Quote:
If someone has a moment, even the OP, could they explain why the grade of AU 5x is your guess? I'm a total noob when related to gold coins and grading. Maybe highlight the areas of wear, circulation marks, etc.
The answer to that is a bit complex. To grade from images, you have to evaluate both the coin itself,
and the images.
How accurate are the photos? Are you seeing the reality of the coin, or to what extent has the photographic process influenced the result? Digital cameras and bright lighting are harsh on a coin, revealing features you might now see in-hand, or see to a lesser extent. Me, I tend to sort of "filter" digital imaging through a mental "blurring" process, correcting for things I know won't so much attract my eye if physically grading a coin in-hand, which is the standard by which we should discuss coin grades.
After that comes the hard part, grading the coin itself. You use differing sets of standards by issue and composition. Some metals are more difficult to strike than others leading to weaker strikes in general; some issues and dates have better striking characteristics inherent in the design and process. Then there's the size of the coin: Should one expect the level of detail in a
Half Dime as one would a Half Dollar? Nope, not really - there's a limit to how much strikable detail you can engrave into a 16mm coin as opposed to a 31mm one.
Gold is one of the more difficult materials to get a handle on. Soft as it is, contact which wouldn't affect a silver coin will mar gold. Copper sits somewhere in between, and nickel is even more resistant to contact. That has to factor into grading decisions - you'll see allowances for marks on gold (in a
TPG opinion) that they won't offer to silver.
So let's apply that generalized thinking to the coin pictured here.
The imagery is pretty good. Not perfect - the coin is overlit - but not bad. In typical digital fashion, every little mark is over-emphasized and I'm taking them more as a collective than closely studying every one. I'm factoring the OP's assurance that the coin is in a "righteous" slab as well; otherwise the ding at 11:30 obverse - and what might be a similar one at 9:30 where the denticles are flattened - might sway my opinion. Likewise the color; overlighting makes it a bit "brighter" yellow than I might want to see in-hand. As for the marks, remember this is a gold coin. In the grand scheme of gold coins, the marks apparent here aren't "numerous." What they
are, however, is of a shape and distribution not consistent with what you'd expect from a coin never circulated. So I think, "maybe circulated." But....
Obverse: I look first - with
this issue, remember - at the line of hair starting behind the eye and extending down to where the ear would be. The next-most important area is at and above the clasp. Third is the front of the breast, a good place to first note wear with this design. The hair shows the
barest hint of "wear," too little to conclusively decide it's from circulation or strike. In fact, with this lighting, I lean away from circulation as the cause for what I'm seeing, my conclusion partly supported by what I'm not seeing on the breast.
Reverse: This is the other side of the coin. First glance here must go to the eagle's neck, top edges of the wings and the talons. Wear shows there first, and they look to have a little rub. But, does a coin circulate on only one face? I don't think so.
A bunch of disparate data, with indications either way. Proof that grading a coin is_not an objective process, but a very subjective, analog one. My very analog stream of thought pops out the conclusion that I have to call this one AU58 - there's just enough evidence indicating possible circulation. When I think about how higher-quality lighting would change the appearance of the coin, I feel like I'd more clearly see rub on it.
Then, once all this is done, you have to put yourself in the shoes of the
TPG grader and walk back
their grading process to achieve their grade decision, which is what the OP asked for. Knowing they're going to be conservative, and knowing they're likely a lot better at this issue than I am, I could see this on in an AU55 slab without disagreeing. Then again, I cold also see it in an MS62 slab. Compromise is therefore called for here, too, and I'm sticking to the AU58 grade as a result. No, AU55. Um, whatever.
First Page
Posted 03/18/2014 6:46 pm
