I'm with Keets; What is the purpose in trying to grade from photos?

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 1:42AM

It is totally useless and a waste of time. Let the flaming begin!

ziggy29 · December 30, 2009 1:45AM

<< It is totally useless and a waste of time. >>

Sort of like resurrecting this topic?

ksteelheader · December 30, 2009 1:46AM

<< 

<< It is totally useless and a waste of time. >>

Sort of like resurrecting this topic?

>>

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 1:48AM

In light of the MS 66 FH 1917 SLQ thread that is currently alive, maybe not!

2manycoins2fewfunds · December 30, 2009 1:49AM

Nice teaching tool.

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 1:54AM

And it teaches us that grading Mint State coins from pictures is a guesstimation at best.

coinguy1 · December 30, 2009 1:55AM

For many forum members, it is still enjoyable. And assessing coins based on images, while informed posters share comments/knowledge, can still serve as a good learning experience. For example, people can learn about weak strikes for certain issues, where to look for minor signs of wear, mint-made vs. man-made flaws, cleaned and/or re-toned appearances, etc. Nothing beats hands-on experience, especially with a knowledgeable mentor, but often that's not possible.

blu62vette · December 30, 2009 1:57AM

Everyones images are different and those poses a big issue. The more images we see the better we can asses a coin we might be looking at purchasing. The lighting on the SLQ makes it look cleaned to me. In reality all it says is that the poster of that coin is using a different lighting method than me.

BAJJERFAN · December 30, 2009 1:59AM

Oftimes one has to make a decision to pass or play based on images, so it behooves one to at least be familiar with them. Some are quite good and others not so much. Over time one can learn to read the images like those from Heritage or TeleTrade and sometimes one can score bargains. Knowledge is power; always was and always will be.

golfer72 · December 30, 2009 2:19AM

Well said Mark. And its fun too!

BillJones · December 30, 2009 2:27AM

If leaning to grade circulated coins from photos is useless, then books like Photo Grade and The Official American Numismatic Association Grading Standards for U.S. Coins are useless. I know from personal experience that is not true. I learned a lot from those books – far more than ever learned from the line drawings in the old Brown and Dunn books. I took that knowledge and applied to the real thing, and I’d say I am at least far above most collectors when it comes to grading expertise.

Is grading coins for pin point accuracy useless? Yes. It is useful to triage damaged coins, giving a starting point for grades or set off alarm bells for problem coins worthwhile? You bet it is.

joebb21 · December 30, 2009 2:28AM

one might not be able to judge by a picture all the time if the coin is a 63-64-65 but based on seeing as many coins as possible and looking for the general telltale signs, one can usually tell fairly quickly a general range. (yes sometimes it is a crapshoot)

a vf coin is not going to look ms.
when we see heavily worn coins, one can still learn alot and educate oneself in grading.

if when one sees a heavily worn coin and they can quickly say its not an ms, this shows that we are learing how to grade.

I for one enjoy the game and can say even through pictures I have learned tremendous amounts about what to look for in grading as well as die characteristics and such
-joe

gyocomgd · December 30, 2009 2:31AM

<< For many forum members, it is still enjoyable. And assessing coins based on images, while informed posters share comments/knowledge, can still serve as a good learning experience. For example, people can learn about weak strikes for certain issues, where to look for minor signs of wear, mint-made vs. man-made flaws, cleaned and/or re-toned appearances, etc. Nothing beats hands-on experience, especially with a knowledgeable mentor, but often that's not possible. >>

Exactly right. Excellent post.

ElKevvo · December 30, 2009 3:10AM

It is fun for me...and I do learn something...sure some of the photos are better than others but I still like it!

K

saintguru · December 30, 2009 3:14AM

One of the greatest collectors I know has an almost psychic ability to grade and qualify coins from pictures. I'm speaking about dealer pics and not the dummied up ones on lesser sites. He has been so amazizingly accurate it's unccanny. In fact, once he told me to look at a pic of a coin on a dealer's site. It was a MS66. He told me it looked like a 67! The pic was about 2"x2'. He bought the coin and made a POP3/0 MS67!

Just the one exception that I've encountered.

IrishMike · December 30, 2009 3:35AM

<< It is totally useless and a waste of time. Let the flaming begin! >>

No more useless than relying on the opinions of 95% of the posters here including myself on grading a raw coin in hand if I were contemplating paying significant money for such a coin.

WoodenJefferson · December 30, 2009 3:41AM

I guess all the books in the world with pictures depicting the finite and the infinite are a complete waste of time also.

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 4:23AM

<< If leaning to grade circulated coins from photos is useless, then books like Photo Grade and The Official American Numismatic Association Grading Standards for U.S. Coins are useless. I know from personal experience that is not true. I learned a lot from those books – far more than ever learned from the line drawings in the old Brown and Dunn books. I took that knowledge and applied to the real thing, and I’d say I am at least far above most collectors when it comes to grading expertise.

Is grading coins for pin point accuracy useless? Yes. It is useful to triage damaged coins, giving a starting point for grades or set off alarm bells for problem coins worthwhile? You bet it is. >>

Really?!? You learned to grade Mint State coins through pictures? Please enlighten me.

doh · December 30, 2009 4:24AM

It's fun.

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 4:24AM

I guess all the books in the world with pictures depicting the finite and the infinite are a complete waste of time also.

Did you say that or did I? I said that grading MINT STATE coins is useless from photographs.

BuffQuarter · December 30, 2009 4:25AM

Actually, what's worse than trying to grade from photos is that all these poor wives who put up with their husbands escaping to their coin collections now lose them that much more when they try and photograph their collections. Seems like the lonliness levels of the collectors wives has gone up in recent times. Might be some good pickings out there now. :-)

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 4:29AM

<< 

<< For many forum members, it is still enjoyable. And assessing coins based on images, while informed posters share comments/knowledge, can still serve as a good learning experience. For example, people can learn about weak strikes for certain issues, where to look for minor signs of wear, mint-made vs. man-made flaws, cleaned and/or re-toned appearances, etc. Nothing beats hands-on experience, especially with a knowledgeable mentor, but often that's not possible. >>

Exactly right. Excellent post. >>

My post centers on grading MINT STATE coins, not striking characteristics, etc. That is a completely different topic.

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 4:31AM

<< Actually, what's worse than trying to grade from photos is that all these poor wives who put up with their husbands escaping to their coin collections now lose them that much more when they try and photograph their collections. Seems like the lonliness levels of the collectors wives has gone up in recent times. Might be some good pickings out there now. :-) >>

Best post yet!

mgoodm3 · December 30, 2009 4:32AM

Good photos often show defects/problems that are extremely dificult to see in-hand with a loupe.

doh · December 30, 2009 4:32AM

<< My post centers on grading MINT STATE coins >>

Nowhere in your original post does it say this.

coinguy1 · December 30, 2009 4:41AM

<< 

<< 

<< For many forum members, it is still enjoyable. And assessing coins based on images, while informed posters share comments/knowledge, can still serve as a good learning experience. For example, people can learn about weak strikes for certain issues, where to look for minor signs of wear, mint-made vs. man-made flaws, cleaned and/or re-toned appearances, etc. Nothing beats hands-on experience, especially with a knowledgeable mentor, but often that's not possible. >>

Exactly right. Excellent post. >>

My post centers on grading MINT STATE coins, not striking characteristics, etc. That is a completely different topic. >>

I don't understand? There are plenty of striking characteristics issues with mint state coins, which many people confuse with wear, and which thus present difficulties in grading.

WoodenJefferson · December 30, 2009 4:44AM

<< I guess all the books in the world with pictures depicting the finite and the infinite are a complete waste of time also.

Did you say that or did I? I said that grading MINT STATE coins is useless from photographs. >>

Then you should have stated that in your opening remarks or title. Pictures are used to convey to our brain what words alone cannot describe. How do you explain to a blind person the color red? A picture is nothing more than a tool we use everyday to convey what cannot be readily explained. Looking at pictures and formulating an opinion is far from being useless, if it were so, we would no longer need eyes.

I am not going to respond further to this thread because you are being absolutely confrontational in your responses.

keets · December 30, 2009 5:17AM

to set the record straight in the event i've been misunderstood-----my ranting pertains mainly to Mint State coins, especially slabbed coins.

let's face it, whenever a slabbed MS coin is pictured with "Guess the Grade" you can rest easy knowing that if you guess MS64 you'll be within a point or two and feel good about "knowing" how to grade from pictures. the other factors such as strike, luster, etc can be greatly misinterpreted in an online picture; luster can almost never be "guessed" properly. while the quality of pictures has improved greatly over the last 5-7 years, this site has perhaps the best overall photography/photographers available ANYWHERE and the discussion is generally open-minded, but we still tend to give newcomers and veterans alike the impression that coins can be reliably graded from online pictures.

i maintain that fact is in error.

we may be able to reliably interpret online pictures at this site to a higher degree than at other sites or on the Internet as a whole, but it's important to remember that we're supposedly posting accurate pictures here. when we lead ourselves down the primrose path that says "I can grade a coin from a picture within 1 point" we are setting ourselves up for trouble. it is well documented how much blatant manipulation takes place and how poorly some auction sites are at accurately depicting coins in their photographs. why do we want to impress upon our membership, not to say on those who lurk here, that it is OK to believe a coin picture can be good enough to accurately grade a coin??

with all that said, i have always thought that PhotoGrade was a fine book for using with online pictures of circulated coins. Mr. Ruddy no doubt carefully chose the coins he used in the book to solidly "grade" at the specific grade, to show wear patterns and strike anomalies. the problem with online pictures arises when that knowledge is put to use on coin pictures which cannot reliably depict the characterics which are needed to accurately grade the coin.

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 7:08AM

<< 

<< My post centers on grading MINT STATE coins >>

Nowhere in your original post does it say this. >>

You are correct, but I DID clarify that a few posts before yours.

OchoReales · December 30, 2009 7:15AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< For many forum members, it is still enjoyable. And assessing coins based on images, while informed posters share comments/knowledge, can still serve as a good learning experience. For example, people can learn about weak strikes for certain issues, where to look for minor signs of wear, mint-made vs. man-made flaws, cleaned and/or re-toned appearances, etc. Nothing beats hands-on experience, especially with a knowledgeable mentor, but often that's not possible. >>

Exactly right. Excellent post. >>

My post centers on grading MINT STATE coins, not striking characteristics, etc. That is a completely different topic. >>

I don't understand? There are plenty of striking characteristics issues with mint state coins, which many people confuse with wear, and which thus present difficulties in grading. >>

Mark, I'm talking about posters who think they know the difference between a 63 and a 64 (for example) from a photo, not about the striking nuances of certain pieces or how to detect high point wear. Grading, in the first place, is subjective. To play internet grader and say a coin is emphatically a particular grade when in hand grading is subjective is, in my not so humble opinion, foolhearty.

golfer72 · December 30, 2009 7:55AM

Foolhardy

fcloud · December 30, 2009 8:06AM

Guess the grades are fun and enjoyable for many here including myself. We call them guess the grade because it is a guess when you can't hold the coin in your hand and rotate to see the luster, hairlines, weakness in some struck areas, etc. However, they are a great learning tool for people with limited access to coins of varying grades.

What I don't understand is the people who think they are useless just simply can't ignore them; for those who think it is something they don't agree with, don't open it. I don't open a lot of threads when I know it is something I don't want to participate in, so to those who think it is a waste of time, don't open it and you won't waste your time.

TahoeDale · December 30, 2009 8:50AM

A very interesting discussion, and worth considering, for learning how "you" grade from images( poor to excellent).

While I do not buy any expensive coin without viewing it, or occassionally have a rep at the sale, I look at a ton of images between shows, and on dealer websites. And my reaction/opinion to almost any imaged coin varies from 'I like it for the grade" to probably AT/AS/overgraded.

So, in the meantime, when you cannot view in hand, have fun with the images you see here, and try to improve your guesses. And the interchange between what you can actually see in person, and what is not viewable in an image will become clearer.

DRUNNER · December 30, 2009 9:07AM

We have no actual grading power here. The questions posed are those of individuals seeking an opinion which, when added to a vast amount of other knowledge (seeing the coin in hand, other's opinions who see the coin in hand, personal experience), still only renders an amalgamation of 'opinions'. If they choose to use that sum of information to send a coin to a TPG, or buy or sell, that is fine.

Grading from photos is an educational experience for many here in several ways. We grade, then see a TPG grade after the fact. Presto . . . a learning experience! We may not agree, but it causes us to evaluate our grading from pix regardless. Perhaps we just realize that grading from pix is difficult or even irrelevant. Fine, we learn from that experience also and it affects how we buy on eBay or other sites. Even in failing to 'match' a TPG grade or the grade of the predominance of those here, we learn. It doesn't cost us anything, we gain experience, and even get a correlary amount of friendship, camaraderie, and even commiseration at times. No problems.

I never try to take the Boards to seriously. I seriously appreciate the friendships, education, and entertainment, but I don't seriously worry about what anyone voices as an opinion. I just realize it for what it is, and don't try to add more meaning.

Can we seriously grade from pix? Well, when PCGS starts to do so, I'll reconsider. Until that time, I'll just value it for what it is, and nothing more.

Have a nice New Year!

Drunner

sweetwilliet · December 30, 2009 9:46AM

I enjoy the guess the grade threads. I find them fun, informative (sometimes) and also a way to show off your new pick-ups. A lot of people, myself included, use the GTG threads to show our newps to collectors of similar material, but we are always happy for any others to make a comment.

Just to play devil's advocate: If trying to grade coins from pictures is totally useless and a waste of time, then do sellers need not include pictures of their coins for sale anymore, especially if they are graded by a reputable TPG, since the image is worthless? Just food for thought. Not exactly apples to apples, but not apples to oranges, either.

coinguy1 · December 30, 2009 11:16AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< For many forum members, it is still enjoyable. And assessing coins based on images, while informed posters share comments/knowledge, can still serve as a good learning experience. For example, people can learn about weak strikes for certain issues, where to look for minor signs of wear, mint-made vs. man-made flaws, cleaned and/or re-toned appearances, etc. Nothing beats hands-on experience, especially with a knowledgeable mentor, but often that's not possible. >>

Exactly right. Excellent post. >>

My post centers on grading MINT STATE coins, not striking characteristics, etc. That is a completely different topic. >>

I don't understand? There are plenty of striking characteristics issues with mint state coins, which many people confuse with wear, and which thus present difficulties in grading. >>

Mark, I'm talking about posters who think they know the difference between a 63 and a 64 (for example) from a photo, not about the striking nuances of certain pieces or how to detect high point wear. Grading, in the first place, is subjective. To play internet grader and say a coin is emphatically a particular grade when in hand grading is subjective is, in my not so humble opinion, foolhearty. >>

Thanks for the clarification.

Edited to add: Again, most of it is done at least partly for fun. Most of us know that even for experts, at the very least, there is no way to grade mint state and Proof coins accurately based on images.

MrSpud · December 30, 2009 12:11PM

Trying to grade from photos is very useful, especially if you get them wrong, because it helps you learn to judge coins on auction sites more accurately. If you learn that you can sometimes be fooled by a photo it can make you more cautious about pictures at auction sites like e-bay.

Also, it is fun, educational and allows people to get enjoyment at looking at other peoples coins.

It is very much more accurate and useful, even for mint state coins, than looking at coins in hand at some coin shows that have bad lighting or only flourescent lighting.

It is infinitely more accurate and enjoyable than just reading a description of a coin without a picture.

I also think that coins that are more photogenic are more valuable in that they will be easier to sell on-line and when people show off their coins on forums such as these they will get more positive reinforcement from other collectors. If 2 coins look equally so-so in hand but 1 looks better in a magnified picture than the other, the more photogenic coin will end up being worth more.

Trime · December 30, 2009 2:43PM

Grading from pictures is not useless just limited.

I'm with Keets; What is the purpose in trying to grade from photos?

Comments

Leave a Comment