Consolidated thread with PCGS grades just posted (Batch of 4 1869 coins)

mercurydimeguy · December 2, 2015 2:33AM

These coins were posted raw previously, but their grades just posted so thought I'd consolidate them here...

Happy to get your thoughts/impressions/opinions about the results. By the way, no matter what I think of the grades on the coins, I've now submitted nearly 30 raw world coins without a single Body Bag, although it will surely happen at some point, so that in itself has me smiling

brg5658 · December 2, 2015 3:36AM

My guesses from your previous individual posts of these coins (raw) were:

MS62

AU55

XF45

MS62/63

I think PCGS got close on all of them based on your images. I think you got a bit of a gift by 1-2 points on the Brazil 20 R (I don't generally care for spotted and dull-ish copper), and I still contend that if those images are accurate, the San Marino piece looks UNC to my eye, but I could live with AU58.

Congrats on your grades.

Zohar · December 2, 2015 3:49AM

congrats very nice!

marcmoish · December 2, 2015 4:07AM

took a quick look again here - unsure if I saw these all but jmho still stands on these.

MS62BN period! unless dog in hand

AU53

EF40 (I disagree with 45 but jmho)

63RB so you did good here

And yes you did overall score and no BB's yet

JohnnyCache · December 2, 2015 5:28AM

the San Marino piece looks UNC to my eye

mercurydimeguy · December 2, 2015 6:10AM

Interesting, and I'm learning how PCGS grades World coins now that I've bought NGC and Raw, and have slabbed PCGS...a great learning experience when you get 30+ coins slabbed, not like 3,000 but there aren't 3,000 to go around, and everyone one of these below was a Pop 1 at PCGS

I think they mistake (or are less knowledgeable in) discerning between strike and wear on World coins. This cuts both ways...overgrade/undergrade...but in essence I'm learning "how they grade," which is more important than what it should grade. This way I'll know when I look at the coin, not how "I" would grade it, but how "PCGS" would grade it. Sounds silly, but it's a good gauge...

By the way, in my mind they kind of bashed the Swedish coin a bit. This has full luster, and some weakness in strike, but one of the high points on the coin is reverse crown and it has ever so slight rub, not XF40. That coin would easily grade AU50 or better in anyone's hand, but on it's day at the PCGS grading room they only say it as an XF40...it is what it is.

brg5658 · December 2, 2015 6:53AM

I think we world coin collectors are a bit more "logical" (and realistic) about grading in terms of not getting bent out of shape by a few points up or down. It kind of begs for the grading systems like they use in the UK or in Germany (just as two examples). I'd be more worried about a point here or there if it were actually consistently differentiated by the TPGs -- but it's not. One day's 62 is tomorrow's 64, and maybe next week's AU58. I still roughly grade MS coins as MS63, MS65, and MS67 -- with demerits or bumps in grade according to luster, eye appeal, spots, etc. Anything beyond that seems overkill. Similarly for AU coins, I think 4 levels of AU is just too much to be taken seriously. I usually just state (AU50/53) or (AU55/58), or in a simplified system AU (average AU) and AU+ (better AU).

My philosophy has been to collect coins that look good to my eye, and are roughly graded (and equivalently/importantly priced) where they should be.

@Mercurydimeguy, I think you are doing a heck of a good job of choosing attractive coins for your collection. The number on the label and the brand of plastic are secondary and tertiary to buying an attractive coin at a proper/fair price.

Best, Brandon

marcmoish · December 2, 2015 7:22AM

EF40 (I disagree with 45 but jmho)

oops, It was graded 40...but hey there is just too much wear for AU50, yes the crown is crisp but that doesn't take away from the rest of the surfaces that clearly exhibit circulated use consistent with a 40 designation.

Sorry, but that's exactly what I thought it would net..don't waste $ trying to upgrade it

You doing well actually - don't be hard on yourself.

mercurydimeguy · December 2, 2015 9:33AM

For what it's worth, here's their image of the San Marino coin...they over exposed it a bit, it's much closer to my image in terms of in hand look. But they captured the colors better than me (probably why they over exposed it a bit, to show off the really pretty surface of the coin).

Zohar · December 2, 2015 9:47AM

I agree with the assessment of eye appeal first and foremost vs. certain TPG and numerical grade. Eye appeal can not be replicated. I have owned some really unappealing mint state coins yet killer AU graded coins which I call MS-58s as at times cabinet friction or heavier toning prevents mint state designation. Some coins just stand out in having both factors and generally get an immediate, emotional, response when seen. As one's taste and selective appetite evolves, so does focus on eye appeal combined with relative scarcity.

PCGSPhoto · December 3, 2015 1:47AM

Originally posted by: mercurydimeguy
For what it's worth, here's their image of the San Marino coin...they over exposed it a bit, it's much closer to my image in terms of in hand look. But they captured the colors better than me (probably why they over exposed it a bit, to show off the really pretty surface of the coin).

Looks like I photographed this one back on the 20th of last month. When we get a coin we do have to make a quick decision on what we'd like to show in the final pic. I probably saw the colors in the field and thought "OK let's light this one up". Sometimes we take a quick glance at a whole box of coins to see if we can use a single technique throughout the order to save time, especially on busy days (my all time record of number of coins photographed in a day is 700 last October).

If you'd like a specific thing you'd like shown in your coins the best way now is probably putting a little note or sticker on the actual mylar flip so we see it as we're photographing them.

My main concern has been keeping up with the editing and getting all of these photos online in a timely manner since we started photographing all Secure orders. Thanks to the release of the new proprietary software I think we've done that - backlog of images to be edited has been reduced from a couple of weeks work to just a day or so. It's still a system in-progress so if any of you have any questions or concerns or suggestions please let me know.

mercurydimeguy · December 3, 2015 3:43AM

Originally posted by: PCGSPhoto

Originally posted by: mercurydimeguy
For what it's worth, here's their image of the San Marino coin...they over exposed it a bit, it's much closer to my image in terms of in hand look. But they captured the colors better than me (probably why they over exposed it a bit, to show off the really pretty surface of the coin).

I'm really grateful for your imaging service. It has taught me more about coin photography than you can ever imagine. Thank you!!!

I love to image the coins, send them in for grading/imaging, and can't wait to see how you imaged them, because as you have said -- I totally get it -- I make a gut call on the technique each time. Interestingly enough our images are often close, spooky close, just different things get accentuated.

I would love for you to continue to do what you do without changing, so I can continue to learn. So I promise you that you won't be getting any sticky notes from me

marcmoish · December 3, 2015 4:47AM

Guys..you see how critical it is to see a coin in hand, and how a really nice pic can be somewhat misleading for lack of a better word to say the least?

I loved your photo MCG - but if I go according to actual host pic here - I might take back my determination, and kind of lean more to 58 or lets say 60/61.

Hence, I would have possibly mentioned imho I can "see" it in a 62 holder, BUT would I have said its a lock 62BN ? No I would have not!

Which means Zohar's last comment is the WTG, and I've said and advised that also over the years.

mercurydimeguy · December 3, 2015 5:03AM

Originally posted by: marcmoish
Guys..you see how critical it is to see a coin in hand, and how a really nice pic can be somewhat misleading for lack of a better word to say the least?

I loved your photo MCG - but if I go according to actual host pic here - I might take back my determination, and kind of lean more to 58 or lets say 60/61.
Hence, I would have possibly mentioned imho I can "see" it in a 62 holder, BUT would I have said its a lock 62BN ? No I would have not!

Which means Zohar's last comment is the WTG, and I've said and advised that also over the years.

Marc, all good points...but I would only debate one point, which you missed -- the host pic is over exposed to show color. That's a stylistic thing. You can overexpose and MS64 Merc and see rub

The real lesson here, as I've also been preaching, it's impossible to grade coins from pictures. Pictures are an artistic representation of the coin on the day the artist decided what the coin should look like.

As for me personally, my style is to show what the coin looks like in hand, good/bad/ugly, which means if a coins is dark, I'll show it dark...if it has a fingerprint, you'll see a fingerprint, I won't overexpose or underexpose to achieve an artistic flare, my personal "photographic fingerprint" is that my image of a coin will resemble the coin's 99% in hand look. That doesn't make it right, or wrong, but I prefer an in-hand look image when I shoot photos more so than other looks.

Having said that, I very much enjoy our host's images as well. They are different, some are very cool! And I like to compare the host's artistic representation of the coin vs. how I saw the coin on the day I imaged it.

To say the host's image is better or worse than mine I think misses the point, it's different, not better not worse. I can overexpose my shot and make it look much more like the host's image, and the host can reshoot the coin without overexposing it and make it look much more like my image, the point that is the most critical one, it's difficult to grade from photos unless you know the photographer's style of photography.

Anyhow, I'll get off my podium now lest I get booted off

mercurydimeguy · December 3, 2015 6:48AM

PS. Don't laugh, I just got this in the mail today, I totally forgot that I won it (an Italian auction)...shipping takes a long time from Italy, for some reason. Anyhow, I now own 2 of these, will probably pick one to keep. But since the topic of this thread tilted towards imaging and grading, and now you know how I image coins...I wonder what it will grade? This might be an interesting study...

In my mind this is like an AU55, clearly lacks the sharpness/detail of the originally posted coin, yet it has nice remnant luster underneath and looks more copper'ish.

Do you think this coin will grade lower, higher, or the same as the original coin, in context of knowing how I image coins...

marcmoish · December 4, 2015 12:27AM

Curious what that one would grade - personally I like this one better but it does have some subtle underlying wear - I guess 58 but I can see it in a 61RB or 62RB holder too

Anyhow, I'll get off my podium now lest I get booted off .. ...you can ramble

on whenever you like and however you wish. I believe there are many lurkers here too that never comment.

I myself go into MIA spells over the years.

brg5658 · December 4, 2015 1:51AM

I'd grade the new one posted at AU55BN. I think the other is nicer and has more luster. I also don't care for the smashed / incomplete rim at 12 o'clock on the obverse this newly posted one. The detail is also more complete on the first one posted (e.g., look at the three towers on the obverse, and the leaf detail on the reverse).

Just my personal opinions.

Consolidated thread with PCGS grades just posted (Batch of 4 1869 coins)

Comments