lot of flack from the services.
I have to agree with you - I think it is a step in the right direction as well. And I do understand why the services may be reluctant. As it is now - the services themselves determine if a person has the necessary skills to be a grader. But it is each service which defines what those skills are. It is also the service which sets the grading standard they use.This is where the problem lies. If the services were required to have their graders certified by the ANA that would mean that there would by necessity have to be a consistent and set grading standard to follow. This is not what the services want. They wish to be the ones to make their own rules. Not have a set of rules they must follow.
Will it even work if all the grading/certification services don't back this attempt by the ANA? ACG doesn't even go by ANA grading standards, but rather follow their own grading guide. Now,once certified, will grader's recieve a grade and be sealed in plastic? This might be a good thing for some services! lol I feel the major services do a very good job overall. Unfortunately there are so many fly-by-night services out there that will probably never comply to this new proposal by the ANA that it probably won't make any difference in the long run. While it may be a step in the right direction,many more steps need to be taken before I'd call it "walking". I would like to see computer chips added to slabs with addition information which won't currently fit onto the holders. We have the technology,it's about time it was used! ~ Jim
Well both of you are right. The 3 majors are at least the majority of the time consistent to a point. Now I rountinely crack coins out of one holder and submit to another in the hope of a higher grade. Key dates seem to have a system all to themselves. Anyone remember the 33 St. Gaudens? How about the 04 Dollar that has moved up to AU. Now over the years I have learned to buy the coin and not the holder. This isn't always easy as I do a lot of sight unseen business with other dealers. There are monster deals out there in these "other" holders. One just has to look past the service name. I have been trying to add any help that I am able to get some of the ANA's suggestions across to graders and dealers. I believe it is a small step in the right direction. Ultimately it will take collectors and dealers working together to bring change. So Mr. GDJMSP when you are ready to make your personal campaign a little more serious, please let me know. It seems as if many of us are doing what we can as individuals, so we need to figure out a way to organize the efforts.
Even if they were able to do it, I would be surprised to see PCGS or NGC be the first to go to computerized grading. I think they like the crackout game. I could see ANACS or ICG or a new company doing it first if it could be done. I personally doubt it can be in a market grading scheme of things. -- Stujoe
Well now that changes are happening at PCGS, maybe they concentrate on applying new technology to the coin certification business. I suspect it will have to be us dealers and collectors that will have to voice our opinions to get changes done.
I would definitely agree with that. I think the grading services in general, and PCGS in particular are more than happy with ithe status quo. If there is to be standardization or certification or anything else, I think the pressure is almost certainly going to have to come from the dealer and collector base. -- Stujoe
