Registry for toned coins ,anyone have interest?

[grip]

For each series.Could be fun.

[Raisethis2]

Hmmmmmm.

 

I'd like to know more.

[PLM]

I would be interested.

[grip]

I only had the idea,not the answers:)..How would you grade and assign points for color/eye appeal?

[coinman_23885]

It would be interesting, but exactly how would one access toning and eye appeal with any reasonable degree of consistency? If the said registry became large enough, it would be a nightmare to manage. I don't think it is feasible personally, that is at least if rankings are to be used. I suppose that it is possible to have toned con galleries, but I would not consider this a coin registry per se.

[TonerGuy]

(thumbs u

[Kenneth F]

I have a custom set built for my toned coins. It would be impossible to assign points to a toned coin because what looks awesome to one might look like to another.

[bsshog40]

As mentioned, there would be no way to actually assign numerical points for these. More points for blue and less for brown?

[RWB]

Yikes!

[Eric Hazen]

I've been thinking about this as a project for a few months now. I have a few ideas that I feel are decent and would not only help with ranking but also collectors avoid price gouging. Posting this via mobile but if I have time tonight I'll share my ideas for your consideration.

[lehigh96]

I really think the only way this would work would be for the viewers of the coin to be able to vote on the eye appeal of the coin. The scale of the eye appeal could be from 1 to 10 and once the coin reaches 50 votes it gets an average ranking which would then be updated with every new vote.

[newprepper]

I really think the only way this would work would be for the viewers of the coin to be able to vote on the eye appeal of the coin. The scale of the eye appeal could be from 1 to 10 and once the coin reaches 50 votes it gets an average ranking which would then be updated with every new vote.

 

I like it!!!

[grip]

Well thats a possibility.Keep them coming.

[brg5658]

I really think the only way this would work would be for the viewers of the coin to be able to vote on the eye appeal of the coin. The scale of the eye appeal could be from 1 to 10 and once the coin reaches 50 votes it gets an average ranking which would then be updated with every new vote.

 

Right...and what would stop people from voting low for everyone else's coins? or creating dummy accounts to "upvote" their coins?

 

If you want a toned typeset, just create a type-set using the registry, and call it your "toned" type-set...like what Lehigh has had for oodles of years...

 

Please, for the love of , let's not get into a loop of trying to assign "wow factor" to toned coins like WingedLiberty's idea of a couple years ago.

[Kenneth F]

I've been thinking about this as a project for a few months now. I have a few ideas that I feel are decent and would not only help with ranking but also collectors avoid price gouging. Posting this via mobile but if I have time tonight I'll share my ideas for your consideration.

 

Impossible.. its like having the cure for all types of cancer..

[grip]

They already have a * designation for eye appeal.Why not star * 1 through star *10..

[toneddollars]

Why not just have a sub category in each existing registry set for toned coins only. The points would be awarded just as they are now, by grade. Thus if you had all toned coins in high grade you would be up towards the top without dealing with sets that have higher white coins in it.

[robec1347]

I really think the only way this would work would be for the viewers of the coin to be able to vote on the eye appeal of the coin. The scale of the eye appeal could be from 1 to 10 and once the coin reaches 50 votes it gets an average ranking which would then be updated with every new vote.

 

Right...and what would stop people from voting low for everyone else's coins? or creating dummy accounts to "upvote" their coins?

 

If you want a toned typeset, just create a type-set using the registry, and call it your "toned" type-set...like what Lehigh has had for oodles of years...

 

Please, for the love of , let's not get into a loop of trying to assign "wow factor" to toned coins like WingedLiberty's idea of a couple years ago.

When WL was posting his 100 Greatest MPL, Toned Brilliant Proof Lincoln's and etc. a couple years ago, he was asking people to vote for their favorites and supply any feedback to make the site better.

 

With the lack of neither he went forward. He was not pushing his rankings onto anyone, but he was or was trying to bring interest to this segment of the hobby. Call it crazy if you want, but how can having a passion for a particular collecting area and illustrating his ideas with a beautiful website be a bad thing?

[coinman_23885]

They already have a * designation for eye appeal.Why not star * 1 through star *10..

 

It would only add even more subjectivity to the designation and to the process. I like monster toned coins and those that are rainbow toned. There are some people who hate these coins and prefer more subtle album toning. Who's to say who is right and who is wrong?

[lehigh96]

They already have a * designation for eye appeal.Why not star * 1 through star *10..

 

It would only add even more subjectivity to the designation and to the process. I like monster toned coins and those that are rainbow toned. There are some people who hate these coins and prefer more subtle album toning. Who's to say who is right and who is wrong?

 

I always thought that the star system utilized by NGC should be a multi star system. If each coin is graded by 3 graders then the coin should get the number of stars that it deserves. If nobody thought it should star, then it doesn't get a star. If all three think it should star, it gets 3 stars. Likewise, each coin could get one or two stars as well.

[WingedLiberty1]

I wanted to keep my Flash Index (that I developed for my 100 Greatest Mirror Proof Lincolns website) around for posterity's sake. And since PCGS said they allow people to post TrueView images of coins they personally own on one's personal website, I was able to legally create this web site attempting to rank the visual appeal of toned coins in my personal collection using my Flash Index.

 

(brg5658, no need to post again how much you hate this idea and my website, we all already know that)

 

I realize that this is just one persons opinion, but it was my first attempt at coming up with some sort of system for attempting to quantify visual appeal. I do agree that everyone will have a different idea of what is appealing. It's definitely subjective. So let's just say the Flash Index and the rankings I came up with is how I personally would rank the visual appeal of colorfully toned coins in my collection. You might look at my collection and come up with a totally different ranking.

 

I found it interesting that my Flash Index worked relatively well across different coin materials, denominations, and series. To my eye, the rankings seem ballpark correct and plausible. However I would add that I think it works best if you use it on a single coin series when comparing scores -- then at least you are not trying to compare an apple to an orange.

 

Ultimately I think this was an interesting mental exercise and food for thought -- rather than a perfect end-all, be-all system for visual appeal quantifying and ranking.

 

Homepage Website Link:

Ranking Toned Coins using the Flash Index

 

How to Compute the Flash Index Score:

How to determine the Flash Index score

 

Screen Capture of Top of Home Page:

[TonerGuy]

I really think the only way this would work would be for the viewers of the coin to be able to vote on the eye appeal of the coin. The scale of the eye appeal could be from 1 to 10 and once the coin reaches 50 votes it gets an average ranking which would then be updated with every new vote.

 

[PLM]

I would be agreeable with toneddollars or with Lehighs voting or almost anything else that just gets our sets easily accessable and identifiable for viewing. I really do not care about winning but I do care about sharing. Most of my toned Morgans can be seen using my signature link if you are interested. I would really enjoy viewing your toned collections-cents, quarters, halves or whatever and toned via album, bag, envelope, endroll or ? and I enjoy bright colors, pastels, monochrome or whatever else. Please just share. It can create hours of enjoyment just viewing differently toned coins. Toneddollars sets are fun to view-as is AB and others. Come on and let's share!

Thanks.

[coinman_23885]

They already have a * designation for eye appeal.Why not star * 1 through star *10..

 

It would only add even more subjectivity to the designation and to the process. I like monster toned coins and those that are rainbow toned. There are some people who hate these coins and prefer more subtle album toning. Who's to say who is right and who is wrong?

 

I always thought that the star system utilized by NGC should be a multi star system. If each coin is graded by 3 graders then the coin should get the number of stars that it deserves. If nobody thought it should star, then it doesn't get a star. If all three think it should star, it gets 3 stars. Likewise, each coin could get one or two stars as well.

 

So is a 3 star coin better than a 2 star coin? If so, then what if a grader is having a bad day, a head ache, or is drunk? If there is going to be a star designation, I think that it should stay like it is where there is likely a consensus among the graders and the finalizer. With your system, the difference between star levels would seem, at least to me, superficial.

 

[brg5658]

Ultimately I think this was an interesting mental exercise and food for thought -- rather than a perfect end-all, be-all system for visual appeal quantifying and ranking.

 

I suppose this is why you registered (or tried to register?) the "Flash Index" as a registered Trademark??

 

No offense Paul, but ranking something with a value between 1 and 10 isn't exactly a "novel idea," especially when it's something completely subjective. I never had a problem looking at all of your pretty coins -- it was the fact that you created a website called the "100 Most Beautiful Proof Lincolns" which was restricted to only those in PCGS plastic, those photographed by Phil Arnold, and 80%+ of them were owned by you.

 

To each his/her own. I see all of this as commercialization, and don't see it as something the hobby "needs". But, just my dissenting 2 cents...

 

PS -- Paul, I have never ONCE said that I didn't like your website. Quite the contrary.

 

 

[WingedLiberty1]

brg5658, I cancelled my Trademark application in the middle of last year about a month after submitting initial paperwork. I decided it wasn't worth the cost ... it was too darn expensive and too much of a pain in the arse with all the paperwork and steps involved.

 

In any case, my attempt at trademarking Flash Index was never an attempt to commercialize anything -- I have never made a dime off of anything I have done. I only wanted to be able to use the name Flash Index, without someone else floating in years from now and telling me I cannot use that name. I think Flash Index totally captures the nature of what I am trying to do -- and I didn't want to have to abandon that name in a few years due to someone else's claim and then come up with some other unused new name.

 

In terms of me owning all the coins on the 100 Greatest websites. Not true. In the 100 Greatest Matte Proof Lincolns website, I had 1 coin ranked out of 109 posted. That's ONE out of 109 !!

 

On the Mirror Proof website, I had roughly 20 ranked out of 100, but that was mostly because I was limiting it to TrueView photos and there are only about 4 or 5 major players of colorfully toned Mirror Proof Lincolns that were regularly getting TrueView photos made at the time I built the website (with me being one).

 

In terms of limiting coins posted to a single photographer, I had to do that to level the playing field. Every photographer has their own techniques and skill level and since the site was ranking photographs and not coins, the system would not work if I allowed photos from every Tom, Richard, and Harry. Especially when tweaking and/or over-saturating coins is so easy to do in Photoshop. Probably the most perfect way to do this is to get ALL the coins that are "in-play" together in the same room and have a number of experts rank them based on in-hand appeal, however that is just impossible to do.

 

In any case, everything I have ever done around this research topic (quantifying visual appeal) has always been 100% free to access, And I never had the idea to charge anybody anything for anything. Every website I have ever build have always been 100% free to access. Just ask robec, who has been an insider to my endeavors for about 2 years. He can tell you I have never been into doing this for money or commercialization.

 

By the way, why do at least 70% of all your posts on all three major coin forums mention me by name. You sound completely obsessed with me and almost a bit in love with me. So you are doing internet research on me now? Amazing ... . Do you have a man crush on me? Sorry I am taken and already have a girlfriend. You need to start to focus on your own life rather than be so completely focused on mine. I relish the day when you finally stop posting about me and actually post about COINS without getting personal. All you seem to do anymore is post a personal attack directed towards me where I end up feeling like I have to defend myself and my clarify my intentions with a reply post to you. I have tried ignoring your posts about me --- thinking you will lose interest -- but that hasn't worked in 2 years.

 

I feel a bit sorry for you my friend. I hate to break this to you but I am NOT the center of coin universe, and most people could care less what I do around my own personal endeavors in the realm of coins. I am not a coin dealer, I don't make money off coins (like most of us, I typically lose money on stuff I buy) -- I am just an amateur, small-budget coin collector with a passion for colorfully toned coins.

 

So bottom line, brg5658 ... Please, try to curb your obsession about me, stop the personal attacks, and focus on your own life. And when you post in the forums, no personal attacks. Coins are a much more interesting subject and is the reason we are all here. And rather than spending all your time and energy researching me and/or bashing me in various Coin Forum posts. Why not try to contribute something (anything) of your own to this great hobby. I guess it's always easier to tear somebody else down rather than build something of your own.

 

By the way, I totally agree that a voting system is the best way to do this. I think what we need is something like Facebook founder's (Mark Zuckerberg) FaceMash application where 2 people were compared and people voted on which was more attractive and then after thousands of votes a ranking system fell out of the wash.

 

The star and/or like system that could be tabulated is also a good system. Of course you will always have the problem of bogus accounts and people gaming the system. I found with the voting system that people almost always upgraded their own coins as the most beautiful. Robec and I always had a running joke that "ownership adds 2 points". It's a tough problem to solve.

 

In my 100 Greatest Matte Proof Lincolns website, I had all the major players of the series vote and I tabulated votes to come up with a rank, however getting everyone to participate fully was not easy, as it's a time consuming process.

 

 

[toneddollars]

I would be agreeable with toneddollars or with Lehighs voting or almost anything else that just gets our sets easily accessable and identifiable for viewing. I really do not care about winning but I do care about sharing. Most of my toned Morgans can be seen using my signature link if you are interested. I would really enjoy viewing your toned collections-cents, quarters, halves or whatever and toned via album, bag, envelope, endroll or ? and I enjoy bright colors, pastels, monochrome or whatever else. Please just share. It can create hours of enjoyment just viewing differently toned coins. Toneddollars sets are fun to view-as is AB and others. Come on and let's share!

Thanks.

 

Like you , I am all about sharing my toners with other lovers of toned coins. You probally will never reach number one in any registry with just toned coins. White (untoned) coins exist more readily than do toners in high grades. So a seperate catagory for toners would be nice. As stated, its all about sharing with other toning lovers. My set linked below called "Rainbow Stars" in the GSA registry, will never be number 1, but has to be right up there as a toned set. Take a look and enjoy as that is what its all about, for most of us collectors. I love finding a set that is loaded with toners and just looking thru it.

[brg5658]

brg5658, I cancelled my Trademark application in the middle of last year about a month after submitting initial paperwork. I decided it wasn't worth the cost ... it was too darn expensive and too much of a pain in the arse with all the paperwork and steps involved.

 

In any case, my attempt at trademarking Flash Index was never an attempt to commercialize anything -- I have never made a dime off of anything I have done. I only wanted to be able to use the name Flash Index, without someone else floating in years from now and telling me I cannot use that name. I think Flash Index totally captures the nature of what I am trying to do.

 

In terms of me owning all the coins on the 100 Greatest websites. Not true. In the 100 Greatest Matte Proof Lincolns website, I had 1 coin ranked out of 109 posted. That's ONE out of 109 !!

 

On the Mirror Proof website, I had roughly 20 ranked out of 100, but that was mostly because I was limiting it to TrueView photos and there are only about 4 or 5 major players of colorfully toned Mirror Proof Lincolns that were regularly getting TrueView photos made at the time I built the website.

 

In terms of limiting coins posted to a single photographer, I had to do that to level the playing field. Every photographer has their own techniques and skill level and since the site was ranking photographs and not coins, the system would not work if I allowed photos from every Tom, Richard, and Harry. Especially when tweaking and/or over-saturating coins is so easy to do in Photoshop. Probably the most perfect way to do this is to get ALL the coins that are "in-play" together in the same room and have a number of experts rank them based on in-hand appeal, however that is just impossible to do.

 

I wasn't talking about the Matte Proof website, and you know it. The version I saw of your rankings about 2 years ago included FAR more than 20 of the 100 that were yours for the Mirror Proofs. But, alas, you're missing the point again -- even getting the "experts" in a room to judge in-hand appeal is a subjective exercise in futility. That's my point!

 

In any case, everything I have ever done around this research topic (quantifying visual appeal) has always been 100% free to access, And I never had the idea to charge anybody anything for anything. Every website I have ever build have always been 100% free to access. Just ask robec, who has been an insider to my endeavors for about 2 years. He can tell you I have never been into doing this for money or commercialization.

 

I never said you were trying to personally profit from this. I said the whole concept of trying to assign a ranking to toned coins can only be used for bragging rights, and effectively, the artificial marketing of said toned coins. Someone on eBay will see your Flash Index, try to assign their coins high scores, and then "market" them as such. That's commercialization. By the way, just because you write something up using "scientific-like" words doesn't make it "research".

 

By the way, why do at least 70% of all your posts on all three major coin forums mention me by name. You sound completely obsessed with me and almost a bit in love with me. So you are doing internet research on me now? Amazing ... . Do you have a man crush on me? Sorry I am taken and already have a girlfriend. You need to start to focus on your own life rather than be so completely focused on mine. I relish the day when you finally stop posting about me and actually post about COINS without getting personal. All you seem to do anymore is post a personal attack directed towards me where I end up feeling like I have to defend myself and my clarify my intentions with a reply post to you. I have tried ignoring your posts about me --- thinking you will lose interest -- but that hasn't worked in 2 years.

 

I feel a bit sorry for you my friend. I hate to break this to you but I am NOT the center of coin universe, and most people could care less what I do around my own personal endeavors in the realm of coins. I am not a coin dealer, I don't make money off coins (like most of us, I typically lose money on stuff I buy) -- I am just an amateur, small-budget coin collector with a passion for colorfully toned coins.

 

Yes, I'm doing internet "research" on you -- you know, the complicated kind, by typing "Flash Index" into Google. Don't delude yourself Paul. If you interpret a "mention" of you as a "personal attack", then I suppose I should feel sorry for you? I have never attacked you, I have criticized your ill-conceived idea; but, if you can't separate the two, there's not much I can do about that. Regarding my posts being centered on you -- complete hogwash. I have hundreds of posts (> 99.9% of them) both here and on CoinTalk that have nothing to do with you. And, I think I've posted 20-30 times on PCGS in my entire life -- so, give it up!

 

So bottom line, brg5658 ... Please, try to curb your obsession about me, stop the personal attacks, and focus on your own life. And when you post in the forums, no personal attacks. Coins are a much more interesting subject and is the reason we are all here. And rather than spending all your time and energy researching me and/or bashing me in various Coin Forum posts. Why not try to contribute something (anything) of your own to this great hobby. I guess it's always easier to tear somebody else down rather than build something of your own.

 

I have never personally attacked you. I have criticized ideas, which is what happens in the real research world. Apparently you have never had the pleasure of dealing with peer-reviewed research?? You obviously don't read posts here much, or outside of your little bubble on CoinTalk if you think I have not contributed. As for the PCGS website, I only lurk there. Playing the victim will get tired eventually. Because I'm not building my own bridge to nowhere, doesn't mean that I'm "tearing" you down, rather than "building" something of my own.

 

 

[lehigh96]

They already have a * designation for eye appeal.Why not star * 1 through star *10..

 

It would only add even more subjectivity to the designation and to the process. I like monster toned coins and those that are rainbow toned. There are some people who hate these coins and prefer more subtle album toning. Who's to say who is right and who is wrong?

 

I always thought that the star system utilized by NGC should be a multi star system. If each coin is graded by 3 graders then the coin should get the number of stars that it deserves. If nobody thought it should star, then it doesn't get a star. If all three think it should star, it gets 3 stars. Likewise, each coin could get one or two stars as well.

 

So is a 3 star coin better than a 2 star coin? If so, then what if a grader is having a bad day, a head ache, or is drunk? If there is going to be a star designation, I think that it should stay like it is where there is likely a consensus among the graders and the finalizer. With your system, the difference between star levels would seem, at least to me, superficial.

 

Yes, a 3 star would be better than a 2 star because all three graders agreed that the coin had exceptional eye appeal. Sorry, but even with the worst hangover, I am able to determine whether I think a coin is pretty. All that a three star system would do is recognize those coins with outstanding eye appeal that did not suit the eye of one of the graders. And with all due respect, the entire star designation is subjective/superficial. I would rather know that 2 of the graders thought the coin should star rather than be left scratching my head as to why there is no star.

[PLM]

Lehigh, as I have said I don't care about rankings I just love to look at beautifully toned coins and Your set of Nickels are incredible!! A pure joy to behold. Thank you for sharing.