Training The Eyes

I wish that one of our members here @Insider would drop by more often and weigh in on these kinds of questions. Although I'm sure when he was very young he had the same problem but being a pro now would help enlighten all of us. And I'm not taking a jab at anyone who has posted here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

He does show up, but only when the bartender has cut him off. J/K!

Chris

 

Funny you say that. I do mess with two local old car groups and have been asked to judge at little local events. I declined because I know every shining Mopar with a big block will win my vote..... Now that I think about it..... I had the same problem with girls. Thank goodness I am married now!

 

The problem with me, other than I'm nuts, is that as I've gotten older my eye sight has declined. When I was younger I could pick up a coin and see its details clearly. Today I have a hard time even seeing the date without correction. So the many minor flaws I could see many years ago aren't an issue since they don't stand out.

 

I can commiserate..... I had eagle eye vision till ten years ago. Now I have to have readers and a loupe to see the date on a cent. You could sell me a 1909-S, VDB and I would just have to believe you. No way I could ever see those initials.

 

I look at the coin and if it gives me goosebumps it's a coin I want. I walk away and look at it again a short time later. If I'm at a show I holditin my hand and look at other coins the dealer has but I don't ask to see them. I'll talk with the dealer, anything to get my mind off of the coin I'm holding.

If I hand it back to him someone else might buy it. That's why I hold it. After I've refocused myself them I'll look at the coin again. Not saying it'll work for you but it works for me.

 

Thanks for the detailed procedure. One question for you. As you've gotten older have you found it more difficult to see things during your evaluation? I see the eyes as the tool and brain as the computer doing the image processing. If the tool degrades, so does the resolution of the image being processed.

 

Maybe you ought to watch Mike Mezack a little more than you have. Here's a guy who hawks MS70 & PR70 ASEs for 199.95 plus shipping—this coin (bullion if you must), the Walker after which it was designed and the gorgeous SLQ are three of my four favorite USA coins.

Some months ago I posted the seller's photos of a raw, ungraded 1924 SLQ before the coin actually arrived. There was a cadre of self-appointed critics who said the coin had been washed, or dipped; some even said it had been whizzed, but a very few, @Randy Abercrombie among them, gave it the like accolade the coin really deserves. It's a far better looking coin than an absolutely beautiful 1920 that had been graded AU58 by PCGS, that I got from a seller in WV for $23. It doesn't have quite the luster of the '20 when examined side-by-side, but if you squint your eyes enough and place the two coins under a very powerful light, it IS possible to see why the seller was willing to let me have it for $23, it just doesn't approach perfection quite as easily that which was the subject of such scorn here. I really wish that I had been able to buy that '24 for as little as the '20, but such is life. Neither of these SLQs come close to the ones with asking prices in the five figures, but gosh are they beautiful...the most beautiful SLQs I've ever held in my hands.

I own thousands of ASEs, but none of them have been certified by any of the TPGs. I have to admit that when I compare one of the many I own to what Mezak wants to sell you for $200, I have to ask myself, "What is going on here?" Most of the CT members look down their noses at the ASE as a coin, anyway so it isn't likely that they'll see the connection I'm trying to draw.

Some astute CT member said in a thread some time ago that he didn't know if he could tell the difference between an MS68 and an MS70; I think he even mused over the value of one against the other as being so small that the MS70 buyer might even be wasting a little money. Flaws are there regardless, and holding handfuls of beach sand in each hand can open different worlds you never knew were there.

 

I will focus in on a few areas, without looking at the whole. For SLQs, I focus on the head, the breast/chest, the leg and shield. The reverse at the eagle's breast, wings, then the field.
That way I see the little details that tell me if it's unc, whether it is fully struck, and if ticks are hidden in the details.
Like they say, how do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

 

I appreciate that. And I’ll tell you. I try very hard to avoid being negatively critical of a fellow collectors prize coin. If I was critical of one you posted I do wish to offer my apologies.

 

Maybe that's my problem; I won't eat elephant.

 

I really want to say something here, but it's against the rules, and a joke can be insulting even unintentionally. So I won't say it.

 

I am fortunate enough to be looking at hundreds of coins a day valued anywhere from a cent to $1,000,000+ and I will say that if the goal is to study a coin for potential purchase then dissecting it as GDJMSP suggested is really the best course.

Few coins really "wow" me anymore, but for those that do, I make sure to take a step back and reevaluate slooowly. If it's a coin I personally want, then often I solicit a second opinion from my numismatist friends to ensure I'm not adding points where I shouldn't.

I work with some of the best numismatists and graders and I can assure you, no one catches everything. That said, the best people in the business train their eyes by really studying thousands of coins in any given series and understanding how coins are being graded at any given moment. Specialists will understand the striking characteristics of any given year so as to know what to expect and even further, know the striking characteristics of specific varieties.

 

Sounds like a wise decision.

 

One part of this two-part question would take too much time to write but I'll do a column after some short observations here.

First, emotions should have NOTHING TO DO with coin grading. When they do, beat up coins with extra ordinary color can get graded two or more grades than that deserve and sell for millions of dollars.

This post contains some excellent advice although I don't do it except in the course of rotating it:

messydesk, posted: "Simplistic answer is to do whatever it normally takes for you to set aside emotions from any decision making process.

If you look at enough really nice coins, then you can desensitize yourself to the emotional triggers of looking at them. The downside of that is that the emotional triggers are something that we enjoy in this hobby.

Another trick to looking more objectively is to look at the coin upside-down when grading, right side up when admiring. That might give visual cues to your brain that will help."

"Islander80-83, posted: "Fortunately or unfortunately, we all can see the same exact thing, hear the same exact thing or read the same exact thing and walk away with multiple opinions. Yes, bias and subjectivity is a major factor. So I guess.............that's why this forum exists."

While I don't think subjectivity is a good thing about grading, when there is something on a coin, 99.9% of the time it is a certain characteristic and every comment that does not agree is incorrect! So you either see it and know what you are looking at. See it and think you know, See it and don't have a clue what you are looking at or don't see it at all. The goal of all of us should be the first possibility; however, as long as you see it, you can be helped/learn.


Read this twice:

TypeCoin971793, posted: "What I do is follow a process. Note that none of these steps are “admire the coin.” That way I can hold a 5-7 digit coin without partiality (which I have done several times).

1. Observe the luster. Is it all there? Is it broken? If so, how much is left? Is it natural luster? Is it disturbed by hairlines or other issues? Is it bold and brilliant? Is it soft or subdued?

2. Observe surface preservation. Rotate it under a light and catch all post-striking marks. The include bagmarks, hairlines, scratches, etc.

3. If the luster is broken from wear, observe the amount of detail/luster left and the strike characteristics to arrive at an appropriate grade. If there is no trace of luster left due to wear, to max it can grade is 45.

Step 1 should take 1-3 seconds on each side. Step 2/3 should take a total of 2-5 seconds on each side. There’s no time to get caught up in the coin. Once this is done, you have your objective judgment and can admire the coin all you want.
This works as well."

Fortunately, I never worked at a TPGS sweat mill. I have ALWAYS had the luxury of being able to take as much time as I wish to examine any coin at each of the places I've worked.

trogdor, posted: "I am fortunate enough to be looking at hundreds of coins a day valued anywhere from a cent to $1,000,000+ and I will say that if the goal is to study a coin for potential purchase then dissecting it as GDJMSP suggested is really the best course.

Few coins really "wow" me anymore, but for those that do, I make sure to take a step back and reevaluate slooowly. If it's a coin I personally want, then often I solicit a second opinion from my numismatist friends to ensure I'm not adding points where I shouldn't.

I work with some of the best numismatists and graders and I can assure you, no one catches everything. That said, the best people in the business train their eyes by really studying thousands of coins in any given series and understanding how coins are being graded at any given moment. Specialists will understand the striking characteristics of any given year so as to know what to expect and even further, know the striking characteristics of specific varieties."

This poster explains the importance of EXPERIENCE. It would be helpful to know who he is and where he works as he could add lots of "inside" info as this.

 

I can eventually see this whole bias and subjective grading thing being eliminated and solved by computer grading.

 

Thank you for adding your insight.