What component of MS grading is the most important to YOU?
BryceM
Posts: 11,845 ✭✭✭✭✭
We all know that our host uses eye appeal, surface preservation, luster, and strike to grade mint-state coins. Is there one particular attribute that is the most important to you, all other things being equal? Are there certain things you can easily look past?
We can go down the rabbit-hole of technical vs. market grading, or get off on a side-tangent CAC discussion if you want, but what really makes a coin attractive to you? For example, from Bowers’ writings, he seems to really emphasize strike detail.
I’ll share my thoughts later.
0
Comments
Make this a poll?
I think most people are going to say eye appeal, but what that means to an individual is derived from one or all of the other attributes, depending on personal taste.
For me it’s luster. I can forgive strike detail most easily and don’t mind the marks as much if the coin is lustrous and therefore attractive.
Well color or luster eye appeal is number one but a excellent strike is a definite plus but not a must, A coin can have the best strike and have defect free surfaces but if it’s not attractive it’s a no go now I don’t mind crusty or toned but black or brown spotty toning you see in a lot of Washington quarters is yuk!
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-major-sets/washington-quarters-date-set-circulation-strikes-1932-present/publishedset/209923
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-major-sets/washington-quarters-date-set-circulation-strikes-1932-present/album/209923
Can make up my mind between surface preservation and luster. If a coin has both of those, then I can forgive an awful strike and "bad" eye appeal.
I'm in the same boat and agree that eye appeal is in large part contingent on the other components.
I would vote eye appeal but luster is often needed to solidify the appeal (so they are a close one and two).
I am more forgiving of strike and surface preservation.
I would add original surfaces Bryce.
Originality and luster = eye appeal for classic issues IMHO.
Pick one I choose eye appeal.
Can't have eye appeal with a bad strike or too many marks. Can't have great luster if dipped too much. Sort of like a new vehicle. Looks, performance, comfort, reliability, etc. …
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
Eye appeal. As others have noted, that comprises the other candidate attributes of luster, toning, surface preservation, and strike. I don't see the point of owning a coin that isn't a pleasure to look at unless it's so rare that there aren't any attractive (or other affordable) examples.
Eye Appeal
Original surface + cartwheel luster!
Strike.
Eye appeal.
Luster.
Originality.
Surface Preservation.
In that order.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
It turns out I have no idea. Here are three relatively recent MS65FBLs I purchased, and I like them all in hand. They all look different, and they’re all enjoyable to me...luster is good, strike is obviously good (FBL), so I don’t know. I think I can forgive anything if I like it.
Yes, my set is very eclectic, as well.
That's a great way to collect, IMHO.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I don't quite know how surface preservation is measured / determined.
For example, I like toners a lot which have good eye appeal, but I think that, by definition, they can have more surface issues than white coins.
Honestly, I don't think there's any one thing that's more important than another to me. I know I'm a bit contrarian in how I do the hobby than most people, though. I usually use a gestalt principle that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. Kind of an "I know it when I see it" thing. Whenever I try to analyze why I like a particular coin I find that whatever criteria I determine is different from another coin entirely.
I'll never be a numismatic scholar but I don't exactly want to be one.
Have to: Clean surfaces, especially fields. Luster.
Willing to: Contact marks, especially if hidden amongst device details. Less than hammered strike.
Can't do: Spots, mottled oxidation/coloring.
This combination usually = eye appeal for me.
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
Eye appeal for me, with natural surfaces corresponding to the age of the coin.
An extra tick here and there doesn't bother me at all.
If it's a 'blast white' 200 year old Bust Half dollar, I run away screaming...
Dave
Strike is the least important consideration to me and isn’t an issue, unless it’s very weak.
Beyond that, I refuse to (or perhaps can’t) rank the other attributes.😉
If a coin exhibits even exceptional luster and/or eye-appeal but is lacking in surface preservation/has distracting flaws, it won’t be for me. On the other hand, if a coin is exceptionally well preserved, but dull and/or ugly, it won’t be for me, either. I’m not very forgiving of any non-strike deficiencies.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Strike is the one I can live without at lower MS grades. It's tough to live without luster. Strike becomes important for me starting at 65. At that point the coin has to start to be "all there" l, and I try to be less forgiving in general.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
Eye appeal.
Mark, do you still collect coins? The reason I ask is that it would be great to see them! When you were a dealer, I loved looking at your personal site and looking at and reading descriptions of your coins. Since you've taken the position at HA, I haven't seen to any "Feldini-approved" coins.
I do not. But I look at a lot of coins for clients. And when doing so, after hearing what they’re looking for, I try to immerse myself into their collector-mindset, while at the same time, applying my knowledge and giving my opinions.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Luster followed very closely by surface preservation. Eye appeal is a reflection of both (I don't award bumps for color). Strike is least important to me.
I’d suggest deleting your comment about not awarding grade bumps for color. That’s a ban-deserving comment, if ever I’ve heard one!😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Cool discussion so far. Here's some food for thought. This is a screen capture from a "Grading 101" video produced by our host.
Very interesting, especially in light of the Simpson interview.
Interesting ratios..
Surface preservation measures the amount of degradation since the moment of minting, primarily wear and marks, and can include toning/tarnish/corrosion from reaction with environments, degrees of "washing" and other types of surface removal in circulation and by collectors over time. Makes sense that this comprises the majority of "grade" and is what some think is even more, or all, of a coin's "technical grade"
Strike is an indication of how well it was minted in the first place, primarily fine details and overall fullness and evenness.
Luster is a reflection (heh) of
the original state of the dies and planchet, and their resultant intersection, combined with what has happened to the coin in the days since, usually to reduce remaining luster..
And Eye appeal is the intersection of all three, a subjective measure of how "pleasing" a coin is, for what it is. This will still have generally universal preferences for things like symmetry, colors, and "natural looking" surfaces. And for lack of distracting damage, very uneven or abrupt toning, stains and spots, or the appearance that someone intentionally "did something to it"
My personal ratios are about the same, although skewed for certain coins. I'd posit that part of "eye appeal" is already contained in the other aspects of grading, and the "approximately" 10% is for Extra eye appeal, whether up, down, or neutral, and if neutral, is already distributed among the other factors.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
For some series like walking liberty half dollars, strike is most important to me. I dislike walkers that are weekly struck with no details visible down the center of the obverse. For Morgan’s I think a lack of bag marks in liberty’s cheek is most important. For me it’s different with different series
Mr_Spud
I'm really surprised strike is placed higher than eye appeal. Unless the coin is noticeably missing major design elements, eye appeal seems more important.
I would have guessed 35% luster, 30% surfaces, 25% eye appeal, and 10% strike.
I believe that actual grading reflects markedly different percentages than what was displayed.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I was thinking the same thing.
Very interesting thread.
Surface preservation - especially hairlines, that is the first step for me to evaluate an MS coin (or a circulated coin). If the hairlines don't fit (i.e present or prominent for what ever grade I am looking at), I walk away from it.
Best, SH
I care not about strike designations and value eye appeal and surfaces as primary.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
When it comes to strike designations there’s another special conundrum.....
If only 15% of the grade is due to strike, it seems a bit exaggerated to put so much importance (price-wise) on FS, FSB, FBL, and FH calls. Sometimes market value will be wildly different between two coins even when in reality they could go either way. Even a novice grader can learn to see this rather quickly. It’s more nuanced on circulated coins of course and die state can add some complexity, but it seems to be the easiest part of grading to learn.
In order, strike, luster, and color. Taken together, these equal eye appeal to me.
Responding to the post above, I find the Full Head designation particularly over rated. How about the rest of the coin, especially the shield?
Mark,
I agree with you, and would love to hear what percentage you think actually gets put in each category these days. Feel free to decline if you think to do so would seem critical of our host. I don’t see it that way - more of an evolution of practice over time.
I personally see eye appeal much higher and luster a bit higher with the difference coming out of the preservation category. I somewhat agree with the sentiment that strike isn’t too important until somewhere in the MS66 range, depending a bit on the series (for Peace dollars it’s important around MS64 and some issues don’t have many strike problems at all).
Eye appeal and value, fwiw
Surfaces, luster and eye appeal in that order.
Lance.
Same here.
As long as eye appeal is part of grading, we will never have standards. Just read the posts above and see the differing opinions of eye appeal.... Just as in beauty, it is what an individual finds attractive. Detail, surface condition... these can be measured....Cheers, RickO
I am big on strike and lack of rub. Then surfaces, luster and eye appeal. There are series like Saints where coins that would normally grade AU, end up in MS slabs. Eye appeal is something that is important to a degree, but eye appeal makes people do silly things that ultimately harm the coin, so if eye appeal ended up being less of importance, a cleaner hobby might emerge where people aren't tempted to doctor a coin or dip a coin just for eye appeal and to get better grades.
I think that for some series, strike makes more difference to me. Perfect examples, I cannot stand a Liberty nickel with weak stars and weak rivets on the shield of a SLQ make me pass often.
This thread reminds me of my recent experience trying to decide what kindda tires to put on my car! There are so many variables and trade offs it's crazy! So far I'm very happy with my choice, It will be confirmed when I get to drive in some snow!
Bryce, I might have a different answer on another day, or even at a different time today😉, but I’d go with:
Surface preservation 50%
Eye appeal 25%
Luster 15%
Strike 10%
I feel that a few comments are warranted...
Surface preservation is a much larger factor (and eye-appeal, a much smaller one), in the case of circulated coins. For example, I think it’s far less likely that a technical VF would be bumped up a grade for eye-appeal than that a coin grading 60 or higher would be.
I think it’s important to remember, that while luster and strike are considered components of a coin’s grade, they’re also part of eye-appeal, itself a component.
I don’t think strike is typically a factor, other than at the higher uncirculated grade levels. It’s rarely an issue with Proof coins and it’s usually not poor enough to merit a reduced grade on circulated coins.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree with @U1chicago WHO said
" eye appeal but luster is often needed to solidify the appeal "
IMO it depends on the series and the specific date.
Some series and dates you will never get the luster or the strike even on Morgans, Ex: 1904.
My own position is that I have a certain fondness for really incredible luster and frosty, granular, original-looking surfaces. I'd take a couple little hits or a couple of stars that aren't perfectly struck-up to get a real blazing beauty. You can fake eye appeal (AT), and you can find coins without hits, but a coin is either lustrous or it isn't. Once it's gone, it isn't coming back either. That's what's so insanely cool about really high-grade US federal issues like TDN's dollars.
Really pretty toning without much luster doesn't do much for me. Both together can be incredible:
Surface preservation.
That my coin grades MS instead of AU! 😮