I remember long before there were any third party grading services when MS70 was considered to be a theoretical grade for a coin that was totally perfect and it was considered that no such coin existed.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@Insider2 said: @Texast said: "I'm looking at the lower bands, the mark there could definitely be a bag mark, as far as the scratch above that if there were a coin with a sharp piece of metal attached dragging across the coin could cause this. It's all speculation so each opinion on what caused this could be valid.
Actually, this is not true. In many cases, some opinions are - well, not valid at all. When I read such statements from any long time member here it makes me wonder what they have been doing all those years.
_The mark on the lower bands is part of the deep, long scratch on the coin. It happens to be placed in such a position that most folks viewing the coin would not see it. That is why it is a good coin to discuss. I encourage folks to look over their coins closely. They can use their eyes alone or ANY POWER OF MAGNIFICATION they wish. I don't choose to let a SUGGESTED STANDARD limit what I can see on a coin. I really don't care what anyone else does. Really.
You take things to literally, then you find some reason for a personal attack, I'm not sure why you do this.
Literally? It is not a bag mark because it looks nothing like a bag mark. I'm not attacking YOU or any other member. IT IS AGAINST THE RULES. I consider everyone here (including myself) to be playing student in some discussions and teacher in others. No one posting on CU is 100% correct all the time including me. It's too bad we cannot keep the good comments and delete the trash in each discussion.
In this discussion, I'm playing the "no-nonsense" Jesuit teacher in a no BS classroom. If we were brave enough to comment, it better be correct or at least reasonable. Otherwise...
With this post, I'm trying to help you and others learn what they are seeing that may be hidden on a coin. As I've explained several times, I've been looking at coins using both eyes (depth perception) and florescent light (removes glare & reflections from the surface) for quite a while. That gives me the ability to look at many things on coins with my eyes alone or a 7X magnifier and know what I'm looking at = A VALID OPINION not a WAG or opening for a discussion. When members post magnified images of parts of a coin, I've probably already seen the coin at that power of magnification in the past.
Take another look at the image again. You should be able to see the clear evidence that the scratch CONTINUED across the bands!
@isaiah58 said:
If the grading system goes by 5x magnification, then the coin in the original picture passes doesn't it? There must be a reason for the standard?
There is a perfectly good reason for a 5X standard. Can you think of what it could be?
After you guess I'll give you a clue.
My guess is that no perfect coins exist. To allow for reasonable expectations based on the striking process, 5x goes reasonably enough beyond what anyone can see without magnification. Hopefully there was a consensus to the standard.
This discussion has not incorporated luster or toning, which are subjective I believe and not addressed as damage if natural?
This discussion has nothing to do with luster or toning.
Actually, If I wish to get stupid, I'd need to agree with you. That's because at some power of magnification we can find some sort of imperfection on any coin. I've NEVER SEEN a coin with perfect edges. I have seen coins that are PERFECT ENOUGH at 20X for me to stop looking for defects. LOL. I grade coins MS-70 all-day-long with a close examination at 7X to 10X.
The reason 5X was picked (formerly 4X if I remember correctly from a time before TPGS) and incandescent light is used is to limit what can be seen on a coin. Thus, it can be graded higher including AU's becoming MS. I want folks to see everything there is to see on a coin FIRST! Then they can MODERATE their opinion to be aligned with others (TPGS & commercial coin market) and possibly ignore some defects on coins like scratches.
Warning: Conservative graders lose out when they sell coins that are upgraded immediately after the sale.
@isaiah58 said:
If the grading system goes by 5x magnification, then the coin in the original picture passes doesn't it? There must be a reason for the standard?
There is a perfectly good reason for a 5X standard. Can you think of what it could be?
After you guess I'll give you a clue.
My guess is that no perfect coins exist. To allow for reasonable expectations based on the striking process, 5x goes reasonably enough beyond what anyone can see without magnification. Hopefully there was a consensus to the standard.
This discussion has not incorporated luster or toning, which are subjective I believe and not addressed as damage if natural?
This discussion has nothing to do with luster or toning.
Actually, If I wish to get stupid, I'd need to agree with you. That's because at some power of magnification we can find some sort of imperfection on any coin. I've NEVER SEEN a coin with perfect edges. I have seen coins that are PERFECT ENOUGH at 20X for me to stop looking for defects. LOL. I grade coins MS-70 all-day-long with a close examination at 7X to 10X.
The reason 5X was picked (formerly 4X if I remember correctly from a time before TPGS) and incandescent light is used is to limit what can be seen on a coin. Thus, it can be graded higher including AU's becoming MS. I want folks to see everything there is to see on a coin FIRST! Then they can MODERATE their opinion to be aligned with others (TPGS & commercial coin market) and possibly ignore some defects on coins like scratches.
Warning: Conservative graders lose out when they sell coins that are upgraded immediately after the sale.
I understand your position and your intent. I am in sales, I come across many people that know way too much, and many that know very little. In reality, it is difficult for anyone to know just enough.
I sell new cars. Under 5x magnification one can see imperfections in factory paint. That does not make the paint imperfect or damaged.
The discussion here is more important to a investor looking for the best specimen produced. Even proof coins are mishandled, yet still proof.
I have a question. For government issued stabbed coins, or let's say I am at a coin show and a seller has a generic slab. Can magnification be used effectively enough to detect marks on a coin through the holder? Can slabbbed coins be properly examined?
@isaiah58 said:
If the grading system goes by 5x magnification, then the coin in the original picture passes doesn't it? There must be a reason for the standard?
There is a perfectly good reason for a 5X standard. Can you think of what it could be?
After you guess I'll give you a clue.
My guess is that no perfect coins exist. To allow for reasonable expectations based on the striking process, 5x goes reasonably enough beyond what anyone can see without magnification. Hopefully there was a consensus to the standard.
This discussion has not incorporated luster or toning, which are subjective I believe and not addressed as damage if natural?
This discussion has nothing to do with luster or toning.
Actually, If I wish to get stupid, I'd need to agree with you. That's because at some power of magnification we can find some sort of imperfection on any coin. I've NEVER SEEN a coin with perfect edges. I have seen coins that are PERFECT ENOUGH at 20X for me to stop looking for defects. LOL. I grade coins MS-70 all-day-long with a close examination at 7X to 10X.
The reason 5X was picked (formerly 4X if I remember correctly from a time before TPGS) and incandescent light is used is to limit what can be seen on a coin. Thus, it can be graded higher including AU's becoming MS. I want folks to see everything there is to see on a coin FIRST! Then they can MODERATE their opinion to be aligned with others (TPGS & commercial coin market) and possibly ignore some defects on coins like scratches.
Warning: Conservative graders lose out when they sell coins that are upgraded immediately after the sale.
I understand your position and your intent. I am in sales, I come across many people that know way too much, and many that know very little. In reality, it is difficult for anyone to know just enough.
I sell new cars. Under 5x magnification one can see imperfections in factory paint. That does not make the paint imperfect or damaged.
The discussion here is more important to a investor looking for the best specimen produced. Even proof coins are mishandled, yet still proof.
I have a question. For government issued stabbed coins, or let's say I am at a coin show and a seller has a generic slab. Can magnification be used effectively enough to detect marks on a coin through the holder? Can slabbbed coins be properly examined?
It all comes down to each individual's choice. I see plenty of defects on coins that I CHOOSE to ignore when I assign a "Commercial" grade.. I also see plenty of modern coins that I cannot find a significant defect on at 15X!
As for your paint example, depending on the make of the car, comparing a factory paint job to a custom job is similar to the example I've given above. At some power of magnification things show up, however, coins are normally not graded at high magnification. The ONLY points of this post are to carefully examine your coins AND more importantly, make sure you take steps TO SEE EVERYTHING there is to see on the coin so you can make an informed decision to buy it. Note: this decision has NOTHING to do with the coin's ACTUAL grade or the "Commercial" opinion on the label.
@Insider2 said: @TwoSides2aCoin said: "What if it's struck through a thread or wire and only looks like a scratch ?"
Please tell us why this cannot be a struck through, or a bag mark either:
I'm not the best at describing but let me try to explain what I'm seeing. I see a scratch because of the displaced metal in the lower bands. Had it been struck through, the metal flow would have not "mushroomed". And a bag mark won leave a long scratch. I think of bag marks as ugly chatter. This is a curved line going through and across the fasces , even into the bands, but not in the deeper recesses of the devices.
Simple enough: post mint damage.
However my first response was primarily to have others consider that not all "apparent" scratches are such. Die polish lines and struck through both have their distinctive characteristics. Please don't ask me to explain myself again. I have writer's cramps.
@TwoSides2aCoin said: "However my first response was primarily to have others consider that not all "apparent" scratches are such. Die polish lines and struck through both have their distinctive characteristics."
"Please don't ask me to explain myself again. I have writer's cramps."
I won't but I'll make a suggestion that would have saved both of us from posting.
The internet and coin forums are full of nonsense, misinformation, and uninformed opinions. An image gets posted and all sorts of "what if's" are often expressed without explaining the characteristics the poster saw to back up the opinion.
This place can be like a school. So, while It is an excellent idea to post characteristics that may look similar to the actual defect in an image, I'll suggest (in the interest of education) that knowledgeable members like you continue to suggest options and then explain why that option is not valid.
Comments
I remember long before there were any third party grading services when MS70 was considered to be a theoretical grade for a coin that was totally perfect and it was considered that no such coin existed.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Literally? It is not a bag mark because it looks nothing like a bag mark. I'm not attacking YOU or any other member. IT IS AGAINST THE RULES. I consider everyone here (including myself) to be playing student in some discussions and teacher in others. No one posting on CU is 100% correct all the time including me. It's too bad we cannot keep the good comments and delete the trash in each discussion.
In this discussion, I'm playing the "no-nonsense" Jesuit teacher in a no BS classroom. If we were brave enough to comment, it better be correct or at least reasonable. Otherwise...
With this post, I'm trying to help you and others learn what they are seeing that may be hidden on a coin. As I've explained several times, I've been looking at coins using both eyes (depth perception) and florescent light (removes glare & reflections from the surface) for quite a while. That gives me the ability to look at many things on coins with my eyes alone or a 7X magnifier and know what I'm looking at = A VALID OPINION not a WAG or opening for a discussion. When members post magnified images of parts of a coin, I've probably already seen the coin at that power of magnification in the past.
Take another look at the image again. You should be able to see the clear evidence that the scratch CONTINUED across the bands!
@TwoSides2aCoin said: "What if it's struck through a thread or wire and only looks like a scratch ?"
Please tell us why this cannot be a struck through, or a bag mark either:
This discussion has nothing to do with luster or toning.
Actually, If I wish to get stupid, I'd need to agree with you. That's because at some power of magnification we can find some sort of imperfection on any coin. I've NEVER SEEN a coin with perfect edges. I have seen coins that are PERFECT ENOUGH at 20X for me to stop looking for defects. LOL. I grade coins MS-70 all-day-long with a close examination at 7X to 10X.
The reason 5X was picked (formerly 4X if I remember correctly from a time before TPGS) and incandescent light is used is to limit what can be seen on a coin. Thus, it can be graded higher including AU's becoming MS. I want folks to see everything there is to see on a coin FIRST! Then they can MODERATE their opinion to be aligned with others (TPGS & commercial coin market) and possibly ignore some defects on coins like scratches.
Warning: Conservative graders lose out when they sell coins that are upgraded immediately after the sale.
I understand your position and your intent. I am in sales, I come across many people that know way too much, and many that know very little. In reality, it is difficult for anyone to know just enough.
I sell new cars. Under 5x magnification one can see imperfections in factory paint. That does not make the paint imperfect or damaged.
The discussion here is more important to a investor looking for the best specimen produced. Even proof coins are mishandled, yet still proof.
I have a question. For government issued stabbed coins, or let's say I am at a coin show and a seller has a generic slab. Can magnification be used effectively enough to detect marks on a coin through the holder? Can slabbbed coins be properly examined?
It all comes down to each individual's choice. I see plenty of defects on coins that I CHOOSE to ignore when I assign a "Commercial" grade.. I also see plenty of modern coins that I cannot find a significant defect on at 15X!
As for your paint example, depending on the make of the car, comparing a factory paint job to a custom job is similar to the example I've given above. At some power of magnification things show up, however, coins are normally not graded at high magnification. The ONLY points of this post are to carefully examine your coins AND more importantly, make sure you take steps TO SEE EVERYTHING there is to see on the coin so you can make an informed decision to buy it. Note: this decision has NOTHING to do with the coin's ACTUAL grade or the "Commercial" opinion on the label.
Yes, coins can be graded through plastic holders
I'm not the best at describing but let me try to explain what I'm seeing. I see a scratch because of the displaced metal in the lower bands. Had it been struck through, the metal flow would have not "mushroomed". And a bag mark won leave a long scratch. I think of bag marks as ugly chatter. This is a curved line going through and across the fasces , even into the bands, but not in the deeper recesses of the devices.
Simple enough: post mint damage.
However my first response was primarily to have others consider that not all "apparent" scratches are such. Die polish lines and struck through both have their distinctive characteristics. Please don't ask me to explain myself again. I have writer's cramps.
@TwoSides2aCoin said: "However my first response was primarily to have others consider that not all "apparent" scratches are such. Die polish lines and struck through both have their distinctive characteristics."
"Please don't ask me to explain myself again. I have writer's cramps."
I won't but I'll make a suggestion that would have saved both of us from posting.
The internet and coin forums are full of nonsense, misinformation, and uninformed opinions. An image gets posted and all sorts of "what if's" are often expressed without explaining the characteristics the poster saw to back up the opinion.
This place can be like a school. So, while It is an excellent idea to post characteristics that may look similar to the actual defect in an image, I'll suggest (in the interest of education) that knowledgeable members like you continue to suggest options and then explain why that option is not valid.