Madness' Coin Grading Training Ground

[1949threepence 3,367]

36 minutes ago, Madness said:

@1949threepence  Are there any principles underlying this dark art?  Principles and guidelines?  I'm here to learn.

In a sense, yes. For example certain coins in certain years are known to have die wear problem. I'll just take the 1906 penny as a prime example. The reverse of the 1906 has a reputation for die wear, and mine is no exception. It's otherwise EF with some residual lustre, but the reverse only looks fine in places, especially parts of Britannia.

This is in addition to what Peck says above, which I totally agree with.

Take a look:-

 

[1949threepence 3,367]

This is what an EF reverse from that era should look like, big difference:-

 

[Madness 146]

Source: @Rob second example:

Given that I was too harsh at my last attempt: 

Grading guestimate: VF -  Significant wear, but localised to the higher points   

What are the parallel lines on the obverse?  They seem too even and straight to be cleaning.  Is this what adjustment looks like?

Thanks again.

[1949threepence 3,367]

Of course, die wear can manifest in all manner of different ways. For example, note the way the 9 on this 1891 penny tends to lack a tail and runs into nothing. That's pure die wear:-

 

Edited July 25, 2018 by 1949threepence

[Madness 146]

My grading guestimate: EF   

What do you think would be a reasonable amount to pay for this example?

 

 

Edited July 29, 2018 by Madness

[1949threepence 3,367]

Yes, grading wise I'd say a/EF. 

Not sure on price as not my speciality. Bot someone else will know for sure. 

[Peckris 2 2,148]

I couldn't say (apart from agreeing with the grade). When I was dealing, these could be picked up for £50 or even less. Probably much more now, but I personally wouldn't pay £100 even for an EF example. But that's a personal judgement.

[Madness 146]

My guestimate: Extremely Fine 

 

This has been graded by an auction house as "Very Fine".  Am I missing something?  There is very little wear, and that restricted to high points.  It doesn't appear to have been cleaned.  Are the small marks on the coin the items that bring the grade down?  I've seen TPG services list the same coin with a similar amount of wear as "UNC".  It even seems to be a nice strike with no obvious die defects of any significance.  What am I doing wrong?

Edited August 5, 2018 by Madness

[1949threepence 3,367]

1 hour ago, Madness said:

My guestimate: Extremely Fine 

 

This has been graded by an auction house as "Very Fine".  Am I missing something?  There is very little wear, and that restricted to high points.  It doesn't appear to have been cleaned.  Are the small marks on the coin the items that bring the grade down?  I've seen TPG services list the same coin with a similar amount of wear as "UNC".  It even seems to be a nice strike with no obvious die defects of any significance.  What am I doing wrong?

No, I don't think you are missing anything. Nice coin with, as you say, negligible wear to the very highest surfaces only. The coin has that unmistakeable crispness which pertains to EF level.

A straight EF from me too.  

[Peckris 2 2,148]

Me too - obverse is perhaps GEF

[DrLarry 443]

On 7/25/2018 at 10:16 AM, Madness said:

Source: @Rob second example:

Given that I was too harsh at my last attempt: 

Grading guestimate: VF -  Significant wear, but localised to the higher points   

What are the parallel lines on the obverse?  They seem too even and straight to be cleaning.  Is this what adjustment looks like?

Thanks again.

I know what they are !!!!!!!!!!!!!! They are part of my  pattern I can see close up to the A or Gratia the tell tale sequence I see all the time note the way the parallel lines have a slight crenulation it you were to view them from the side angle the lines would merge...ooopss  I am not supposed to be talking about this !

 

Edited August 5, 2018 by DrLarry

[DrLarry 443]

I will post these pictures of your line question on my own wacky thread with the interpretation of how after taking an image of those lines the exact same mathematical relationships exist.  

[Madness 146]

My guestimate: Obverse - GVF Reverse - VF

 

 

 

[1949threepence 3,367]

4 hours ago, Madness said:

My guestimate: Obverse - GVF Reverse - VF

 

 

 

Maybe the photography detracts slightly on that one @Madness - perhaps a bit too much light on the obverse? Based on screen appearance I'd say VF on both sides. 

[Madness 146]

1787 Sixpence

My guestimate: EF  

I almost gave this GEF.  While it lacks many of the finer details of the Pingo proof, I think this relates to die issues rather than wear.  One of the first points of wear on these coins appears to be the tips and edges of the top laurels.  There's next to no wear here on this example.  I'm not sure if the lack of detail on the frills of his shirt around the neck relate to wear of or die issues, similarly with the bottom right curl of hair.  The top of the reverse has a weak strike as does the Honoverian shield.  The details in the Hibernian harp are excellent for a circulation coin. There are some hairline scratches on the obverse and flecking on the reverse.  Good amount of remaining lustre.  

I'm still having trouble differentiating between die issues and wear.  I'm also having difficulty interpreting the reflections in images and determining how they relate to wear.  

Feedback please!

btw, what value does Spink give to the various grades of a run-of-the-mill 1787 sixpence?

Edit: The seller has listed this as a 1787 Shilling.  I believe that it's actually a sixpence because of 

a. The extra detail in George III's hair to the left of the laurels and

b. The left of the base of the bottom of the hair-ribbon loop is squarer and consequently slightly closer to GIII's neck in the shilling than in the sixpence

I've asked the seller for diameter measurements in order to confirm.

 

 

 

Edited August 13, 2018 by Madness

[Rob 3,160]

The legend above the head says it is a sixpence.Shillings have a stop or a space.

It looks to be quite good where you can see the detail with the caveat that some bits aren't clear because of the lighting. The toning looks random and untouched - which is a good sign.

Spink prices are Fine 15, VF 45, EF 115.

[Madness 146]

9 minutes ago, Rob said:

The legend above the head says it is a sixpence.Shillings have a stop or a space.

It looks to be quite good where you can see the detail with the caveat that some bits aren't clear because of the lighting. The toning looks random and untouched - which is a good sign.

Spink prices are Fine 15, VF 45, EF 115.

Thanks Rob.  There is a stop over George's head here, though, isn't there?  What grade would you give?

Edited August 14, 2018 by Madness

[Rob 3,160]

Yes but the legend has much closer spacing on the 6d. The shilling has the legend spaced either side of the top of the head with a distinct gap between III and DEI, with or without an intervening stop.

[Madness 146]

2 minutes ago, Rob said:

Yes but the legend has much closer spacing on the 6d. The shilling has the legend spaced either side of the top of the head with a distinct gap between III and DEI, with or without an intervening stop.

Ah!  I see what you mean thanks.  Does haymarking detract from grade?

[Rob 3,160]

Just now, Madness said:

Ah!  I see what you mean thanks.  Does haymarking detract from grade?

No. Grade is wear dependant. It may however affect the aesthetics which will determine the amount a person is willing to pay, but that depends on the individual.

[Peckris 2 2,148]

15 hours ago, Madness said:

I'm still having trouble differentiating between die issues and wear.  I'm also having difficulty interpreting the reflections in images and determining how they relate to wear.  

Feedback please!

 

The short answer is that die issues are very localised and will be seen in the same particular place(s) on many top grade examples. Wear tends to be more generalised, starting from the highest points of the design and spreading downwards.

I'm not sure what you mean by reflections in relation to wear?

[Madness 146]

Duplicate - Sorry

Edited August 18, 2018 by Madness

[Madness 146]

Is "bright" a euphemism for "dipped" as per this example being sold by Michael Gouby?  

http://www.michael-coins.co.uk/sx1787WH (3).htm

[Nonmortuus 900]

1 hour ago, Madness said:

Is "bright" a euphemism for "dipped" as per this example being sold by Michael Gouby?  

http://www.michael-coins.co.uk/sx1787WH (3).htm

Generally yes.

[Madness 146]

1 hour ago, Nonmortuus said:

Generally yes.

I've just cleared up this issue with Michael.  He said that "bright" does not mean dipped for the coins he sells and that he would mention any evidence of cleaning or dipping when describing the coin.  Given his reputation and demeanor in my dealings with him I believe him entirely.  

Made final payment for a 1787 shilling and sixpence and am looking forward to the arrival of same.

A quote from his email:  

As I always say to every collector “I will always give you a full refund for the coin if you are unhappy for any reason and wish to return it” !

Needless to say I'll be buying from him again as the experience has been far more pleasant than the baptism of fire I got through eBay.