Is it reasonable to think that if the grade of a coin can be easily asserted....

[James_OldeTowne]

... by a particular image, then it must be a good image?

[coinman_23885]

Yes, with one exception: toning. Just because a coin is a technical MS65 doesn't mean that it can't have mediocre (I didn't say distracting) toning. Photographs can make toning seem significantly more or less attractive. This doesn't necessarily affect the grade per se (absent exceptionally eye appealing or negative toning).

[MarkFeld]

... by a particular image, then it must be a good image?

In general, yes. However, in the case of circulated coins, it is often much easier to ascertain the grade, even if the images are sub-par.

[PerryHall]

I've never seen a pic good enough to see all the hairline scratches. Usually a coin needs to be rotated and tilted under a good light to see all the hairlines.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

While a Grade may be asserted from an image by an individual, it does not mean it is the correct Grade, except as viewed by the individual making the assertion, nor does it mean the coin is not counterfeit.

 

While a Grade may be ascertained from an image by an individual, it is only certain to the individual, and nothing more. It can not be stated with certainty and accepted by the general numismatic community, nor does it mean the coin is not counterfeit.

 

Yes, I agree that an individual can state that the image is the correct image of the item, but this does not mean the general numismatic community can rely on the declaration as anything more than a personal assertion about the image, and I do not agree that this is a method to ascertain a Grade.

 

If this was an acceptable method, there would be no need to send a coin to a TPG to ascertain or assert the coins' authenticity, Grade, etc.

 

We could all just hire a Professional Numismatic Imager (PNI) and have the PNI assert under Oath that he/she has ascertained the Authenticity and Grade of the imaged coin. To some degree, this has already occured in the numismatic community in a less formal declared manner- individuals are buying coins from ebay images, buying coins from auction images, etc.,- but this is not certainty of Grade.

 

No, I do not agree an image, no matter how accurate, is a method to grade the coin, and therefore it is not reasonable to use "grading" of the image ( i.e. the image is "good") as a declaration that the image is good enough to declare a Grade.

 

I do not agree that this can even be a generally accepted statement.

 

I also do not agree that it is "easier" if the coin is circulated, nor do I agree the level of circulation makes it easier to ascertain even if the images are sub-par, because there are just to many variables.No two individuals view all things the same-depth perception/color range/interpretation/"eye appeal"/details, not to mention weak strike.

 

I would agree that some individuals may be capable of developing a talent for determining information that would tend to lead to a higher percentage of accuracy in determining the Grade of the coin, and due to their Standing in the numismatic community, their determination would be given a higher level of credence, but this is not the OP request for comment.

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

[ModCrewman-migration]

... by a particular image, then it must be a good image?

In general, yes. However, in the case of circulated coins, it is often much easier to ascertain the grade, even if the images are sub-par.

Did I just see Mark Feld say you could grade accurately from photos??

 

(Just kidding Mark.)

[MarkFeld]

... by a particular image, then it must be a good image?

In general, yes. However, in the case of circulated coins, it is often much easier to ascertain the grade, even if the images are sub-par.

Did I just see Mark Feld say you could grade accurately from photos??

 

(Just kidding Mark.)

No, you didn't. However, I strongly believe that generally, grading circulated coins from images isn't as problematic as grading uncirculated or Proof coins.

[ModCrewman-migration]

No, you didn't. However, I strongly believe that generally, grading circulated coins from images isn't as problematic as grading uncirculated or Proof coins.

 

I appreciate (and agree with) that fact. In fact last September I'd posted some really horrible pictures of a Superbird ATS asking for grade opinions. Your response was something along the line of "It's impossible to grade proof coins from photos...especially those of this nature." It was that post that made it clear to me if I was going to bother to take and post photos, I'd better get it figured out. which has opened up an entirely new way for me to enjoy the hobby.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

But (there is always a "but"):

 

Is it "reasonable" to assert that because of a "good" image- or in the case of circulated coins,a sub-par image -a Grade can be ascertained to a degree certain?

 

Is there a Posit Flaw in the question, or in the answer(s)?

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

[MarkFeld]

But (there is always a "but"):

 

Is it "reasonable" to assert that because of a "good" image- or in the case of circulated coins,a sub-par image -a Grade can be ascertained to a degree certain?

 

Is there a Posit Flaw in the question, or in the answer(s)?

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

John, in answer to your questions above:

 

1) No

 

2) In the question AND the answers.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Gotta love logical answers.

Respectfully,

john Curlis

[MarkFeld]

No, you didn't. However, I strongly believe that generally, grading circulated coins from images isn't as problematic as grading uncirculated or Proof coins.

 

I appreciate (and agree with) that fact. In fact last September I'd posted some really horrible pictures of a Superbird ATS asking for grade opinions. Your response was something along the line of "It's impossible to grade proof coins from photos...especially those of this nature." It was that post that made it clear to me if I was going to bother to take and post photos, I'd better get it figured out. which has opened up an entirely new way for me to enjoy the hobby.

I'm very glad to hear that you are enjoying the hobby more in that way. (thumbs u

[FishyOne]

... by a particular image, then it must be a good image?

 

 

I agree that if the grade can be accurately obtained from images, then the images must be good. That's not to say an accurate grade couldn't be obtained from poor images, but then there's guess work coming into play.

 

===============================================

 

One a similar note: I am often stunned by high MS grades tossed about on coin forums from (seemingly) sub-par images.

[physics-fan3.14]

 

One a similar note: I am often stunned by high MS grades tossed about on coin forums from (seemingly) sub-par images.

 

Grading from images requires two separate and vital skills - being able to grade coins correctly, and being able to interpret images correctly. If you can't do these, you can't grade coins from images.

 

Unfortunately, many collectors have never really learned either skill. The people here are better at it than most because we practice so much, but many collectors are just blind, relying solely on the grade on the plastic.

[messydesk]

The original question is equivalent to asking the question, "Is it reasonable to think that if the photo of a coin is not good, the grade of the coin will not be easily asserted?" It seems easier to answer this question in the affirmative, but it becomes more apparent that requires a subjective interpretation of "good." If we define a good photo as being one from which the coin can be easily graded, then we're asking "if P is true, then is P true?" which is silly. So the question that we should be asking is how we define "good" when judging a photo of a coin.

[James_OldeTowne]

the question that we should be asking is how we define "good" when judging a photo of a coin.

That's kind of where I'm coming from.

 

Is it possible to define a "good coin image" by how accurately a group of viewers (who are competent graders, of course) can ascertain the grade?

[MarkFeld]

the question that we should be asking is how we define "good" when judging a photo of a coin.

That's kind of where I'm coming from.

 

Is it possible to define a "good coin image" by how accurately a group of viewers (who are competent graders, of course) can ascertain the grade?

That's a good, general starting point. However, due to the limitations of trying to evaluate a coin based on an image, in many cases, an image can be excellent, but still not allow for an accurate grade assessment.

 

As just one example, light (grade-affecting) hairlines on Proof coins will not be evident, even if an image is excellent.

[Oldtrader3]

I agree Mark. Pixelating of images will never yield an image equal to sight of the coin under balanced light. For one thing, I truly also believe that each of us sees just a little differently with our brain for color and shade interpretation of images than others do. Some images get close to reality but most are somewhat an interpretation of the person making the image.

[crypto79-migration]

It is my belief that most people can grade coins form photos about as well as they can grade them in person which is to say not at all.

 

Jokes aside I believe that coin grading should be done with a "total coin" perspective factoring the whole package into the grade. Photo's often lose the multidimensional perspective needed to see things like how the luster plays off of the tone/color and not just if it has luster or tone/color. Also some of the subjective parts of grading like defining the impact of flaws and putting a weight on them can be hard without having it in hand as pictures can play these up or down.

 

One can often interpret the technical grade from a photo while cross referencing it in their mind against similar coins they have held in hand which is often correct given the other factors. Problems come up if the coin is atypical on the positive or negative side of normal like on the strike, luster, marks & their locations, tone/color, common or rare, ect.

 

If you can grade a coin well form the picture then by default I feel it in turn represents the coin properly and must be a decent photo.

 

[rrantique]

 

One a similar note: I am often stunned by high MS grades tossed about on coin forums from (seemingly) sub-par images.

 

Grading from images requires two separate and vital skills - being able to grade coins correctly, and being able to interpret images correctly. If you can't do these, you can't grade coins from images.

 

Unfortunately, many collectors have never really learned either skill. The people here are better at it than most because we practice so much, but many collectors are just blind, relying solely on the grade on the plastic.

 

I agree with Jason as I have recently posted in the GTG forum and my images may seem sub par to some to offer any kind of accurate grades. The images however I think are posted for more of a learning experience, even those that do not post a guess are looking. The responses are very close if not right on the money. And that says a lot to me about members on the forum and their grading skills from images. I realize it's just a fun way to hone ones grading skills and appreciate the participation. (thumbs u