Lustre

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Not so long ago, it used to be referred to as eye appeal - that certain quality that bronze has when the light catches it at the right angle. I'm talking of course about lustre and I want to have a rant about the mountain of crap in the UK that is passed of as lustrous.

I don't have any statistics to back up my argument, but I wouldn't mind betting that more coins are bought online today than are seen in hand first. Unfortunately where lustre is concerned, you can't really tell from most photographs, so the dealers assessment is all you can go by.

This is where I have a problem, most people try to grade accurately but, to me anyway, seem to lose all scruples when it comes to describing lustre and will pass of almost anything as BU.

One dealer who shall remain nameless desribes coins as BU, full lustre with some toning. What the hell does that mean, it's like describing a woman as very attractive with some ugliness ?

Or BU, but with some pitting under magnification - well then it's not BU is it ?

ABU. What ?

Can we please get rid of the BU BUT syndrome, it either is, or it isn't.

In fact, can we get rid of BU full stop when describing circulated bronze and all adopt the Gouby system whereby the top grade is about uncirculated and the remaining mint lustre expressed as a percentage, eg AU75

It's very much harder to misdescribe a coin using this system.

Come on dealers, get better.

Rant ends.

[Red Riley 2]

In fact, can we get rid of BU full stop when describing circulated bronze and all adopt the Gouby system whereby the top grade is about uncirculated and the remaining mint lustre expressed as a percentage, eg AU75

I said as much in the grading book. In fact your rant is pretty much a 'toned up' version (would I expect anything less!) of what I said.

There are problems with Michael Gouby's technique though, particularly where it comes to subdued lustre but it's light years ahead of all the nonsense that surrounds BU. Certainly, I will be adopting the system.

[1949threepence 3,367]

I don't like the description "ABU"

What's that all about anyway ? Does it mean "about brilliant uncirculated" or "about uncirculated" ? The seller could easily argue the latter if taken to task over his description.

Anyway, "About brilliant uncirculated" is a misnomer if ever there was one. A coin is either BU or it aint, there's no "about".

[argentumandcoins 70]

Not so long ago, it used to be referred to as eye appeal - that certain quality that bronze has when the light catches it at the right angle. I'm talking of course about lustre and I want to have a rant about the mountain of crap in the UK that is passed of as lustrous.

I don't have any statistics to back up my argument, but I wouldn't mind betting that more coins are bought online today than are seen in hand first. Unfortunately where lustre is concerned, you can't really tell from most photographs, so the dealers assessment is all you can go by.

This is where I have a problem, most people try to grade accurately but, to me anyway, seem to lose all scruples when it comes to describing lustre and will pass of almost anything as BU.

One dealer who shall remain nameless desribes coins as BU, full lustre with some toning. What the hell does that mean, it's like describing a woman as very attractive with some ugliness ?

Or BU, but with some pitting under magnification - well then it's not BU is it ?

ABU. What ?

Can we please get rid of the BU BUT syndrome, it either is, or it isn't.

In fact, can we get rid of BU full stop when describing circulated bronze and all adopt the Gouby system whereby the top grade is about uncirculated and the remaining mint lustre expressed as a percentage, eg AU75

It's very much harder to misdescribe a coin using this system.

Come on dealers, get better.

Rant ends.

You ask too much this time 400!

You are dealing with a full range of "dealers" from ebay hobbyists to people with large reputations and even larger stock levels.

My 40% lustre may be toned to you or B UNC to the next man. Like grades, lustre is very much open to the individuals perception. A dealer must call it as they see it and most will stand by their grade with the promise of a refund if not happy.

With respect to Michael, why call a coin A UNC and charge an UNC price?

I pay good money for my stock, sometimes too good, and whilst most of my grading is conservative or accurate some will be overgraded and some undergraded. This isn't me trying to rip off buyers, it's sometimes down to using templates to list, tiredness (10 hours photographing, sorting and listing often into the small hours) or worse still carelessness!

There was a letter in coin news a few issues ago asking why dealers grade 2 sides of a coin differently. What's the answer to that one, grade at the lowest, highest or mid grade??? To be accurate if one side is VF and the other GVF is that not how it should be listed? Or as buyers would you rather that dealers called it the lower grade and took a loss on the sale? As 95% of my stock is auction purchased (quite often unseen due to living in the far Northern reaches of the Empire) I have to rely on auction descriptions and they are even worse than dealers listings in my experience! This means my price paid is often not much less than the price I am asking. To list as A UNC and ask an UNC price means I will never sell anything.

Quite a few of my items are just called UNC when it is obvious to the viewer that they are UNC with almost full lustre. The only way to have any uniformity is to have all coins slabbed by the same grading company and that is an absolute non-starter.

The one you didn't touch on and that really does p*** me off is the good old "About FDC" or "Toned FDC". Now that really is farcical. If it aint mint as struck (proof coins only) it is UNC or less. That really is something that dealers should be tightening up on!

I'm sure if the members look through my listings they will find examples to complain about, they'll also find some undergraded bargains, but they never get pointed out to me until after sale

John.

[scott 144]

i dont believe in BU either, i have no issues with toning, its a natuaral proccess, a coin can still tone but be UNC, it should be based on the wear in my view, i have a couple of coins that to the eye look like unlustred coins, BUT you shine it in the light it has that reflective effect from the lustre, and the key is, little wear, it doesnt detract from the grade in my oppinion

[Red Riley 2]

I don't like the description "ABU"

What's that all about anyway ? Does it mean "about brilliant uncirculated" or "about uncirculated" ? The seller could easily argue the latter if taken to task over his description.

Anyway, "About brilliant uncirculated" is a misnomer if ever there was one. A coin is either BU or it aint, there's no "about".

Both are technically gobbledygook as, to the man on the Clapham omnibus they mean nothing whatever (and surely it isn't possible to have a preposition describing an adjective?!). In UK grading 'About Uncirculated' still means that the coin has not hit Tesco's till but may have led a hard life at the mint or in less than ideal storage conditions. They are the equivalent of the American MS60-62. Its very lack of sense actually makes it less misleading than say, 'very good' and as such it is a useful grade to slot above GEF.

I can't begin to get my head round 'About Brilliant Uncirculated' though...

[Red Riley 2]

The one you didn't touch on and that really does p*** me off is the good old "About FDC" or "Toned FDC". Now that really is farcical. If it aint mint as struck (proof coins only) it is UNC or less. That really is something that dealers should be tightening up on!

I'm sure if the members look through my listings they will find examples to complain about, they'll also find some undergraded bargains, but they never get pointed out to me until after sale

John.

Yes, it tees me off too, and not only for the reason you state. As you say, a coin is either FDC or it isn't and most coins advertised as such, bearing in mind even the slightest hairline scratch would disqualify them, just aren't. At one time the expression 'proof impaired' was used but now seems to have gone out of use. If we were really being strict about it, almost nothing would qualify and if a coin was over say, 50 years old, forget it! The American Sheldon Scale takes the problem and throttles it to death with no less than eleven levels of condition (PR60-70) being used to sort the proof wheat from the chaff. Call me old fashioned though, but the Sheldon Scale just seems to lack the romance present in the traditional system and it would be a cold day in hell when I describe a coin as PR68 or whatever!

[Colin G. 147]

Okay devil's advocate time....I do agree with much of your sentiment, but

Lustre can be subdued, so I can have two coins that are both uncirculated with full lustre, but one will look different to the other. I will always try and highlight this as subdued lustre, but it is still technically a BUNC coin in my opinion.

I do however try and keep the classification BUNC for only those coins that I feel have true full lustre, otherwise I will indicate as UNC with 90% lustre or similar.

This is the only product I can find in my stock which is described as ABU, and this is due to the fact that this coin is BUNC to the eye, but when scanned/photgraphed, a slight patch of lustre is missing to Victoria's hair, so I do not feel it should be classed as BUNC. Do I now describe this as UNC with 99.9% lustre? I can see the issue being raised but have never personally seen it as a major issue. If this annoys collectors, then I might be willing to change this to UNC with "almost full lustre" or similar. The last thing I want to do is rub you lot up the wrong way

Do you honestly see this example as a major issue, I really do value your opinions guys?

http://aboutfarthings.co.uk/shop/product_info.php?products_id=550

As I say, I do the best I can and also would gladly accept returns if buyers are unsatisfied, but it does not just seem that big an issue to me. I know there are those who take this a step too far, but we will never get concensus on this so I think it will always be a case of if you don't like the dealer's way of listing stock, and are not happy with their grading then do not use them, and let them know the reason why the coin is being returned (because mistakes do happen ). That is exactly what I do and would not expect anything less from anyone buying from me.

Now I will hide behind my monitor and wait for the backlash

[scott 144]

i would say thats UNC, very hard to see problems on mint darkened farthings though. i would say its accurate

this to me is UNC as i dont see any wear. but something in the lettering

and this one, again, to the eye it seems to be worse then the 1908 but on the photo it looks great

[azda 979]

I've noticed onewebby on ebay sometimes has 2 coins, the same grade, but cos 1 has a little more lusture he charges 10-20 quid more, why? The grade is the same, confusing

[1949threepence 3,367]

I've noticed onewebby on ebay sometimes has 2 coins, the same grade, but cos 1 has a little more lusture he charges 10-20 quid more, why? The grade is the same, confusing

I think his both grading and price structure are rather subjective. Many of his coins are good, but somewhat overpriced IMO.

At the end of the day though, he has to make a living, same as the rest of us.

Edited July 14, 2010 by 1949threepence

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Many interesting points in response chaps.

A few stood out for me;

John, Michael can speak for himself, but his point is that no penny is uncirculated, they have all come from circulation of sorts unless they are in a proof set, therefore it isn't technically accurate to use the term uncirculated. OK, he's swimming against the tide, but he's probably earned the right to do so.

Scott, copletely agree that a coin can be uncirculated without being lustrous. The grade comes first, then the degree of remaining lustre.

Red, can I infer from your posts that you are about to change sides and become a dealer ?

And Colin, regards your farthing (very nice by the way) if, as it appears it is the mint darkened version of the 1901 issue, it would seem a bit silly to me to describe it as 'Brilliant' when the mint have deliberately made it dark. BU to me means uncirculated with full lustre, it's never had any lustre so surely should be listed as uncirculated, mint darkened?

I do accept that it must be frustrating when you have a genuinely uncirculated coin to sell and you have to somehow make it stand out from all the junk that's listed as unc. These are the forces that produce 'grade creep' I guess, I mean lets face it, the whole UK grading system is set up to encourage grade creep - is it right to describe a coin that has been in circulation for 50 years and run over by several buses as 'Fine' ?

Say what you like about numerical grading systems, but you know where you are with them.

I forgot about subdued lustre, that's another unhelpfull term....

[scott 144]

actually mint darkened coins do show some sort of lustre, it still has the shine see my 1908

i love UNC grade, but i never use it, whats the point, its been in cerculation even if its taken directly from the till from the bag directly from the bank from the mint

Edited July 14, 2010 by scott

[Red Riley 2]

John, Michael can speak for himself, but his point is that no penny is uncirculated, they have all come from circulation of sorts unless they are in a proof set, therefore it isn't technically accurate to use the term uncirculated. OK, he's swimming against the tide, but he's probably earned the right to do so.

I can remember a time when Michael would not describe anything as more than GEF. His grading system is certainly fairer, although given that few coins on his site include illustrations, I guess it has to be.

Red, can I infer from your posts that you are about to change sides and become a dealer ?

Yep. I'm keeping most of my pennies though which is a shame, I think you would have liked some of them... F.A.I.D.C.

I forgot about subdued lustre, that's another unhelpfull term....

But it's reasonably accurate and I can't think of a better way to describe the phenomenon.

Well that didn't work did it? I tried to use multi-quote but without success so for my last post, see green box above. Can somebody tell this technophobe how to use it? I'm much more comfortable with a torque wrench and a pair of stilsons...

Edited July 14, 2010 by Red Riley

[argentumandcoins 70]

actually mint darkened coins do show some sort of lustre, it still has the shine see my 1908

i love UNC grade, but i never use it, whats the point, its been in cerculation even if its taken directly from the till from the bag directly from the bank from the mint

Scott, when you think of the grade "Uncirculated" it has to be taken as a coin that exhibits no signs of wear from circulation, but may have bag marks.

You might not like to use the term but what else do you call it, "circulated but without wear"?

What is "Almost Uncirculated"? A coin that nearly didn't make it from the mint into a bank bag?

I know we're splitting hairs but we need to use a term that everybody understands.

As a collector if you choose to call a coin A UNC that's your perogative, as a dealer it is to commit financial suicide.

John.

[1949threepence 3,367]

John, Michael can speak for himself, but his point is that no penny is uncirculated, they have all come from circulation of sorts unless they are in a proof set, therefore it isn't technically accurate to use the term uncirculated. OK, he's swimming against the tide, but he's probably earned the right to do so.

I can remember a time when Michael would not describe anything as more than GEF. His grading system is certainly fairer, although given that few coins on his site include illustrations, I guess it has to be.

Red, can I infer from your posts that you are about to change sides and become a dealer ?

Yep. I'm keeping most of my pennies though which is a shame, I think you would have liked some of them... F.A.I.D.C.

I forgot about subdued lustre, that's another unhelpfull term....

But it's reasonably accurate and I can't think of a better way to describe the phenomenon.

Well that didn't work did it? I tried to use multi-quote but without success so for my last post, see green box above. Can somebody tell this technophobe how to use it? I'm much more comfortable with a torque wrench and a pair of stilsons...

The multi quote doesn't work on here, Red. I've tried it a few times.

I do "multi quote" effect posts sometimes, but am only able to do it via copying and pasting.

[argentumandcoins 70]

Many interesting points in response chaps.

A few stood out for me;

John, Michael can speak for himself, but his point is that no penny is uncirculated, they have all come from circulation of sorts unless they are in a proof set, therefore it isn't technically accurate to use the term uncirculated. OK, he's swimming against the tide, but he's probably earned the right to do so.

Scott, copletely agree that a coin can be uncirculated without being lustrous. The grade comes first, then the degree of remaining lustre.

Red, can I infer from your posts that you are about to change sides and become a dealer ?

And Colin, regards your farthing (very nice by the way) if, as it appears it is the mint darkened version of the 1901 issue, it would seem a bit silly to me to describe it as 'Brilliant' when the mint have deliberately made it dark. BU to me means uncirculated with full lustre, it's never had any lustre so surely should be listed as uncirculated, mint darkened?

I do accept that it must be frustrating when you have a genuinely uncirculated coin to sell and you have to somehow make it stand out from all the junk that's listed as unc. These are the forces that produce 'grade creep' I guess, I mean lets face it, the whole UK grading system is set up to encourage grade creep - is it right to describe a coin that has been in circulation for 50 years and run over by several buses as 'Fine' ?

Say what you like about numerical grading systems, but you know where you are with them.

I forgot about subdued lustre, that's another unhelpfull term....

We can't use a point scale for the reasons that I had already mentioned;

Slabbing every coin is an absolute non-starter. I like the feel of an old coin, the way the light bounces of it, the way you can constantly play around with weighing different coins in a series for comparison, magnifying different areas under a scope to spot tiny adjustments on the dies. Slabbing ends most of that.

Most bulk lots would vanish from sale rooms as the dross would be scrapped (not cost efficient to slab) and the little gem that you occasionally find would vanish as it would have been spotted on slabbing (hopefully). Losing the dross kills the hobby for new collectors as most would baulk at paying £25 for a slabbed 1949 Penny (prices would be higher as I would have to pass on the slabbing cost).

All graders are different and grading houses even more so. The US companies don't even slab with consistency on their own coinage never mind UK coins!

The US market is so crazy that you get some sellers listing a "raw" coin as MS-65...WHAT???

Call it "almost uncirculated with nearly full brilliance apart from the carbon spot and 5 rim nicks"....Please?

As dear old Winnie said "You can't please all of the the people all of the time"

John.

[Peckris 579]

And Colin, regards your farthing (very nice by the way) if, as it appears it is the mint darkened version of the 1901 issue, it would seem a bit silly to me to describe it as 'Brilliant' when the mint have deliberately made it dark. BU to me means uncirculated with full lustre, it's never had any lustre so surely should be listed as uncirculated, mint darkened?

Actually, it HAS had - and still has - full lustre. The artificial toning is applied over the lustre which is why you sometimes see untoned examples. It's also why true BU 'toned' coins have a gorgeous lustrous purple appearance, as distinctive - until wearing - as normal lustre is.

Well that didn't work did it? I tried to use multi-quote but without success so for my last post, see green box above. Can somebody tell this technophobe how to use it? I'm much more comfortable with a torque wrench and a pair of stilsons...

I just used multi-quote for this post. What you do is click the MQ button under each post you want to quote from, THEN you click the Add Reply button at the very bottom, and lo and behold it inserts all the posts you've MQ'd.