Do quality and eye appeal go hand in hand?

[AnkurJ]

Or are they seperate entities?

 

Can you have a quality coin that isn't eye appealing? And vice versa?

 

Thoughts??

[MarkFeld]

If by "quality", you mean technical quality, then my answer is "of course not".

 

There are many superbly well preserved coins which are other than gorgeous, pretty or even neutral in appearance/the eye appeal department. Likewise, there are many splendid looking coins which are of lower quality, on both a technical and relative basis.

[CyberspaceVoid]

Definitely seperate!

 

An example ... a MS65 coin with ugly toning compared to one of idential grade with either brite white or attractive toning. Appeal is dependent upon the eye of the beholder while quality is more mechanical.

[messydesk]

They're separate, but strongly correlated. A high quality coin can have neutral eye appeal, and a coin with lots of eye-appeal can be of run-of-the-mill quality. I suppose an otherwise appealing coin can have other issues that make it of lower than average overall quality, such as a bad strike, some unfortunate marks, or repaired damage.

[CyberspaceVoid]

Messydesk, I agree they are strongly correlated in many cases, but not always. I dont find "Easter Eggs" attractive at all (eye appeal) even though they may be high quality coins otherwise ...

[Conder101]

I think it depends on how you are defining "High Quality". If you simply mean high grade then no they do not have to go together. If you mean a high end piece for the grade with good strike, no marks, even color, not stains blotches etc then yes they go hand in hand. You can have a "high quality" coin at any grade level and eye appeal become a big part of it.

[brg5658]

If by "quality" you mean technical grade, then Physicsfan's CBH in the NGC star holder comes to mind. I think it's an XF45★ or something like that. Technically not an amazing coin, but insanely gorgeous and eye appealing.

[Coinbuf]

I think it depends on how you are defining "High Quality". If you simply mean high grade then no they do not have to go together. If you mean a high end piece for the grade with good strike, no marks, even color, not stains blotches etc then yes they go hand in hand. You can have a "high quality" coin at any grade level and eye appeal become a big part of it.

 

 

This

[James_OldeTowne]

They are separate entities that sometimes overlap, less frequently than most people think. For example, probably every single coin in existence that grades MS/PF-68 and up possesses outstanding quality, but almost certainly mediocre eye-appeal (think PF-68 modern Lincoln cents, for example).

 

There is actually a very great amount of "high quality" material in existence, but not a very great amount of "high eye-appeal" material.

[physics-fan3.14]

If you are defining "high quality" as "high grade" then yes, good eye appeal is required for higher grades. Above MS-65, you cannot have negative eye appeal and still receive a higher grade.

 

However, there are plenty of scuffed up, marked, scratched, or otherwise low grade coins (MS-60) that have tremendous eye appeal. The Proof Gold that Ankur recently bought comes immediately to mind - very low quality (graded 60), but incredibly eye appealing.

[AnkurJ]

I dont define high quality as high grade. This is one coins I feel that has both eye appeal and is a quality coin. Yet the grade is F15.

 

[brg5658]

Physics, i was hoping you'd post that stared CBH you have? I can never get too much of that one!

[brg5658]

Ankur, beautiful 1795!!!!

[TomB]

For many collectors and many individual issues one can say that there is a strong link between quality and eye appeal. However, pieces such as the American Plantation tokens (James II Plantation token) are generally cruddy as all get out given their tin composition and a high quality piece is likely to have limited, if any, positive eye appeal to most folks.

[cladking]

I don't really believe in "eye appeal". Obviously two coins in the same grade can be very different but almost all characteristics of a coin can be delineated. Some (especially surface quality) is exceedinly difficult to define and quantify and this tends to be the major component of what we call "eye appeal". More original surfaces simply are seens as superior. Semi-PL surfaces or those imparted by slight planchet polishing can be components of "eye appeal". Older coins vary much more along more parameters and collectors simply prefer quality in all of them. "Qualities" that are more difficult to define are lumped into "eye appeal" but this term is vastly overused and doesn't apply to all coins. Just because a coin is superior in easily defined parameters doesn't confer any special qualities.

[physics-fan3.14]

Physics, i was hoping you'd post that stared CBH you have? I can never get too much of that one!

 

The star? This one isn't even worthy of the star, compared to some of the others I have. But, if you insist, here is the only early half dollar graded EF-40 to have earned the Star :

 

[AnkurJ]

I agree with Physicsfan. That Bust half is pretty, but not star worthy. Sorry to say but ive seen stars given to some coins that makes me just scratch my head.

[brg5658]

I agree with Physicsfan. That Bust half is pretty, but not star worthy. Sorry to say but ive seen stars given to some coins that makes me just scratch my head.

 

Well, I think it's a beautiful CBH. I love the color, and the original crusty surfaces.

 

I guess if NGC had a "TrueView" juicer like PCGS then all coins could get stars, eh?

[BillJones]

For me eye appeal and quality definitely go hand in hand. Back when I was working on a 1913 Proof set, I looked at all of the certified Proof coins that were available at a Baltimore show. Although very few of the Barber silver coins were dated 1913 (It’s a harder date to find than you might think.) I still noted the quality of what was offered.

 

There are a fair number of Proof Barber coins in grades like PR-65 and 66 that don’t please me at all. Yes, they were original and have never been dipped. And yes, from my brief review of them, they did have very few if any hairlines. BUT the toning had reached the point where the Proof mirrors were almost totally dimmed. The coins were dark blue to black, and so far as I was concerned they had very little eye appeal at all.

 

Natural toning can go too far. It can go to the point where the coin is dull and lifeless, while the technical grade might be what it says on the holder, the eye appeal and in my opinion, the market value, is not up to that level.