Please rank the following on importance to you: luster, wear, strike, eye appeal

[MikeInFL]

It occured to me that everyone has their own preferences when it comes to evaluating coins. To wit, please rank the following coin attributes in order of (1) most important to (4) least important:

 

Luster

Wear/hits

Strike

Eye Appeal (to incude toning)

 

How do you rank these characteristics when evaluating a coin for inclusion into your collection?....Mike

[MarkFeld]

It occured to me that everyone has their own preferences when it comes to evaluating coins. To wit, please rank the following coin attributes in order of (1) most important to (4) least important:

 

Luster

Wear/hits

Strike

Eye Appeal (to incude toning)

 

How do you rank these characteristics when evaluating a coin for inclusion into your collection?....Mike

Mike, would you consider distinguishing "wear" from "hits"?

 

Either way, my answer (which admittedly, might change based on the combination of the characteristics on a particular coin) is:

 

1) Hits

2) eye appeal

3) luster

4) strike

[bsshog40]

#1. Wear/hits

#2. Luster

#3. Strike

#4. Eye Appeal.

I figure if a coin has the first 3 qualities, it most likely will have the fourth!

[gmarguli]

To me, eye appeal encompasses all of the other attributes and it is the the most important factor for me.

 

Luster is next. Wear/hits and strike are about equal.

 

I also like nice planchets and avoid spotted coins. A coin with great luster, condition, and strike might be awful to me if it has carbon spots.

[MikeKing]

It occured to me that everyone has their own preferences when it comes to evaluating coins. To wit, please rank the following coin attributes in order of (1) most important to (4) least important:

 

Luster

Wear/hits

Strike

Eye Appeal (to incude toning)

 

How do you rank these characteristics when evaluating a coin for inclusion into your collection?....Mike

 

great question, Mike.

off the top of my head

for me, personally, I rate them in an order of importance as this:

 

1. Eye appeal (which includes toning but not restricted to that or any of the above, it all depends on how the whole thing pulls together, the overall aesthetics of it, as exemplified by an XF 45 looking a lot better and harder to obtain than an average MS 64)

 

2. Luster (Luster brings out the 'life' in a coin, regardless of the presence of toning, regardless of strike and regardless of hits)

 

3. Strike (I've always debated within myself, which was more important, strike or luster, and this, I think is a very personal preference, and the luster always won out. This is also understanding that luster = a worn die). A great strike can elevate a coin no matter what the grade!

 

4. Wear/hits: I'd say hits are more important than wear, for me at least. Hits can undermine everything, much more than good 'honest' wear. But hits are also unavoidable in all the coins I can afford, and also, need to be appreciated when collecting something like Southern gold.

 

edited to add: or when evaluating some rare pieces of copper.

[TomB]

I view and evaluate coins in a manner that wraps all attributes up in the term eye appeal, so I cannot single this quality out. Of the remaining qualities the wear/hits category is really two categories lumped together that would have to be teased apart. Additionally, depending on the grade range of the coin the attributes may have varrying importance such as luster, which should be essentially absent on a VF20 while booming on an MS67. At first glance this appears to be an easy question to answer, but thinking more about it leads me to state that the individual coin's eye appeal will be the determining factor and that the eye appeal is the sum of all the parts.

[physics-fan3.14]

Good idea for a thread.

 

1. Strike. I want my coins to be fully struck and detailed. Obviously, if the date/mint is known for its bad strike this might have to relax somewhat, but I try not to. To me, a 65 needs to be fully struck, not just free of marks.

 

2. Luster. For some reason, I really like bright, booming luster. When it looks like the coin is dripping with watery luster, I find it hard to resist. Even if it is under toning, I want to be able to see a good bit of luster shining through.

 

3. Eye Appeal. I don't want splotchy and ugly, but I usually can't afford bright colors and such. I seek the best quality that I can afford.

 

4. Hits/wear. I know how to grade (well, sort of), and I know what grade I want for a particular coin. If there are too many hits, or too much wear, it won't qualify for that grade. Then I usually pass, unless there is something really special about it.

[ant]

the order in title is right.

[MikeInFL]

Just a quick comment, but I am frankly surprised at the range of answers thusfar!

 

Keep them coming!

[jesbroken]

Mike

I offer the two categories if I understand you:

 

My preference: :

 

Strike

Eye appeal

Wear/hits

Luster

 

Collection/value

 

Eye appeal

Luster

Wear/hits

Strike

[MikeInFL]

I was really only interested in YOUR preference, although I do welcome and appreciate any alternative interpretations and responses!

[DC Dawg]

#1 Eye Appeal... if it does not appeal to me, then I am not going to look at anything else. The coin needs to grab me, grab my attention in order for me to consider it. Since I am not into toned coins (with some very rare exceptions), I would not consider them regardless of the rest of their attributes.

 

#2 Wear/hits... once I am hooked, I want to look at the wearing of the coin. Wear is not a bad thing. For some reason, I like well worn early coppers. I own about a dozen 1798-1804 Large Cents with discernible dates but very worn. I think they're cool!

 

#3 Luster... with a caveat: some coins I look at do not have luster, like older copper coins. Depending on the coin, this could be #2--like when looking at Mint State coins--or non-existent (early coppers).

 

#4 Strike... with a similar caveat to #3. I look for the strike as #2 on silver bullion coins. But I am looking at the strike differently on a 1922 No-D Lincoln Cent. I will look at the strike as #2 on Mint State Walkers, but lesser so on Barber Halves.

 

Then there are the folders that I fill the holes from change where it's more important to fill-in the date regardless of the condition. Yes... I do have a number of Whitman blue folders that I fill with pocket change. Why? Because I like it!!

 

Scott

[BillJones]

#1. Eye appeal. If I don't like the looks of a coin, it's over for me right there.

 

#2. Wear/hits - This is really a part of #1. I don't like hits very much at all. If coin is baggy, I'm out.

 

#3 Strike - I want to see the design in its best possible light. I guess that's why I'm drawn to Proof coins. If I'm collecting a series and a poor strike is normal, I take that into account. But if I'm looking for a type coin, strike is way up there.

 

#4. Luster - I've seen coins will lots of luster and lots of hits that got higher grades because of the luster. Such coins are a turn-off to me. When a satin surface coin, especially a gold piece, gets slammed by the grading services, I think that stinks. I once had a very smooth satin surface $2.50 Indian. I thought the coin should have gotten an MS-64. It came back MS-62. Needless to say I was not happy, but what you can you do?

[moovyz]

This is facinating! I am truly amazed at the variety of answers here. I guess it just goes to show that this is such an enjoyable hobby for everyone and we all have our little niches and areas that make it special and motivating our opinions.

 

 

As for my 2 cents worth (I really never cared for 2-cent pieces) ...

 

 

1. Eye appeal, a coin just grabs you or it doesn't. If you look at a dealer's display of 40 coins and one is either a bright red copper, or a blue-green silver proof... whatever, it jumps out at you.

 

2. I've got to, personally, go with luster as second importance. This is usually part of the eye appeal, but when the light hits that special coin from different angles it's like a halo on an angel, just awe inspiring. It also impresses me that that thin layer has survived so long in many cases. I think I might put the toning aspect in this category as opposed to eye appeal, but again, they all tie in together.

 

3. Strike. A weak strike may be overlooked a bit if the above 2 are exemplary. A good example of this is another post here recently about 1913 Buffalo nickels. There were 2 pics in the thread, both very appealing coins with weak strikes.

 

4. Wear/hits. This is down further for me but mostly because I just try to stick with MS coins. I'm not really in to key date circulated coins. It needs to be like it was made for me to get excited about it. That being said, a really nice, luster covered, strong strike coin with a big hit on the cheek or something, loses it's eye appeal and therefoe becomes an overall factor in the 3 above.

 

I think, in all honesty, that all of these factors tie in so closely that that is why we are seeing so many different opinions in the order. If we were to ask everyone who answered to rate these by % of importance, I think you might see something more on the lines of all 4 %'s being relatively equal in determineing whether to purchase or not. For me...

 

Eye appeal 40%

Luster 30%

Strike 20%

Wear 10%

 

But a very interesting post nonetheless!

 

 

 

[leeg]

I feel that if a coin has superb Eye Appeal (1), and is correctly graded, then I can live with minor hit's, rub, wear, and weak strike (3 & 4). Has to have lustre that matches the grade (2).

[Tradedollarnut]

I too think that eye appeal is a combination of the other choices. Change it to toning and it still comes out on top:

 

Eye appealing toning

luster

hits/wear

strike.

[Conder101]

#1 what the coin IS. There are pieces out there I will buy I don't care what they look like

 

#2 Eye appeal. If I don't like the way it looks, it doesn't matter what the wear, strike, or luster is I pass.

 

#3 Wear I'd take a high grade with substandard luster than a low grade with nice luster. (Of course if you have a low grade coin with "luster" something else is wrong.)

 

#4 luster I have to say that a coin with nice luster beats one with low luster

 

#5 That just leaves strike bringing up the end

[cladking]

It really depends a lot on what collection you're talking about. With some I have very little concern with grade.

 

In clad strike is far and away the most important factor. You can almost always find well-preserved coins if you can find well-struck ones.

 

Luster is third. I like the PL specimens when they are clean and the type and quality of luster can sometimes make or break a gem.

 

I don't believe in eye appeal. Obviously some coins are much more attractive than others and this is critical to grading but ascribing it to "eye appeal" is usually just the lazy way to descibe the coin. If a coin has nice original surfaces and flashy luster or if it's well balanced in its attributes one shoulsd just say so.

 

Sure there are little differences in planchet and die preparation as well as storage media which are very difficult or impossible to identify but one should simply describe the effect on appearance in such cases. Terms like "struck on partially polished planchet", or "struck from basined die", or even "flashy for date" are far more appealing to me than ascribing "eye appeal" to a coin.

 

[chinook]

To me, eye appeal encompasses all of the other attributes and it is the the most important factor for me.

 

Luster is next. Wear/hits and strike are about equal.

 

I also like nice planchets and avoid spotted coins. A coin with great luster, condition, and strike might be awful to me if it has carbon spots.

 

Ditto.

[Arizonadesertrat]

1. Eye appeal---if it isn't there IMO, none of the following matter.

2. Wear/hits--particularly the latter.

3. Luster--for anything AU53+.

4. Strike

[IGWT]

Depends on the reason that I'm interested in a coin. But, if we're talking about coins that generally have the greatest aesthetic appeal to me, I'd say that "eye appeal" subsumes the other categories to a large extent. Unabraded, smooth surfaces and quality of strike carry a lot of weight. Flashy, coruscating luster can actually detract from a coin's appeal . . . I prefer a satiny look.

[toyonakataro]

As someone state above, eye applealing coin means lusterous, well struck , clean coin for me so eye appeals comes to #1

#2 will be luster and because I like lusterous coins, wear comes #3 and I don't like circulated coins very much with a few exceptions.

 

I hate coins with fingerprints and try to avoid them no matter how lusterous it is.

[WinstonWare]

Nice question

 

1) Eye Appeal - What to say a nice original eye-appealing coin is hard to beat...

2) Strike - Varies so much it's important in the early silver coins that I like.

3) Wear/Hits - don't mind them if they are contemporary to the coin. Hate them if they are recent hits and reveal fresh metal.

4) Luster - I generally collect lower grade older coins, so luster isn't a major factor.

[jackson64]

1.Low hits

2.Strike ( strike doesn't matter if its worn)

3. Luster.(depends on the series--some series for me the strike is very important ex: Walkers, SLQ's..others series need luster to even get me to look).........all of these make up eye appeal for me..

[Newmismatist]

My preference, in order of importance are the following:

 

1. Eye Appeal

 

2. Eye Appeal

 

3. Eye Appeal and finally

 

4. Eye Appeal

 

After my top 4 choices, in no particular order: Luster, Strike and High Grade - but if they have Eye Appeal, they usually have the other criteria.

 

 

[michael]

eye appeal is most important and wins out overall

 

but if you think about it if the coin has great strike lustre and even or little wear then this all creates eye appeal

 

so i guess the point is moot

 

but eye appeal wins out which again means great qualities about the coin many positive attributes so good to great eye appeal

 

 

[michael]

great thread by the way mike in fl

 

[cpm9ball]

It doesn't matter to me if it's a $1,000 coin or a $1,000,000 coin, if it doesn't have eye appeal, it's not for me. As Tom and some of the others said, wear, strike and lustre are more or less a part of what makes eye appeal. But, if I had to separate them, it would be:

1) Eye appeal

2) Wear

3) Strike

4) Lustre

 

Chris

[James_OldeTowne]

It occured to me that everyone has their own preferences when it comes to evaluating coins. To wit, please rank the following coin attributes in order of (1) most important to (4) least important:

 

Luster

Wear/hits

Strike

Eye Appeal (to incude toning)

 

How do you rank these characteristics when evaluating a coin for inclusion into your collection?....Mike

Hi Mike!

 

I didn't respond right away, because to me, "eye appeal" is a summation of all the other factors. Possibly a better 4th category is "surface quality" (which includes toning).

 

In that case, I would personally rank them as follows:

 

1. Surface quality

2. Wear/hits

3. Luster

4. Strike

 

... with "eye appeal" being derived from all of these factors.

 

Great post!

[MikeInFL]

James,

 

I agree...

 

Actually, after I posted the thread and started to read the responses, I realized that I probably should have "set aside" eye-appeal because, as you and others have pointed out, it really spans the other characteristics too. Had I to do it all over again, I would have likely left it out for discussion purposes.

 

Thanks to all for their responses and the wonderful discussion, and anyone whose not responded yet, please feel free to add your thoughts!

 

Take care...Mike