Do You Agree With What Jim Halperin Says About Eye Appeal?
IGWT
Posts: 4,975 ✭
I've read many times -- and Rick's survey confirms -- that "eye appeal" is the most important factor for many collectors in considering a coin for purchase. Jim Halperin has written that eye appeal is just one factor in grading a coin, weighted the same as strike and luster, but given just half the value of surface preservation. In explaining eye appeal, he writes:
"If lustre sounds subjective to you (it really isn't, it just takes a lot of experience to evaluate it) just wait until you learn about eye-appeal. Eye-appeal is, by far, the most subjective aspect of grading.
. . . .
"Since eye-appeal can be so important, it is critical that you develop a sense for it an art critic's eye for the aesthetically pleasing. My best friend, Marc Emory probably has the best eye for quality in the coin business today. Marc taught me almost everything I know about eye-appeal. He believes, as I do, that eye appeal can best be divided into three distinct areas: Toning, balance, and that certain inexplicable: aesthetic attractiveness."
Do you agree with that statement? Read on for a good example of the importance of eye appeal:
"To give you an idea about the importance of eye-appeal, I will now tell you my favorite rare coin war story. In late 1979, Jerry Cohen, then a partner in the Abner Kreisberg Corporation, held a coin auction in Los Angeles. It was an especially beautiful sale with many interesting coins. One of the most interesting (and rare) coins in that sale was a 1795 Small Eagle bust dollar, described simply as Uncirculated. It was a gem coin with superb surfaces, lustre and strike. Unfortunately, the toning was positively hideous. The coin simply lacked eye-appeal.
"The Coin Dealer Newsletter listed "bid" that week at $22,500 in MS-65, and most of the top dealers (myself included) were willing to bid somewhere in the $20,000-$25,000 range for the coin. Steve Ivy, my good friend, but also at that time my arch rival (we're now business partners - how the world changes!) bought the coin for $28,000.
. . . .
"I suppose I had some reservations about dipping the coin. Even for an expert, dipping a coin is a risky undertaking. (And I would never recommend that a novice ever dip a coin). What if the toning hid some unpardonable flaw? Or what if the lustre became dull as a result of the dipping? Still; no guts, no glory!
"A quick dip in Jewel Luster produced the most stunning, blazing white semi-prooflike gem early U.S. silver coin I had ever seen! Really, nothing had changed except the eye-appeal factor. The coin was transformed from a "technical MS-65" with no eye-appeal, to a wonder coin, a coin that had it all. The coin that Steve couldn't sell now had suitors waiting in line. There were literally half a dozen knowledgeable buyers begging me to give them first shot at the coin. I sold it to a dealer in the Boston area for $137,500."
J. Halperin, How to Grade U.S. Coins (1990).
Do you agree with his no-guts-no-glory approach to enhancing the eye appeal of a coin? The "eye-appeal" factor -- the quality that most collectors appear to value above all else -- is the reason that underlies dipping and artificial toning. We're given what we want; remember that the next time you demand eye appeal above all else when buying a coin.
"If lustre sounds subjective to you (it really isn't, it just takes a lot of experience to evaluate it) just wait until you learn about eye-appeal. Eye-appeal is, by far, the most subjective aspect of grading.
. . . .
"Since eye-appeal can be so important, it is critical that you develop a sense for it an art critic's eye for the aesthetically pleasing. My best friend, Marc Emory probably has the best eye for quality in the coin business today. Marc taught me almost everything I know about eye-appeal. He believes, as I do, that eye appeal can best be divided into three distinct areas: Toning, balance, and that certain inexplicable: aesthetic attractiveness."
Do you agree with that statement? Read on for a good example of the importance of eye appeal:
"To give you an idea about the importance of eye-appeal, I will now tell you my favorite rare coin war story. In late 1979, Jerry Cohen, then a partner in the Abner Kreisberg Corporation, held a coin auction in Los Angeles. It was an especially beautiful sale with many interesting coins. One of the most interesting (and rare) coins in that sale was a 1795 Small Eagle bust dollar, described simply as Uncirculated. It was a gem coin with superb surfaces, lustre and strike. Unfortunately, the toning was positively hideous. The coin simply lacked eye-appeal.
"The Coin Dealer Newsletter listed "bid" that week at $22,500 in MS-65, and most of the top dealers (myself included) were willing to bid somewhere in the $20,000-$25,000 range for the coin. Steve Ivy, my good friend, but also at that time my arch rival (we're now business partners - how the world changes!) bought the coin for $28,000.
. . . .
"I suppose I had some reservations about dipping the coin. Even for an expert, dipping a coin is a risky undertaking. (And I would never recommend that a novice ever dip a coin). What if the toning hid some unpardonable flaw? Or what if the lustre became dull as a result of the dipping? Still; no guts, no glory!
"A quick dip in Jewel Luster produced the most stunning, blazing white semi-prooflike gem early U.S. silver coin I had ever seen! Really, nothing had changed except the eye-appeal factor. The coin was transformed from a "technical MS-65" with no eye-appeal, to a wonder coin, a coin that had it all. The coin that Steve couldn't sell now had suitors waiting in line. There were literally half a dozen knowledgeable buyers begging me to give them first shot at the coin. I sold it to a dealer in the Boston area for $137,500."
J. Halperin, How to Grade U.S. Coins (1990).
Do you agree with his no-guts-no-glory approach to enhancing the eye appeal of a coin? The "eye-appeal" factor -- the quality that most collectors appear to value above all else -- is the reason that underlies dipping and artificial toning. We're given what we want; remember that the next time you demand eye appeal above all else when buying a coin.
0
Comments
<< <i>The easiest way to judge eye appeal-ask someone who knows NOTHING about coins if a coin is pretty. It works every time! >>
There's great wisdom in simplicity.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
But i do not agree with all his " P.Q." labels
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Not true, but it is true that eye appeal often plays a bigger role in valuation than it does in grading.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I bounce coins off my seven year old son all the time. He is a really good barometer for what's nice and what isn't.
Here is a link to the book online
The coin grading method described in his book is what I use to grade coins. It is a step-by-step method to get you "in the ballpark" on the grade of an uncirculated coin. It quantitatively breaks down uncirculated coin grading into the following four factors: Surface Preservation, Strike, Luster, and Eye-Appeal. This method is not "fool proof", but it is repeatable.
The coin grading method described in his book is accomplished by assigning a number from 1 to 5 (1 the worst and 5 the best, with half numbers also acceptable) to each of the four factors mentioned above. It also assumes Surface Preservation is twice as important as any of the other three factors. After assignment of numbers is complete, you add them up and compare to a table in the book for assignment of numerical grade. This method is applied to the obverse and reverse independently.
For example, 5 to 12.99 points is MS-60, and you are looking at the following coin...
The coin you are looking at has no wear (and thus an uncirculated coin), but it has bag marks everywhere, that is a Surface Preservation of 1.
The coin has a very weak strike (for a coin that is expected to have average strike or better), then that is a Strike of 1.
The coin has very bad luster (no cartwheel at all), then it has a Luster of 1.
The coin just looks bad (so you might be wondering why you are even looking at it), then that is an Eye-Appeal of 1.
Since Surface Preservation counts as twice as important as the others the count is 1x2 +1 +1 +1, which equals 5 points. This coin is as bad as an uncirculated coin could get and it is still an MS-60.
Now you are saying, there is no way the coin I am looking at is that bad. Great, let us pick a more representative example...
The coin has a few bag marks but a couple are right there in the middle where you can really see them. That is a Surface Preservation of 2 (for this example).
The coin has an average strike then the Strike is a 3.
There is fair luster, then the Luster is a 2.
The overall look of the coin is not displeasing (which is why you are looking at the coin), then the Eye-Appeal is a 3.
The count would be 2x2 +3 +2 +3, which equals 12 points. This uncirculated coin is much better than the previous example, but it is still an MS-60.
So, what have we learned? There is a large group of coins that will grade MS-60. What if that last coin we discussed (in your opinion) had a Luster of 3 or a Strike of 4? In either case, then the coin would have been MS-61 (and worth more). Should it be worth more? Yes, if the one coin is in all aspects the same as another except it has slightly better strike or luster then it is a better coin and should be worth more. It also explains why a coin that does not look "stunning" can grade the same as a "stunning" coin. The difference between the two coins could be that one is well-struck, but has a lot of bag marks, while the other is weakly struck, but is relatively free of such marks. Or instead of bag marks, the difference could be that one has much better luster than the other.
To identify a top notch uncirculated coin, it must have no wear (otherwise it would be a circulated coin), be relatively free of marks (especially in the most important areas), be well struck, have above average luster (you will know it when you see it), and have eye-appeal (you will also know this when you see it).
You are probably saying, "this seems very subjective". Well, grading coins is very subjective. That is why there is such debate on the grading of coins. If you are looking at a coin (with the intent of buying it) and you disagree with the grade, either offer an amount equal to the fair market value for the grade you believe the coin to be and see if the seller is willing to take it, or walk away, or pay what the seller is asking. But understand that not every MS-63 coin looks the same. There is one or more reasons why the coin is not a higher quality (or lower quality). Is it the strike (probably the hardest to really quantify), or is it the bag marks, or is it sub-par luster, or is it the over-all look of the coin? As you go up in quality, you will see the coins looking much more alike.
I have more to say on all of this on My web page
Which explains part of the reason that (1) coins are worked on, and (2) the concept of market acceptability is fundamental to the operations of the TPGs.
<< <i>It's pretty clear that I wrote a post that is too long to hold readers' attention to the end.
I read the entire post and agree with it for the most part.
I only buy coins that are eye appealing, at least to me. Maybe the eye appeal factor will not raise a coin by a full point and it probably shouldn't. But, if a coin is so close to the next grade up, that eye appeal factor may just be what pushes it over the edge to get to that next point grade. Is this a bad thing?
Surely eye appeal is worth smoething as compared to your average every day run of the mill coin. A coin that is "special" will usually carry a premium price. I don't mind paying that premium for that "special" coin.
-----------
etexmike
This may give another point of view on his grading...
She knows nothing, but knows what looks nice.
Eye appeal DOES affect grade and should. Many folks on the baords grade the grading posts from a technical perspective. OK, but eye appeal will push a coin to a higher grade if it's superb. It's kind of like nice toning adding a point (not MOC Toning).
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
<< <i> The point? Eye appeal is not only subjective but transient. >>
When I read this, I thought of "Rubenesque". Despite what modern society thinks, 400-500 years ago "substantial" women were the supermodels. Times change.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>The easiest way to judge eye appeal-ask someone who knows NOTHING about coins if a coin is pretty. It works every time! >>
I think that's a very true statement, but there are exceptions. A collector, well studied in his or her area, particularly when it comes to original toning, which they may likely end up judging in a completely different way than someone who is non studied, might find certain coins as having exceptional eye appeal, while someone less studied may not.
I hope that wasn't too much of a runaway sentence, but I forgot to use periods!