it will be interesting if we can tell any differences when TruViews are posted
I've always had trouble with spotting the rub that would bump a coin from MS to AU so on 1, 2, 5 and 6 I probably wouldn't have done much better. But the 66 to 63 indicates a big gap in strike and/or marks on the coin that wasn't identified.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@HenryO said:
Realized I did not order Trueviews, but here are the coins from my submission;
since the "regular" level tier service is shield by default, doesn't that mean that all coins submitted at that level and above have been trueviewed? i see the washie you posted doesn't have one (yet) but i think it may take a week or two sometimes before they post. (someone can correct me if i am mistaken)
one of my previous orders (first one in a while) came with trueviews and i thought someone just made an error in my favor but i later figured out that part of the reason that tier seemed to go up in price was due to the trueview thing. if i am correct, this is amazing and worthy of its own thread, if there are one(s) already as several people, somewhat myself included, have been harping on about having images of coins for authentication reasons, although i think the slab-view may be better for this, having coins at regular and above tiers automatically professionally imaged, comes with a host of benefits, not least of all is authentication and tracking coins that have been doctored conserved.
you provided pretty decent images HenryO, just change out the lights you are using (if you can), tinker some more and post images for advice here about grading and it should save you a ton of money.
i made a post recently halfway joking about having nightmares of au58s (sliders). hitting that grade when we think it won't reach that high is fantastic and the opposite is gut-wrenching. i know all-to-well.
Thanks Lance. It still says "Being Imaged" on the account page, so I will check back later and see if there are trueviews available
Thank you for posting the images. If I recall correctly, PCGS at one time produced TrueView images of Gold Shield level coins, so if they are still doing that then you will have them up shortly.
If you had a "guess the grade" contest of your coins, without the PCGS grades or hoped-for PCGS TrueViews, then I would have guessed lower than your guesses. However, if all we had were your images, I don't know that I would have been able to pick out all the AU58 coins in the group, either. I also don't see evidence of cleaning on the coin that received the designation, but if you were to rotate it under a light I'd imagine you would find parallel lines going across it or swirling about the surfaces. It's just that with a single static image that this can be difficult, if not impossible.
I don't recall how long you have collected WQs, but they are one of my long-term loves and the 1932 issues don't usually come with great luster or with great color. They also are uniformly okay with respect to strike, but neither great nor terrible. Therefore, many coins need something else to make them "pop" into the gem or super-gem grade and this may mean especially mark-free surfaces, which these coins do not possess.
Thank you for updating the thread and I look forward to the TrueView images.
Here is a screenshot of one of your 58s.
I have highlighted where Washington quarters first start to show wear.
If you look at the areas I have highlighted on your AU58 coins you will begin to see the wear patterns.
It is extremely important to rotate coins while examining/grading.
Go to a show and ask around to see who the hotshot graders are.
Watch them. Watch how they examine coins.
They all have a routine, and most can determine grade in a matter of a few seconds. No hand-wringing or agonizing. Boom, bam. "It's a 4-" or " shot 6".
Next coin.
It is also important to be critical of your own material and not allow ownership bias to inflate your expectations.
My personal motto "Grade crabby."
(But also grade realistically.)
On a separate point, as @TomB said, I can't see the cleaning issue either but with a static image it is a tough call.
"Better luck next time..." as the Teletrade robot used to say.🙂
@TomB said:
Thank you for posting the images. If I recall correctly, PCGS at one time produced TrueView images of Gold Shield level coins, so if they are still doing that then you will have them up shortly.
If you had a "guess the grade" contest of your coins, without the PCGS grades or hoped-for PCGS TrueViews, then I would have guessed lower than your guesses. However, if all we had were your images, I don't know that I would have been able to pick out all the AU58 coins in the group, either. I also don't see evidence of cleaning on the coin that received the designation, but if you were to rotate it under a light I'd imagine you would find parallel lines going across it or swirling about the surfaces. It's just that with a single static image that this can be difficult, if not impossible.
I don't recall how long you have collected WQs, but they are one of my long-term loves and the 1932 issues don't usually come with great luster or with great color. They also are uniformly okay with respect to strike, but neither great nor terrible. Therefore, many coins need something else to make them "pop" into the gem or super-gem grade and this may mean especially mark-free surfaces, which these coins do not possess.
Thank you for updating the thread and I look forward to the TrueView images.
Thanks Tom. I can defiantly see the marks you re referring to on the cleaned coin. Disappointing but educational. I am assuming the apparent wear on the curl above the ear caused the 58 grades. Its hard for me to see the difference between that and other WQ that grade MS and appear to have weak strike in that area. More to learn on that.
Those all have trueviews, just type in each number into the verification page. (Though they may not be ready yet.) edit to say I checked and they’re not.
@mannie gray said:
Here is a screenshot of one of your 58s.
I have highlighted where Washington quarters first start to show wear.
If you look at the areas I have highlighted on your AU58 coins you will begin to see the wear patterns.
It is extremely important to rotate coins while examining/grading.
Go to a show and ask around to see who the hotshot graders are.
Watch them. Watch how they examine coins.
They all have a routine, and most can determine grade in a matter of a few seconds. No hand-wringing or agonizing. Boom, bam. "It's a 4-" or " shot 6".
Next coin.
It is also important to be critical of your own material and not allow ownership bias to inflate your expectations.
My personal motto "Grade crabby."
(But also grade realistically.)
On a separate point, as @TomB said, I can't see the cleaning issue either but with a static image it is a tough call.
"Better luck next time..." as the Teletrade robot used to say.🙂
Thank you for the input!
I may never become the level of collector as many of you here, but I am thrilled and grateful to be learning so much about it from you all.
EBay does get frustrating sometimes. I'd avoid buying Unc coins on eBay, but I've been returning a lot of circulated coins lately where the seller deliberately hides the hairlines.
One more rule, never trust a Trueview image to be accurate. They're glamour shots that hide the flaws.
@HenryO said:
Well my heart kind of jumped when I checked for the 6th time today and saw my submission moved from encapsulation to QA! Anyone know when I can expect to see the grades available at this stage?
Here are my novice guesses I jotted down before I submitted the 8 1932 WQs;
1-MS66
2-MS65
3-MS66
4-MS62
5-MS62
6-MS66
7-MS66
8-MS65
I am prepared for a dose of reality on my normal over optimistic approach to life. Still, I don't think I will sleep too well........
I appreciate your posting your predicted grades beforehand. The predictions contrasted with the final results make the post far more interesting and informative for the reader as well as the poster.
I have some coins currently in QA and was gonna post my predictions while I wait. So, that's what I'm gonna do now.
@HenryO said:
Realized I did not order Trueviews, but here are the coins from my submission;
since the "regular" level tier service is shield by default, doesn't that mean that all coins submitted at that level and above have been trueviewed? i see the washie you posted doesn't have one (yet) but i think it may take a week or two sometimes before they post. (someone can correct me if i am mistaken)
one of my previous orders (first one in a while) came with trueviews and i thought someone just made an error in my favor but i later figured out that part of the reason that tier seemed to go up in price was due to the trueview thing. if i am correct, this is amazing and worthy of its own thread, if there are one(s) already as several people, somewhat myself included, have been harping on about having images of coins for authentication reasons, although i think the slab-view may be better for this, having coins at regular and above tiers automatically professionally imaged, comes with a host of benefits, not least of all is authentication and tracking coins that have been doctored conserved.
you provided pretty decent images HenryO, just change out the lights you are using (if you can), tinker some more and post images for advice here about grading and it should save you a ton of money.
i made a post recently halfway joking about having nightmares of au58s (sliders). hitting that grade when we think it won't reach that high is fantastic and the opposite is gut-wrenching. i know all-to-well.
Yes they do have trueviews:
AU58
AU58
MS63
MS64
AU58
MS63
MS63
Unc Details
When I look at the coins and the grade was assign, I doubt the grader ability to do this job.
What I can say??!! just the last two photos MS-63 show me two different designs : First it is Type Ia and second Type Ib. Two different metal Dies and Hubs, which has different degrees of smoothness on polishing the surfaces.
According by the year, type of striking, kind of Dies used, first coin 66 and second (from early strike) 65.
God help us! Marketing talk.
PS: I have to give 100% credits to FRED W. when him mention " To day's it is SLOBBING and not SLABBING."
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT.FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL.THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE. MARK TWAIN
Comments
And last and the least 8, my guess 65
I've always had trouble with spotting the rub that would bump a coin from MS to AU so on 1, 2, 5 and 6 I probably wouldn't have done much better. But the 66 to 63 indicates a big gap in strike and/or marks on the coin that wasn't identified.
Thanks Lance. It still says "Being Imaged" on the account page, so I will check back later and see if there are trueviews available
GoldShield so will get TruViews, interesting coins in hand before pics uploaded
Thank you for posting the images. If I recall correctly, PCGS at one time produced TrueView images of Gold Shield level coins, so if they are still doing that then you will have them up shortly.
If you had a "guess the grade" contest of your coins, without the PCGS grades or hoped-for PCGS TrueViews, then I would have guessed lower than your guesses. However, if all we had were your images, I don't know that I would have been able to pick out all the AU58 coins in the group, either. I also don't see evidence of cleaning on the coin that received the designation, but if you were to rotate it under a light I'd imagine you would find parallel lines going across it or swirling about the surfaces. It's just that with a single static image that this can be difficult, if not impossible.
I don't recall how long you have collected WQs, but they are one of my long-term loves and the 1932 issues don't usually come with great luster or with great color. They also are uniformly okay with respect to strike, but neither great nor terrible. Therefore, many coins need something else to make them "pop" into the gem or super-gem grade and this may mean especially mark-free surfaces, which these coins do not possess.
Thank you for updating the thread and I look forward to the TrueView images.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Here is a screenshot of one of your 58s.
I have highlighted where Washington quarters first start to show wear.
If you look at the areas I have highlighted on your AU58 coins you will begin to see the wear patterns.
It is extremely important to rotate coins while examining/grading.
Go to a show and ask around to see who the hotshot graders are.
Watch them. Watch how they examine coins.
They all have a routine, and most can determine grade in a matter of a few seconds. No hand-wringing or agonizing. Boom, bam. "It's a 4-" or " shot 6".
Next coin.
It is also important to be critical of your own material and not allow ownership bias to inflate your expectations.
My personal motto "Grade crabby."
(But also grade realistically.)
On a separate point, as @TomB said, I can't see the cleaning issue either but with a static image it is a tough call.
"Better luck next time..." as the Teletrade robot used to say.🙂
Thanks Tom. I can defiantly see the marks you re referring to on the cleaned coin. Disappointing but educational. I am assuming the apparent wear on the curl above the ear caused the 58 grades. Its hard for me to see the difference between that and other WQ that grade MS and appear to have weak strike in that area. More to learn on that.
Those all have trueviews, just type in each number into the verification page. (Though they may not be ready yet.) edit to say I checked and they’re not.
Thank you for the input!
I may never become the level of collector as many of you here, but I am thrilled and grateful to be learning so much about it from you all.
EBay does get frustrating sometimes. I'd avoid buying Unc coins on eBay, but I've been returning a lot of circulated coins lately where the seller deliberately hides the hairlines.
One more rule, never trust a Trueview image to be accurate. They're glamour shots that hide the flaws.
I appreciate your posting your predicted grades beforehand. The predictions contrasted with the final results make the post far more interesting and informative for the reader as well as the poster.
I have some coins currently in QA and was gonna post my predictions while I wait. So, that's what I'm gonna do now.
Yes they do have trueviews:
AU58
AU58
MS63
MS64
AU58
MS63
MS63
Unc Details
Collector, occasional seller
The TV's illustrate the difficulty grading coins from photographs IMO.
On the Unc. Details coin it looks like someone was playing tic-tac-toe right above In "God We Trust".
When I look at the coins and the grade was assign, I doubt the grader ability to do this job.
What I can say??!! just the last two photos MS-63 show me two different designs : First it is Type Ia and second Type Ib. Two different metal Dies and Hubs, which has different degrees of smoothness on polishing the surfaces.
According by the year, type of striking, kind of Dies used, first coin 66 and second (from early strike) 65.
God help us! Marketing talk.
PS: I have to give 100% credits to FRED W. when him mention " To day's it is SLOBBING and not SLABBING."
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT.
FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL.
THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
MARK TWAIN
They give the best grades they honestly can and I doubt the other services would have been much different.