Some random thought reflective of recent threads.
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
- It is unrealistic to expect to be able to properly grade a coin from an online photograph.
- Understanding that simple fact, if you insist that you can you are only fooling yourself and probably miss out on more coins than you realize.
- I can see no real logic in trusting a personal interpretation of an image vs. the in-hand opinion of a respected dealer.
- If you reject everything above, are you familiar with the term micro-grading??
- I can accept that newcomers may fall into the trap of believing they can grade accurately from pictures, seeing experienced collectors and dealers assuring others that it is viable leaves me shaking my head.
- Do any of these thoughts make sense to you??
Al H.
6
Comments
What if the coin in the picture is in a PCGS holder?
Don't quote me on that.
Pictures are still worth a Thousand words.
In other words don't fall for all the hype.
My first lessons in grading was using Photograde when it was in book form.
dmwest, what does that have to do with the topic??
Agree that assessing "THE" grade via pictures is probably dreaming. Things like luster and overall eye appeal can be significantly lost, or unfairly enhanced, by pictures.
But I think the exercise is worth it since at the very least you learn to get a "risk/reward" assessment based on the photo.
"Yeah, it might be an MS-65....but that mark would probably bug me. Pass."
"It looks all of MS-65. And the luster might make it even look better. I'll take a shot."
Nothing beats seeing a coin in hand, though.....I'll give you that!
Having learned to do pretty well with Heritage and Stacks' auction images, I don't think that situation is as cut and dried as you stated it. This is especially true for the circulated grades, EF-40 or lower, where luster is not an issue. Sure, a personal examination is always better than photos, but pictures do serve a purpose. Of course one must avoid dealers who doctor their photos as well as their coins.
Bill, yes, I am mainly taking about Mint State grades.
Images are a great start, and most reputable sellers have a return policy just in case the provided images are "hiding" something with a favored angle or deceptive lighting....You gotta start somewhere.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Judging by all the GTG threads I have seen over the years, the majority usually gets the grade right. (most of the time) with the photos provided.
eBay ID-bruceshort978
Successful BST:here and ATS, bumanchu, wdrob, hashtag, KeeNoooo, mikej61, Yonico, Meltdown, BAJJERFAN, Excaliber, lordmarcovan, cucamongacoin, robkool, bradyc, tonedcointrader, mumu, Windycity, astrotrain, tizofthe, overdate, rwyarmch, mkman123, Timbuk3,GBurger717, airplanenut, coinkid855 ,illini420, michaeldixon, Weiss, Morpheus, Deepcoin, Collectorcoins, AUandAG, D.Schwager.
Obviously, an in hand inspection is preferable as a coin may look better or worse than the images. Images are not worthless, however, as you seem to think. If a coin has deep terminal toning or huge hideous spots, that isn't going away regardless of how you photograph the coin. Those problems aren't going to go away in hand either.
I think many coins can be graded just fine from a great image. The question I have is can you grade according to the current grading standards, and that is a moving target.
It takes talent to put up a photo that captures the nuances that you subjectively favor in a coin, or dislike.
This forum is not filled with people who have equipment and lighting to do so. Photography is painting with light as art form, it takes time to master or deceive.
Images help a great deal, but definitely are not the final answer to grading a coin.
With that said, I'm sitting on the fence with the OP's issue.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
I think... therefore I am.
My opinion never made me a dime. You may be asking yourself : "what is this guy's problem ?" On the other hand it's hard to guess the value more than the grade. What's a fair market value ? Ebay minus 30% or more ?
Judging by all the GTG threads I have seen over the years, the majority usually gets the grade right. (most of the time) with the photos provided.
JMHO...................
Bruce, I have said this before : if I guess MS64 every time there's a GTG I will be within 1-2 points virtually every time, and that's without even looking at the picture!! they are fun, but they are not a good judge of one's skill at grading.
Wabbit, the post by soldi just after you sums it up nicely. that is the one thing about some auction sites like Heritage --- even though their pictures usually suck, they usually suck on a consistent basis. looking at enough of their listings can give a bidder some idea of what the coin will look like.
again, JMHO.
I lean towards keets. When a GTG is posted several experts chime in . When the grade is revealed and it's not the grade they guess the image Is called into question or the TPG or CAC. Shampoo, rinse repeat
Grading coins in hand is tough enough. Grading images is a gambit especially when images are blown up. It's altogether a different orientation.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
A coins photogenic stance is now part of the grade.
A coins photogenic stance is now part of the grade
I agree with that, I believe we now expect that a seller be proficient with their camera. I think the trend came about after NGC first began posting pictures of coins they encapsulated(starting around 2003) and PCGS followed a few years later by hiring Phil Arnold to start with TrueViews. to my way of thinking it took Phil a few years to really get fine-tuned but that single function has radically changed encapsulation. I always use it and find myself always checking cert numbers to see if an image is available. like Heritage, I think the imaging quality is consistent, just a whole lot better.
In hand inspection with 10x loupe is the rule I live by. After inspection,the coin is either acceptable for my collection at the price I have to pay for it or not. There is no middle ground.I care not what the label says nor who is saying it.Pictures are helpful for sure in deciding whether to spring for coin online but in no way factors into decision to keep coin or return coin for refund.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Please say it ain't so. I have seen experts on here that advise us sometimes not just the grade but whether it is a, b or so called c. They can tell if it is 65.3 no John according to the experts, or
65.4 John by an image let alone in person. I wanna believe.
Obstacles to getting coins properly imaged that should be (due to value, need to bring out positive attributes, peevish, risk averse, gun shy customers); inertia, or priorities that are greater; the steps necessary to make it happen to either drive to a photographic pro or ship them with all that entails. Sometimes it is just hard to get it done.
Keets is pretty much spot on. I'll play the GTG games here, presuming that everyone appreciates that it is only that... a grading game based on a picture. It is not a game, however, and is absurd to think that you could buy a coin based off its picture.
Are there people that disagree with things in the OP?
It seems that some of the recent posts are more nuanced, like you can't tell everything but you can tell some things.
I 2nd the idea that an average person is right grading off photos as often as they are right grading sight seen (not often). Advanced people are right grading off photos about as often as as they are sight seen (most of the time).
Problem with photos is if something is hidden you can't take a 2nd look at it and investigate closer.
That said grading is about seeing 1000s of coins and ranking them in your head and learning about market preferences and typical pitfalls. If the photography is consistent, there is no reason the same can't apply.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Fully agree with the OP, but it is still very FUN to grade anything that comes along here in images. If we did not do GTG or raise issues with some coin images, there would be alot less here to talk about.
Best, SH
I've said it before, and I will say it again: I dislike grading coins from pictures. When I do it, I like to include my observations of the individual coin along with my "guess" at a grade.
I include observations so that others take note of them, as in a Buffalo Nickel's weak top feather.
I'm not the King Cobra around here, but I like to impart some of the knowledge I've learned through the years.
I agree.....................DO NOT rely on an image as a sole source of fact about ANY coin. The key word being SOLE.
Pete
When the coin is in hand the coin is the coin. When grading from pics the pic is often the one being graded
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Agree, the more experience you have grading coins sight seen, the easier it is to grade from photos. However, Keets is referring mainly to Mint State coins, and the premise weakens when trying to discern an MS 64 from an MS 65 from an MS 66 from a photo. Photos do not adequately provide enough information on luster, eye appeal, hairlines, marks, etc. to be able to reliably grade as well as in hand.
Grading FROM pictures, is actually grading THE picture.... I agree with keets.... Yes, it is a game we play here on the forum.... and we often get lucky... but frequently surprised....we should NOT be surprised, since we appraised the picture - NOT the coin. A recent post questioning an MS66+ CAC coin is likely a good example..the coin did not look the grade - in the picture. In hand, based on two grading authorities, it likely will be representative. Cheers, RickO
You all have seen pictures posted by European auction houses.
It is usually near to impossible to even get a small idea of what the coin is really like, never mind a grade or a photographic grade.
Usually they over expose and move the contrast to a point where you only see some outlines. Then call it XXX grade.
The European grading system leaves them enough flexibility to defend their position.
Wabbit: "** The question I have is can you grade according to the current grading standards?"**
what current standard??? whos standard, mine, jacks, Jims heritages or yours?
I am not aware of a standard as there is no Norm which everyone adheres to.
Keets Micro grading, fraction grading?? who are we kidding...?? Nobody can give a understandable and fact based explanation, not simply: it is my opinion, between a MS 67. 6 and a MS 67.7 if there is such an animal possible.
The old story: buy the item, not the packaging
I'm quite sure that most coins in this day and age are bought and sold based on photos. Maybe someone could do a poll on that.
I disagree with Keets #2 statement above. You could miss out on great coins by not taking a chance on bad photos. Just look at all those "you suck" awards around here.
I do agree that you cannot see everything about a coin in a photo, but you will have a good idea on how it "should" look in hand.
Keets Micro grading, fraction grading?? who are we kidding
you misunderstand what micro-grading is. it entails taking a coin the size of a Dime and enlarging a picture of that coin to be approximately 10 inches in diameter, then dissecting that image and talking about minute ticks and digital anomalies which are quite often not clearly visible to the unaided eye.
the process culminates in saying that PCGS is all over the place and the coin isn't MSXX.
Good points, but of more concern to me is that pros seemingly can't grade consistently with the coins in hand....
The new wave folks will cringe at this, many years ago when all we had to put up were scanner images some people were very sharp grading from images. Even in mint state.
Of course that was probably technical grading and accounting more for strike marks etc.
when you didn't just automatically say well yeah with eye appeal it might be that high grade on a coin. How can you be close to wrong with so many exceptions these days.
As one of the ol' coots on here calls me, I guess I am a "dyed in the wool" collector still.
I believe the photos are helpful in eliminating a possible purchase. Just a quick glance in many instances will exclude a coin for not having the look you are after. Before the net you would be making a decision based on a written description or verbal comments. Before completing a purchase I still need a hands on look.
I agree with you, Keets.
Tom
While I agree that a "final determination of grade....and assessment of the Grading Services" should probably never be done with a photo alone....
I hope we don't decide as a group to stop doing GTG, or stop doing ANY assessment based on photos! There is much to be learned from reading the thought process people use in grading, and checking your work against others and the TPG's. In other words, it's a good exercise!
And since many buying decisions are made based on photos, just learning to read photographs is good!
If you look at images all the time, eBay, Heritage, etc, you do get a feel for the actual coins. Since it is the only option available on eBay and many times on the large auction sites, it became a necessity to learn that skill, at least for me.
I believe that is what Keets said above, " looking at enough of their listings can give a bidder some idea of what the coin will look like."
given how old "PhotoGrade" is I believe this was inevitable.
It's always fun, no matter. I wish more people could have it.
I disagree with some of this:
@keets said:
"It is unrealistic to expect to be able to properly grade a coin from an online photograph."
Not the best way to examine a coin but you have stacked the deck. Circulated coins are much easier than Unc's (which you wished to focus on). Up to MS-65 I believe it is fairly easy for most professionals. Higher grades it is difficult to impossible.
"I can see no real logic in trusting a personal interpretation of an image vs. the in-hand opinion of a respected dealer."
Agree
"If you reject everything above, are you familiar with the term micro-grading??"
I wonder if you are? IMO, "micro-grading" as defined by TPGS finalizers I have met, is not something easily done with photo images.
@Ronyahski said: "Keets is pretty much spot on. I'll play the GTG games here, presuming that everyone appreciates that it is only that... a grading game based on a picture. It is not a game, however, and is absurd to think that you could buy a coin based off its picture."
First of all, all of this discussion depends on the quality and accuracy of the image. In spite of this, the more experience you have grading coins, the better you will be at the GTG game. Some members do very well.
@YQQ said: "...Micro grading, fraction grading?? who are we kidding...?? Nobody can give a understandable and fact based explanation, not simply: it is my opinion, between a MS 67. 6 and a MS 67.7 if there is such an animal possible."
Apparently, you don't have a clue what "micro grading" is either.
I joined the forum 15 years, and what was true then, is still true today. 15 years from now it will still be true.
Then its grade should NEVER be questioned?
"Each separation from the original introduces error."
--Me
Amen.
There's a reason these things are called "GUESS" the grade!
Also there are NO STANDARDS for the pics from which we are supposed to guess.
Pictures help a great deal but they never tell the full story....
And some photographs (or photograph styles) are better than others.
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 neither agree or disagree.
FIFY!
@RYK said: "I joined the forum 15 years, and what was true then, is still true today. 15 years from now it will still be true."
And what is that? I've been here almost a year and have no idea what was true before , now, and in the future. Death and taxes?
So what are you disagreeing with?