Posted 10/25/2012 3:50 pm
I know what you mean by the Official ANA grading standards book being a bit difficult. The pictures are not spectacular and the descriptions leave something to be desired. However, these are the same grading standards that TPGs use...or at least they claim to. Because of this, it is probably the best resource despite its setbacks.
Photograde is ok, but it doesn't always agree with the ANA standards. The whole idea to grade a coin simply by what its entirety looks is a method many don't subscribe to. Coins, especially classical coins, have things to look for like..."is this separated from this"...."how many letters of liberty can I read" etc. Photograde doesn't always adhere to this. There are also many variations of what a coin can look like within a certain grade. You could probably put most coins up to photograde pictures and conclude it doesn't really look like any of them.
I know I'm barely answering your question, but what I would recommend is this: Look up descriptions from a few sources of what grades what...one would be the ANA book. Take a bunch of circulated coins of the series if you can and just divide all of them up into AG-AU categories. I know this isn't feasible for very old classical series, but for most 20th century types, if you do this one time for one hour, you'll have all the experience you'll need to grade any circulated coins of that series without looking at anything. For MS coins, it's all about eye appeal and to a greater degree, hits and marks. If you wanted to, you could get a 5x (recommended) and just count up all the issues. Then decide qualitatively what you think of luster and eye appeal and you have your grade. This is easier said than done and takes practice, but at least is pretty much the same thing for most series you're grading.
Photograde is ok, but it doesn't always agree with the ANA standards. The whole idea to grade a coin simply by what its entirety looks is a method many don't subscribe to. Coins, especially classical coins, have things to look for like..."is this separated from this"...."how many letters of liberty can I read" etc. Photograde doesn't always adhere to this. There are also many variations of what a coin can look like within a certain grade. You could probably put most coins up to photograde pictures and conclude it doesn't really look like any of them.
I know I'm barely answering your question, but what I would recommend is this: Look up descriptions from a few sources of what grades what...one would be the ANA book. Take a bunch of circulated coins of the series if you can and just divide all of them up into AG-AU categories. I know this isn't feasible for very old classical series, but for most 20th century types, if you do this one time for one hour, you'll have all the experience you'll need to grade any circulated coins of that series without looking at anything. For MS coins, it's all about eye appeal and to a greater degree, hits and marks. If you wanted to, you could get a 5x (recommended) and just count up all the issues. Then decide qualitatively what you think of luster and eye appeal and you have your grade. This is easier said than done and takes practice, but at least is pretty much the same thing for most series you're grading.
