Beautiful colors and eye appeal. What do you think?

Insider2

Over the time I've been collecting (once I learned a coin's condition mattered) eye appeal has become THE MOST IMPORTANT part of the grading equation. I guess that's because a little "cabinet friction" became acceptable and "eye appeal" is sort of the "complete package" that includes all of a coin's attributes.

For a little over a decade (?) color has become the rage. Blazing beautiful, even colors definitely raise a coin's eye appeal. In fact, many common coins need to have beautiful color to reach the very highest grades.

It seems to me that the popularity and exclusiveness of these attractive colors very often can override a coin's actual technical condition based on friction, strike, luster, and marks.

Hey, I'm in the middle of this situation and appreciate color. I just saw some top-pop coins in another discussion that got me thinking. So, I'm interested in how others feel. Nothing in this discussion is going to affect the coin market so what do you think? In the ANA Guide, 67's, 68's, and 69's all have EXCEPTIONAL eye appeal. I should think "exceptional" would cover a coin's exceptional color too.

Should a "technical" MS-67 with full, blazing luster get kicked-up to MS-68 for its color? I guess the question of a grade bump for color could be asked for any MS grade. Would a star or plus suffice?

jmlanzaf

I think they should used a two-tiered system like NGC does for Ancients. For the ancients, they get a numerical grade (5 max) for "strike" and a separate grade for "surface" because these are two significant issues for ancients.

For moderns - 16/17th century forward, you could use a separate technical preservation grade and then a grade more akin to "eye appeal".

Note: Incorporating color into "eye appeal" (or whatever we call it) is problematic since it will change over time. Further, it is probably the most subjective thing about the coin. When I refer to "eye appeal" above, I'm talking more about how the small flaws distract (or don't).

Smudge

I think a plus or star is enough. A full point for nice color is a bit much. Tough and good question, but ugly toning should hold a coin back. Personally I like a coin or do not, and the look is more important than the number. I would rather hear you have the best looking coins than you have the most highly graded coins.

BillJones

If the coin has super colorful toning, the technical grade takes a backseat with respect to pricing. It's not my thing, but we've seen huge prices for color, even in a "dead series" like the the "old" commemorative half dollars.

thefinn

I think a coin should ultimately be graded on technical merits, then a bump (be it a star, or a rainbow, or unicorn) if it has something special. I do like the Ancient grading, were you would give it a technical grade, then maybe a "net" grade due to its esthetics. So maybe, a Morgan Dollar would technically grade MS65, but due to its incredible toning, put a "Rainbow" symbol next to that, and (MS67) in parentheses next to that showing its market grade. - which is really a subtle way of saying what it should price at.

ctf_error_coins

It is all about eye appeal.

divecchia

No, I think the grading should be kept as is and let everyone price the pieces accordingly instead of changing or adding to the grade because I believe eye appeal is just too subjective in my opinion. In other words, just because a grader finds a piece appealing does not necessarily mean I will or someone else will. Eye appeal to me is all about the lack of distracting hits and dark spots on a coin.

Donato

DIMEMAN

@divecchia said:
No, I think the grading should be kept as is and let everyone price the pieces accordingly instead of changing or adding to the grade because I believe eye appeal is just too subjective in my opinion. In other words, just because a grader finds a piece appealing does not necessarily mean I will or someone else will. Eye appeal to me is all about the lack of distracting hits and dark spots on a coin.

Donato

I completely agree.

Insider2

@divecchia said:
No, I think the grading should be kept as is and let everyone price the pieces accordingly instead of changing or adding to the grade because I believe eye appeal is just too subjective in my opinion. In other words, just because a grader finds a piece appealing does not necessarily mean I will or someone else will. Eye appeal to me is all about the lack of distracting hits and dark spots on a coin.

Donato

But a beautiful rainbow can negate this. Furthermore, that black rim often associated with beautiful color is terminal corrosion.

jmlanzaf

@ErrorsOnCoins said:
It is all about eye appeal.

That's why errors suck. Where's the eye appeal in a coin struck through a nail?

Onastone

Natural toning or artificially induced? Does it matter? If a coin has a rainbow of colors because it was left in a sock drawer should that be a new process of raising the coins value? Isn't toning a result of moisture or chemicals reacting with the coin? Does toning affect the luster? Does toning affect the grade? I guess that is the real question here, and if the toning is not attractive like a rainbow, does the coin lose a grade or get a minus mark? I've seen some of these beautiful colorful rainbow coins but it makes me wonder what caused those colors and it just doesn't seem natural to me.

@divecchia said:
No, I think the grading should be kept as is and let everyone price the pieces accordingly instead of changing or adding to the grade because I believe eye appeal is just too subjective in my opinion.

I agree here too.

Insider2

@jmlanzaf said: "That's why errors suck. Where's the eye appeal in a coin struck through a nail?"

Hint: GREEN & $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

bolivarshagnasty

"Should a "technical" MS-67 with full, blazing luster get kicked-up to MS-68 for its color? I guess the question of a grade bump for color could be asked for any MS grade. Would a star or plus suffice?"

I think I see this fairly often from PCGS. Technically the coin should be a 67 but gets a 68 due to outstanding original toning.

ChrisH821

I don't think attractive color should add to a numerical grade. I believe that's what a plus or NGC star is for(among other attributes like unusually strong luster). Let the market decide what the toning is worth above the technical grade price.

koynekwest

I agree with the statement above. A star or some such thing would be fine. I think, tho, the strike should be rated separately, especially for those series that are notorious for poor strikes.

WildIdea

I would think that a coins technical grade should win the day. As you stated, color is all the rage right now, but trends could change and down the road color may not be valued the same way.

I always thought a coins grade could and should describe the coin sight unseen. A coin with color, say graded 66, 67, or 8 wouldn’t really tell the whole story over the phone or in print. A 67 given an 8 really doesn’t help much if your buying. Sometimes a coin has huge price jumps per grade and maybe a coins price bump for color doesn’t really merit the same price lift. I think that’s the point of the plus and star designations. It describes a coin as a MS X with something extra.

So again, I think that a coin accurately graded based on it’s surviving condition since it left the mint and then go from there based on the color either pos or negative to arrive at a more accurate price than just dealing with it in the numerical grade.

SiriusBlack

Who do I need to contact to vote for the unicorn grade?! This needs to happen!

Catbert

I think the plus should be reserved for eye appeal only and not an additional grade step level. Apply the technical grade and use the plus for the eye appeal notation only.

Catbert

Of course, the opposite would be true, ala minus, for ugly toning.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

batumi

I do like the star system that NGC uses. Great eye appeal on most imo.

ricko

I have maintained for years, that tarnish (of any kind) should not be considered in the numerical grade. A coin should be graded only on technical merits. I have no problem with a symbol for 'eye appeal' - though I am also sure that measuring eye appeal is an exercise in futility. What is attractive to one person is not necessarily attractive to another. This is evidenced in art and selection of partners (men or women). Giving a star or a plus simply demonstrates the opinion of the graders reflecting what they believe is popular at the time. I understand why a rainbow of colors will appeal to some collectors. However, I like my coins as close to original (meaning untarnished) as possible... and I prefer ladies who use little or no makeup. I have seen coins shown here that are flat out butt ugly - and there are always a few that find them attractive. I do not take issue with those that like tarnished coins... it is a matter of personal preference. That being said, it has no place in the grading of coins. Cheers, RickO

CopperCollector

This is a Modern Lincoln Cent that will command a lot of money. It is graded MS68+ and without the color probably would have graded MS65 with all the hits and spots. http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/81634364_121531218_max.jpg

WildIdea

Another thought.
If the graders take a MS 66 with color and bump it to say MS 67 or something for color, then a dealer is gonna say "look at this 67 with color, I gotta bump the price for the color, right!" Ultimately, they are getting the coins price way out of whack and it's no wonder toning premiums are just crazy now days.

Then the buyers go crazy because they've never seen a 67 with color before in the series and then it can get crazy from there, when all along it was a 66 with prob a modest toning premium at best.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

rln_14

Color should not affect the numerical grade. I have seen some toned coins on this forum that I think are absolutely ugly and others think are beautiful. Toning
"attractiveness" is highly subjective, should not influence the numeric grade at all, imho

Baley

All grades are net grades. For example, a VF20 is just a 70 net 50 points of wear. Yes, beautiful color can add points.

@ErrorsOnCoins said:
It is all about eye appeal.

Agree; and tastes differ. some collectors find nothing uglier than a major error, and would never buy one at any price. C'est la vie.

Insider2

@CopperCollector said:
This is a Modern Lincoln Cent that will command a lot of money. It is graded MS68+ and without the color probably would have graded MS65 with all the hits and spots. http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/81634364_121531218_max.jpg

I consider small spots almost as detracting as bagmarks! Not my 68!

Insider2

@afford said:
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...........and therefore should be left out of grading imho.

@rln_14 said:
Color should not affect the numerical grade. I have seen some toned coins on this forum that I think are absolutely ugly and others think are beautiful. Toning
"attractiveness" is highly subjective, should not influence the numeric grade at all, imho

But, don't TPGS claim to be putting a VALUE on a coin? Beautiful color adds value to a coin today as evidenced by the auctions. So which is it? No "bump" ($$$) for color or "bump" ($$$) OK? Are both views correct?

Justacommeman

Grading is over rated

m

messydesk

At the end of the day, every actual coin grade has a dollar sign in front of it, and the TPGs grade assignment tries to accommodate this fact with minor bumps and "nets", to arrive at grade that is, to a point, a proxy for the amount they think the coin should sell for. CAC further agrees or disagrees based on whether they'd honor their bid for a coin of that grade. Monster color coins and the market's current reaction to color creates a bit of an outlier situation where the price can't be effectively predicted with a grade, so a 3/4 point bump for stunning eye appeal due to monster toning on an otherwise MS63 1884-O Morgan isn't going to reflect this and result in an MS68 grade.

I've used the term "hypercube of quality" to describe a 4-dimensional space with the axes labeled luster, strike, surfaces, and eye appeal, and then explained that the TPGs attempt to project this information into not only a 1-dimensional value, but a discrete one with fewer than 20 values, if we're only considering uncirculated grades. As market tastes change, the projection changes. The effect can be like those sculptures that are made such that viewed from one side, you see a circle, while viewed from another side, you see a square, or maybe a gorilla.

rln_14

@Insider2 said:

@afford said:
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...........and therefore should be left out of grading imho.

@rln_14 said:
Color should not affect the numerical grade. I have seen some toned coins on this forum that I think are absolutely ugly and others think are beautiful. Toning
"attractiveness" is highly subjective, should not influence the numeric grade at all, imho

But, don't TPGS claim to be putting a VALUE on a coin? Beautiful color adds value to a coin today as evidenced by the auctions. So which is it? No "bump" ($$$) for color or "bump" ($$$) OK? Are both views correct?

Insider, i am just a small time collector, i cannot make any educated comments about value, i just know what i like to look at and what grade i think a coin might be, i will leave value to you pros

Insider2

@messydesk posted: "I've used the term "hypercube of quality" to describe a 4-dimensional space with the axes labeled luster, strike, surfaces, and eye appeal, and then explained that the TPGs attempt to project this information into not only a 1-dimensional value, but a discrete one with fewer than 20 values, if we're only considering uncirculated grades. As market tastes change, the projection changes. The effect can be like those sculptures that are made such that viewed from one side, you see a circle, while viewed from another side, you see a square, or maybe a gorilla."

Perhaps you would write an article for the numismatist on this.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Insider2

Unfortunately, the commercial market abhorred the True technical grading practiced at the first TPGS (INSAB) and the second TPGS (ANACS using a "bastardized" similar system in CO). Technical grading did not consider a coin's eye appeal or strike to be important as neither reflected the condition of the coin from when it was struck. Strike and "ugly" were described separately.

Eye appeal affects the coin's value and today's TPGS attempt to value a coin. IMHO, it is a failure as circulated coins are graded MS and there are huge differences in value between to MS-65 coin's of the same date and mint, with/without any additional stickers.

Baley

The Grade of a coin is another way of saying the Quality if a coin. Are the Strict Technical Graders who hold themselves in such high esteem stating that a coin with absolutely no wear or toning but lots of bagmarks (an MS60) is of higher Quality than a coin with the slightest bit of wear on the highpoints, but no bagmarks, and with subtle peripheral toning ( a "technical" AU58)?

mannie gray

@Insider2
You are only partially correct.
Your quote should read : "WELL circulated coins are graded MS"

I don't intend to derail the thread, but it's time for the TPGs to drop the "MS."
Just give it a number.
This will be my mission moving forward and I will dedicate my remaining numismatic energy to see that it takes place and that I live to see it.
"Drop the MS BS."

Baley

@mannie gray said:
@Insider2
You are only partially correct.
Your quote should read : "WELL circulated coins are graded MS"

I don't intend to derail the thread, but it's time for the TPGs to drop the "MS."
Just give it a number.
This will be my mission moving forward and I will dedicate my remaining numismatic energy to see that it takes place and that I live to see it.
"Drop the MS BS."

Exactly right!

Namvet69

ricko read my mind! Toning has little to do with the minting process beyond heat, pressure, alloy, contaminants etc. IMO. What happens after the coin pops out of the press is wear or damage. Peace Roy

Insider2

@mannie gray said:
@Insider2
You are only partially correct.
Your quote should read : "WELL circulated coins are graded MS"

I don't intend to derail the thread, but it's time for the TPGs to drop the "MS."
Just give it a number.
This will be my mission moving forward and I will dedicate my remaining numismatic energy to see that it takes place and that I live to see it.
"Drop the MS BS."

Ain't going to happen. A large number of folks have been on that mission for decades **with no success.

Baley

Then end the Arbitrary and Contradictory "Line" at 60 and allow gorgeous old coins with a hint of friction to be called AU64 and ugly beat up stainy-toned coins with no wear to be called MS53. Would make a LOT nore sense to everyone.