Collecting Coins or Collecting Plastic?

[SkyMan]

Just wondering, how about a show of hands of how many of you like to show your coins to other people?

 

There was a comment recently at another board about people collecting plastic as opposed to coins, as shown by how many registry sets did not have either descriptions or imagery of the coins in their sets.

 

It would seem to me that if you put together a neat set you'd want to have at least ONE image of the "Baby" of your set, so that other people could enjoy it too. Since I'm interested in Frankies I recently did a quick scan of the top 5 sets in each half dollar category that is on the NGC registry. While I was going to use both descriptions and imagery as details it turns out if you actually read some of the descriptions that they are pretty banal, such things as "Pop top" or other comments of a sort that make me think the collector is more interested in the plastic than the coins. So I created a list that shows what sets of the top 5 sets in each category had at least ONE image. The way to read this is the numbers after the category show which sets in the top 5 of that category have at least one image. For example, in the Capped Bust Half Dollars 1807-36 category the number 3, 4, and 5 sets have at least one image.

 

There are 22 half dollar categories. Only 3 of them have the #1 set with even one image. Only 9 of them have the #2 and #3 sets each with even one image. Five categories have ZERO images in the first 5 sets in each category, and unfortunately MS Frankies was one of those.

 

EDITED TO ADD: Sorry, the formatting got screwed up when the Word file got pasted in this post. The set numbers should be seperated by a couple of tabmarks from their category.

 

 

Flowing Hair & Draped Bust Half Dollars 1794-1807 3,4

Capped Bust Half Dollars 1807-1836 3,4,5

Capped Bust, Reeded Edge Half Dollars 1836-1839 None

Early Half Dollars 1794-1839 2,3,4,5

Seated Liberty Half Dollars, No Motto 1839-1866 2,4

Seated Liberty Half Dollars, Motto 1866-1891 4

Seated Liberty Half Dollars 1839-1891 3

Seated Liberty Half Dollars 1839-1891, One-Per-Date 2,4

Seated Liberty Half Dollars 1858-1891, Proofs 1,2,5

Barber Half Dollars 1892-1915 2,4,5

Barber Half Dollars 1892-1915, One-Per-Date 1,2,3

Barber Half Dollars 1892-1915, Proofs 1,2

Walking Liberty Half Dollars 1916-1947 None

Walking Liberty Half Dollars 1934-1947 None

Walking Liberty Half Dollars 1941-1947 None

Walking Liberty Half Dollars 1916-1947, One-Per-Date 3,4

Walking Liberty Half Dollars 1936-1942, Proofs 3,4

Franklin Half Dollars 1948-1963 None

Franklin Half Dollars 1950-1963, Proofs 2,3

Kennedy Half Dollars 1964-Date 2,4

Kennedy Half Dollars 1964-Date, Proofs 5

Kennedy Half Dollars, Silver, 1964-1970 MS and Proofs 3,4

 

It seems to me if you can put together a top Registry set you should have the funds to image the coins, and be proud enough of the coins to want to image at least a couple of the coins if you're going to "brag" and put them up there on the Registry. Unfortunately, what it really tells me is a lot of the top of the line sets are put together by people who are more interested in the plastic than in the coins.

 

Your thoughts?

[MunkyMan95]

Some just put the coins up there for organization, or they are just plain too lazy to image their coins.

[WinstonWare]

I’m with you Sy. I’m trying to put together my own “registry set” but it’s basically just my collection on my site. I think it would be nice to have some pictures for people who know me and know coins but also for people that know me and don’t know coins. “What does it mean that you collect Capped Bust Halves?” Well, here are some pictures….

 

In any event, I’m not much of a photographer so it’s slow going. I’m hoping to make some progress over this long weekend.

[TomB]

I collect coins, not plastic. In fact, if you follow the registry link in my signature line you will see my one set currently has 100% images and 86% descriptions. Be warned, however, my descriptions sometimes test the envelope of NGC's 5,000 character limit.

 

As for others, I think they may lack one or more of the following; the drive to put in extra information, the ability to take good images or the ability or willingness to express themselves regarding their collection.

[Stanley]

(((((While I was going to use both descriptions and imagery as details it turns out if you actually read some of the descriptions that they are pretty banal, such things as "Pop top" or )))))

 

Are you trying to copy the Registry Data Base?

Which one of them sets is yours?

 

 

 

 

 

[WinstonWare]

Tom, I don't know about that "25c WASHINGTON, STATEHOOD 1999-2008" quarter. I don't recall those coming out

[TomB]

I had to lobby NGC for three long years before they would accept the 1883 HA quarter in the State Quarter slot. I really did.

[SkyMan]

Which one of them sets is yours?

 

 

I don't have any major category sets in the top 5... too expensive for me. However, my 1958 proof and mint sets are both in the # 4 slots. The proof set has an image of the Frankie and the mint set has several images. For category sets my proof Frankies are # 17 and they have only one image, and yes I do mean to have more coins imaged. The mint set is only 40% completed and is # 47. It has multiple images.

 

 

 

Tom, for those of us that are ignorant what is the 1883 HA quarter? Does it have to do with Hawaii?

[AC-migration]

I thought Skyman's breakdown of the Half Dollar categories was pretty eye opening on how few of the top sets in each category have at least one image. The fact that only 3 top sets had images surprises me.

 

So I thought I would do a similar census of the Gold Eagles and Gold Double Eagles categories, but I only looked at the top 3 sets instead of the top 5. I should disclose that in the Double Eagle categories, a couple of the sets with images are mine, including the #1 Type 1 set ( Link to my set ).

 

Set ranks listed below are those with at least one image.

 

Gold Eagles

 

Coronet Eagles, No Motto, 1838-1866 – Set Rank # 2

Coronet Eagles, With Motto, 1866-1907 – Set Rank # 2, 3

Coronet Eagles 1900-1907 – Set Rank # 3

Coronet Eagles 1838-1907 – Set Rank # None

Coronet Eagles 1838-1907, One-Per-Date – Set Rank # 2

Coronet Eagles 1838-1907, Proofs – Set Rank # None

Indian Head Eagles 1907-1933 – Set Rank # 1, 2

Indian Head Eagles 1907-1916, One-Per-Date – Set Rank # 1, 2, 3

Indian Head Eagles 1908-1915, Proofs – Set Rank # None

 

Gold Double Eagles

 

Coronet Double Eagles, Type 1, 1850-1866 – Set Rank # 1, 3

Coronet Double Eagles, Type 2, 1866-1876 – Set Rank # 1

Coronet Double Eagles, Type 3, 1877-1907 – Set Rank # None

Coronet Double Eagles 1900-1907 – Set Rank # None

Coronet Double Eagles 1850-1907 – Set Rank # 1, 2

Coronet Double Eagles 1850-1907, One-Per-Date – Set Rank # 2, 3

Coronet Double Eagles 1850-1907 Proofs – Set Rank # None

Saint-Gaudens Double Eagles 1907-1932 – Set Rank # 3 (#1 set is obscured)

Saint-Gaudens Double Eagles 1907-1928, One-Per-Date – Set Rank # None

Saint-Gaudens Double Eagles 1907-1915, Proofs – Set Rank # None

 

What really surprised me was the #1 set for Saint-Gaudens Double Eagles 1907-1932 is obscured! What's the point? Why even bother listing it if we can't even see which coins you have. No descriptions and no images might be attributed to being lazy, but obscured can only mean that you don't want to share. I think obscured sets should not be allowed!

 

What cracks me up is that the set has had 892 views, which puts it in the top 100 of most viewed sets. It seems a lot of people are taking the time to look at this guy's set only to see a bunch of nothing.

Link to obscured set - Click here and you will help boost his number of views, ha ha!

[ElectricEye-migration]

I collect coins and have images for 95% of my morgans posted across the street. It's not a top 100 set, it's not even complete, but it would probably get more looks than many in the top fifty. Each coin in the set is in my possession. I wonder how many of the top sets consist only of inserts?

[jtryka]

Interesting observations, and a point of frustration for me with my fellow Saint collectors (especially the obscured #1 set). To me, the whole point of the registry is to track and share my collection with others.

 

And AC, if it makes you feel better my set ranked #20 has the most views of any Saint set, so even if the owners don't care about images and descriptions, it seems the users of the registry still do!

[WinstonWare]

Sy, I thought you mentioned something about taking photos of the BC Morgans. Are those the pictures at TCCS? Are there more somewhere else?

 

ElectricEye, are those Morgans all NT?

[SkyMan]

Sy, I thought you mentioned something about taking photos of the BC Morgans. Are those the pictures at TCCS? Are there more somewhere else?

 

ElectricEye, are those Morgans all NT?

 

I just started a signature set of BC coins. Basically what I'm planning on doing is doing a weekly post here of 1 or 2 BC coins. After it's been on the board for a day or two I will add it to the signature set. Within roughly a half a year the whole collection will have been posted to the set. At this point the set only has a few coins, but as nearly all of my BC coins have been imaged the set should fill out nicely.

 

AC, those are some VERY cool coins in your set!!! Aside from the coins being very tasty, I particularly like that you mentioned the scam stuff in the 1864 description. That is a very helpful reminder to the reader to remember to watch out for scam artists. Also it was neat of you to give the equivalent info for the Eagle and Double Eagle series. It's kind of eye-opening. Oh, I also agree with you vis-a-vis the obscured set. It's sad when you think about it. Anyhow, COOL coins you've got!

[WinstonWare]

doing a weekly post here of 1 or 2 BC coins

 

Very cool. I'll be looking forward to that

[ElectricEye-migration]

ElectricEye, are those Morgans all NT?

 

Of course, and they all look like that in hand.

[MikeKing]

Some of the registry collectors just don't care to image their coins or don't have the desire or ability to handle a digital camera. It's like electronics, you know, a lot of us have a tv, tivo, dvd, vhs, whatever, but wouldn't know how the hell to set that up and just have no desire to. I wouldn't criticize them for it. Though, I'd love to see their coins. Also, sending all your coins in to either pcgs or ngc for photographing can be a royal pain in the arse.

 

Then, there are those who wouldn't dare show their coins because they collect plastic and/or are too fragile to handle criticism. And the people guilty about collecting plastic don't particularly exist in any particular financial strata.

 

Undeniably, there is a snobbery when it comes to $$$ and plastic. Collectors (some with #1 sets in both the PCGS and NGC registries, some without), high end dealers (shall I name them?) and auction firms (ALL of them, including the ones I like) are all guilty of that...so guilty, that they will praise garbage and demote true quality, and actually believe themselves, as they are so self-hypnotized by the hysteria and greed.

 

 

edited to change *spoon* to arse and *spoon* to garbage

[TomB]

Howdy Sy, I hadn't meant to leave out important details for the 1883 HA quarter, I just thought others wouldn't care to read about it. The 1883 HA quarter is the Kingdom of Hawaii quarter that the US Mint made as part of the Hawaiian coinage it produced in the nineteenth century. The quarter was only made for one year, similar to the dimes, halves and dollars, and it and the dime are the two easiest to obtain issues.

 

I had wanted to list my 1883 HA quarter in the State Quarter series slot because I find the State Quarter series particularly uninspiring and believe that too few folks know the history of the Kingdom of Hawaii coinage. However, NGC repeatedly blocked my attempts to get the coin into the State Quarter slot and I have to agree with them that they were technically correct. Finally, I spoke with Scott Schechter at NGC and asked him to look into the issue and was delighted when he told me that they added that option for that slot.

 

Obviously, I did not add the coin for the points obtained, since it was only 37 points. Additionally, I did not put the coin in there because it was less expensive than a traditional State Quarter in MS66, since this is a $2,000+ coin. I listed the coin to share the information with others, though it currently is one of only a few coins without description.

[EZ_E]

It seems to me if you can put together a top Registry set you should have the funds to image the coins, and be proud enough of the coins to want to image at least a couple of the coins if you're going to "brag" and put them up there on the Registry. Unfortunately, what it really tells me is a lot of the top of the line sets are put together by people who are more interested in the plastic than in the coins.

 

Your thoughts?

 

I find registry sets w/o photos and/or descriptions frustrating and annoying. A complete waste of cyberspace!

[SkyMan]

Some of the registry collectors just don't care to image their coins or don't have the desire or ability to handle a digital camera. It's like electronics, you know, a lot of us have a tv, tivo, dvd, vhs, whatever, but wouldn't know how the hell to set that up and just have no desire to. I wouldn't criticize them for it. Though, I'd love to see their coins. Also, sending all your coins in to either pcgs or ngc for photographing can be a royal pain in the arse.

 

Then, there are those who wouldn't dare show their coins because they collect plastic and/or are too fragile to handle criticism. And the people guilty about collecting plastic don't particularly exist in any particular financial strata.

 

Undeniably, there is a snobbery when it comes to $$$ and plastic. Collectors (some with #1 sets in both the PCGS and NGC registries, some without), high end dealers (shall I name them?) and auction firms (ALL of them, including the ones I like) are all guilty of that...so guilty, that they will praise garbage and demote true quality, and actually believe themselves, as they are so self-hypnotized by the hysteria and greed.

 

Mike, while I would agree with many of your points one thing I'm willing to bet on is that nearly every single top 5 set in any given category bought at least SOME of their coins from dealers who image their coins and post the images on their website. While I'm willing to give people over say 50 a pass on computer literacy (although realistically I bet most people up to say age 65 can at least cut and paste), it doesn't take a whole lot of effort to copy an image off the web. Personally I far prefer it when I buy a coin from a dealer who has the image on his site, as that way I don't have to hassle with getting the coin imaged. I'll grant you some dealers images are a whole lot better than others ... don't even get me started about how BAD Heritage's images are, but on the whole a lot of dealers, particularly the higher end dealers, take pretty decent images of their coins.

 

 

Tom, I just checked your site to see the HA. That's a FUN coin!

[MikeKing]

Mike, ..., While I'm willing to give people over say 50 a pass on computer literacy (although realistically I bet most people up to say age 65 can at least cut and paste), it doesn't take a whole lot of effort to copy an image off the web.

 

 

 

 

 

...................................................OVER 50 ????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??? ............................

is that ageist or what!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'll have you know that I was 30 when I got my first computer....and I had to learn DOS!!!!!!!! This was pre-Windows man, pre-Windows. This was BEFORE the AT. It was the time that if you had an external 24 K HAYES modem, you thought you were high tech!!!!!

[Bruceswar]

Dos

[WinstonWare]

Man I still use the DOS command line from time to time

[Bruceswar]

Man I still use the DOS command line from time to time

 

Me too but back on the subject... I have never been a registry set fan as far as competion goes, but to show off coins yes!

[WinstonWare]

To be honest I don't really understand the concept of "registry set." Many of the coins that I would like to show pictures of are raw and my understanding is that you can't include raw coins in your registry set. That's why I would prefer to just create my own page of coins. It is also gives you the ability to design the page as you like.

[EZ_E]

To be honest I don't really understand the concept of "registry set." Many of the coins that I would like to show pictures of are raw and my understanding is that you can't include raw coins in your registry set. That's why I would prefer to just create my own page of coins. It is also gives you the ability to design the page as you like.

 

I agree with you. I now find myself about to send off some of my raw Dansco coins just so I enter them in the NGC registry. I will crack them out again afterwards. I'm about as looney as the rest.

[WinstonWare]

Wow. I didn’t know that registry sets were so addictive.

[SkyMan]

 

...................................................OVER 50 ????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??? ............................

is that ageist or what!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'll have you know that I was 30 when I got my first computer....and I had to learn DOS!!!!!!!! This was pre-Windows man, pre-Windows. This was BEFORE the AT. It was the time that if you had an external 24 K HAYES modem, you thought you were high tech!!!!!

 

Mike, I'm 48 myself, so hardly one to be ageist. As to 24 K modems I remember the days when a 512 K HARD DRIVE was a monster hard drive, as to DOS, of course who didn't use it?

 

My point was more along the lines that just about all people could download images to their registry set.

[WinstonWare]

512 K HARD DRIVE was a monster hard drive

 

Nearly all new CPUs have more on die cache than that! That’s crazy!

[MorganMan]

Undeniably, there is a snobbery when it comes to $$$ and plastic. Collectors (some with #1 sets in both the PCGS and NGC registries, some without), high end dealers (shall I name them?) and auction firms (ALL of them, including the ones I like) are all guilty of that...so guilty, that they will praise garbage and demote true quality , and actually believe themselves, as they are so self-hypnotized by the hysteria and greed.

 

 

Well said. The VERY reason I collect raw only. The Only time I buy anything in plastic is if I want it for a set and am gonna crack it out.

 

Edit: I might add the "First Strike " Fiasco on BOTH sides of the street only confirmed by reasons to buy raw.

 

DOWN WITH SNOBBERY

 

 

MM

[Stanley]

Some of my thoughts on the Registry

 

There are as many different reasons to have a registry set as there are folks who build them. I started my registry sets a few years ago, some of the categories were vacant and as I would enter a set someone else would enter one, sometimes there set had more points sometimes not. But points was not my objective Yes it feels good to be at the top, it feels good to be at the top on most every thing if you think about it.

 

At first I found myself becoming addicted to the points, but it didn’t take long for me to realize that it wasn’t about the competition or points. Starting the registry made me aware of many things I did not know, and at the time I had never participated in the NGC Chat Forums. I was very Numismatics challenged big time. Just to mention a few things it helped me in my education of Numismatics.

1. I saw a lot of coins and others sets.

2. I began to notice varieties, errors, rarities, keys, availability, pop reports, market values, and etc

3. A place to organize and display my coins. Although I have a ways to go with my imaging skills, I was enjoying that as well.

4. I was under the impression that folks who enjoyed coins would enjoy seeing others coins.

5. It was opening my eyes to all the positives that coin collecting has to offer.

6. I started noticing some negatives. I started seeing people get big headed with points and some would actually check on there sets over and over just to get the number of views up. I noticed on a few occasions where a participant would enter a coin in a slot that didn’t even belong to them. I figure it’s there set they can do as they please and I would never criticize anyone for that.

7. The introduction of the Signature Sets was a great advancement in the Registry. For those who collect differently whether it be more advanced or far out radical, it gives everyone the same opportunity to express his or herself. I was one of the first to participate in the signature sets. Some time I may even make my set more sensible, but in the meantime it is my set and I’m proud of it.

8. As far as the displaying of raw coinage, there are different venues for us to explore. I sometime may consider one myself. I would like to get my imaging more accurate first of course.

9. I have often heard comments referring to Registry Sets as just for show off and I am absolutely sure there are a lot of participants who would firmly disagree.

 

In conclusion the registry is there for us to use the way we want. As I have stated above for whatever reason each of us choose.