A grading concept..I'm sure I'm not the first to think of this
LRCTom
Posts: 857 ✭✭✭
I was looking at a group of world coins the other day. Mostly in the VF-AU+ grade, based on my assessment. And how did I assess this? Not by looking at an ANA grading guide or Photograde or... (yes, I'm old...) a Brown and Dunn book... or anything similar. Because, as far as I know, these don't exist for German States thalers, etc...
I graded, subconsciously probably, by the percentage of wear that appeared, compared to the total surface area of the coin.
Which got me wondering....did anyone ever try to formalize a grading system for circulated coins based on percent wear?
It seems one might be able to say, for example:
AU=5% wear
XF = 10%
VF=20%
etc.
Could it even be that computers could do this?
I'm not saying I'm necessarily an advocate for formalizing this as a system to be recognized. But I'm thinking many of us actually grade this way, whether we realize it or not.
What do you think? Has anyone ever advocated such an approach?
...Tom
LRC Numismatics eBay listings:
http://stores.ebay.com/lrcnumismatics
Comments
All kinds of ideas have been put forward about grading methods in the past. Would you believe even grading by weight!
Grading is extremely difficult for older foreign coins because we are not familiar with them - we grew up in America, not Germany, Poland, etc. Additionally, more difficulty arises due to the way they were made, strike weakness, damage, cleaning,etc. Also, the lack of sharply struck original coins does not allow a grader to know what the as-struck coin should look like.
One grading instructor teaches the "luster" method for all coins. It gets you into the "ballpark" quickly. I apologize for not writing more but you have opened a question that I should need an hour to answer and that would only be my opinion. So I'll just write this. Experience looking at the type of foreign coins helps tremendously. With the Internet, images abound. Next, don't be intimidated. Coins are mostly just pieces of metal. Original surfaces are a key to telling a weak strike from friction wear. Look at the entire coin. If it has mint luster it is VF and above depending on how much luster remains.
Your % of wear idea is probably what we all do in about 1/10 of a second anyway. Hope this helped just a little.
Other posters should do much better.j
If you watch the grading videos of circulated coins from PCGS they refer to percentages of wear for each grade assigned.
Wear is certainly a significant part of a coins grade. As are marks, cleaning and rim dings. These are all measurable, but are not measured. That is why, eventually, computer grading will become a reality. With the incredible advances in AI, I see the future arriving more quickly than previously anticipated. There is still a prohibitive cost factor to be surmounted, however, that factor is shrinking with advancing technology. It is the future. Cheers, RickO
"FALSE" computer grading could be done even sooner on the cheap. Human graders assign a grade, scan the coin into a computer database, and claim it is computer graded. LOL. Every time the coin is sent in and scanned, it receives the same grade if it's condition remained the same. I call that computer grading.!
I don't think TPGS accounts would like it. Less money for them and no loosening of the grading standard down the road. Crack-out experts would loose out too.
Go Cubs...
Grading will always have a subjective component and that is not going to change. I appreciate that you started with world coin examples with your analysis and conceptual grading thoughts. Grading standards are terrific but need to be based on reality. And with older world coins, we tend to look back with a 21st century yardstick without an appreciation for the technology associated with coinage from 200 to 375 years ago. Look at the challenges associated just with developing references through the surviving population as to what reasonable standards should be. And developing these standards really does not work well with a one size fits all approach.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
How does one define 5% wear? 5% wear where? Is it located all in one place or spread over the majority of design? What about luster and strike?
If adopting your approach, you might as well weigh the coin (allow a small amount of tolerance) and base it on the amount of metal that remains.
@Insider2 wrote:
This is already done, as PCGS Secure:
pcgs.com/secure
That means no PCGS Secure coin can be cracked out and up graded years from now as the standards continue to evolve..
I've had Secure holdered coins submitted for re-grade and got a higher grade. They were not even cracked out of the holder. So the Secure holder doesn't limit the potential to get a higher grade.
As Ricko said, computer grading will be based on AI. The computer will learn with every coin, and the grading standard will continually improve. That means that grades will change over time. For this reason, I would expect the TPGs to put the date of certification on every computer-graded slab.
BTW, the fight against counterfeits may well become another reason for putting the date of certification on every slab. A subject for another day, I suppose.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
We just need to know what AI computers will collect.