Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;wxcoin, post: 4005231, member: 74624&quot;]That&#039;s where I have issues with the star designation.&nbsp; It seems more subjective and less objective (at least for non proof coins).&nbsp; The star designation seems to be applied to coins that meet a specific objective grade but stand out in some way from the others.&nbsp; I can look at hundreds of non proof coins of a specific series and date for a given grade and find many which are far superior than others.&nbsp; What&#039;s my criterion for separating these coins?&nbsp; Eye appeal, which is truly subjective; not everyone will agree with what I consider eye appeal.&nbsp; For proof coins, like many Franklin halves, a non-cameo star example may have have cameo features on one side and not the other.&nbsp; This is an objective reason to give a star.&nbsp; Toning is in the eye of the beholder and totally subjective.</p><p><br /></p><p>Would one consider giving a coin a star if, say, the net grade was lowered because of a lower grade on the reverse?&nbsp; To me that would be an objective way of giving a star to any coin; both circulated and uncirculated.</p><p><br /></p><p>I guess I&#039;ve rambled on enough here.&nbsp; No system is perfect but I&#039;d like some sort of objective way of determining whether to give a coin a star or not.[/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