How do YOU distinguish between VG and F?

Kind of an odd question, but a little background….after 40+ years away from the hobby I started collecting again during the pandemic.   In the 70's I collected US coins only so - while application varied by person - there were well defined criteria for each grade for each type ('Lincoln's beard has no wear", etc)  in the Red Book.

In my pandemic return to collecting I switched to world coins - and found grading was the wild, wild west.   For the first couple years I didn't even bother grading my own collection…….until a few months ago when I decided to dip my toe into Numista swapping and thus had to start assigning grades.

I was - and to a lesser degree still  am - very uncertain in my own grading capabilities but have pleasantly found that my grades on both the coins I send and the coins I receive (mostly) match up.   So I think I'm (mostly) ‘doing it right’.     

The one thing I did notice though was that most (almost all!)  of the grades I disagreed with on the coins sent to me in swaps were around the border between VG and F…..I've received a fair number of F's that I thought were VG, plus a few in the other direction.

So I just wanted to open up the floor to a general discussion about what ya'll look for when trying to distinguish VG from F?   I suspect it will mostly come down to the famous 1960's US Supreme Court definition of pornography - “I know it when I see it” - but I'm hoping to at least hear some perspectives and maybe get some pointers.

Thanks in advance….

Have you tried PCGS Photograde? It is very helpful in honing your grading skills specifically with U.S. coins and is helpful in better assessing world coins. For instance:

                               VG8                                                                           F12

https://www.pcgs.com/photograde

It often depends on whether you are buying or selling. 😏

😅

Whatever my gut tells me about detail, and whether or not I have to lowball the dealer.

As a circulation level collector (I.e. trying to pull from coins in my change), I work on “Fine” being basically looking as good as it did when it left the mint. “Brilliant Uncirculated" quality despite actually circulating. No obvious flaws to the naked eye. As you can imagine, not something that happens often.

“Very Good” allows for minor damage visible to the eye. However, most-to-all of the finer details are still sharp.

“Good” would be some loss of finer details with minor marks. 

“Fair” would be loss of finer details with multiple circulation marks.

Anything beyond that is just poor or worse.

You seem to work with you very own system of grading … unfortunately that won't work if you have to find common ground with other collectors 😅. I believe to word grading stems from collectors of ancient coins that were usually found in poor states of conservation and where identifying a general type or at least some text was considered enough. That's why a coin graded “Very Good” doesn't look very good and more like crap in today's context.

I selected these two pictures of russian 2 kopecks when I wrote an article about coin grading. First of all, the number of preserved small details is important: the eagle on the VG coin is almost smooth, and on the F coin some details appear. But if the second coin had any additional defects - for example, corrosion or a scratch - then I would also classify it as VG.

I find it hard, as there is not that much difference between the grades and very few of my coins have neat grades. I have lots of gVG's and aFine's next to the VG and Fine. Then there is truly borderline stuff like this.

As you are American - take this 1866 penny.

Definitely much better than VG, but not quite Fine, The wreath would pass, but Liberty is nearly gone from the head band. I gave the coin a VG10. Many 1800s American coins, have the word Liberty on headbands or shields as a line between Fine or less than it.

Barbers show up differences well, the 1908 is a bare fine, Liberty is clear enough and some face detail between cheek, ear and nois is visible, the wreath is mostly made out. The 1901 is a Barely VG coin and theres no liberty, the wreath is misty and flat wear covers the whole head shape with just a few bits of ear and Liberty's lips (That coin was cleaned and may even be in the high Goods)

However Very Good is still much better than Poor, Fair and even Good coins, you should expect a full rim on most modern coins, heads, shields and eagles should be fully outlined and separate from letters and rims (Even Walkers). Dates should be clear on most types (Buffalo nickels and UK E7 florins an exception). Very Good is mediocre/meh! not truly awful. Its a 2 star coin, not a 0 star one. Deeper and recessed areas should be showing bits of details and often the eagle on an American coin, should have some detail at least in recessed areas.

For British the distinction is harder. They leap from Poor to Fair and then Fine. Except their Fair is not FR 2, its like Good and VG coins are usually called “Almost Fine”,

For halfcrowns and monarchs it is easy, VG coins have a full outline, sharp rim and clear letters, but any raise detail like hairlines are flat and misty, although the 1844 (VG) has eyes, lips and some ear and nose. With fine you see individual teeth in parts and the hair gains detail (The 1884 is verging on good fine).

In general to me, a fine coin is leaning on the verge of more fine detail (But can be worn - still seeable). Very Good means its identifiable, but more wear than detail. Any kind of lustre on coins of this level is not expected though. But its like comparing a C- coin with a C+ one.

Rule of thumb - Very Good - more wear than detail, 25 - 33% detail remains, blurry appearance, but main features are visible and most reading can be seen on edges (Not small mottos and Liberty). Heavy wear is present. Discolouration common

Fine - 50% of detail. Coin appears sharper and not so heavily worn. Wear is moderate all over, all lettering should be clear and coin appears closer to intact than flat. Less dicolouration.

My scale

Poor - Identifiable to type only, almost no outline of anything and on coins like British pennies, a date only.

Not collectible unless rare or you want to complete date runs. Basal state

Fair - A bit more detail established, extremely worn, damaged, flat areas and only some devices are identifiable, bits of lettering, rim and detail blend. Far from collectible, but real used coins

About Good - Devices can be seen, but silhouettes, some lettering full readable, rim still blends with all details, corrosion, wear, still an awful piece, but you can do much worse

Good - Full rim in many cases, outlines visible, most lettering visible, but basically worn flat with no detail. Good spacefiller grade, but Good really means bad in coin world.

Very Good - All design elements are visible, strong rims, some light detail in parts. Lots of wear, flatness, heavy wear and general lack of any fine detail. Still a decent piece.

Fine - A lot more detail and many devices and sunken designs will have good detail. Overall even wear and most lettering clear, sharp rims, less likely to be damaged or stained. Raised areas like the maces and King's ear and temple will be heavily worn.

For higher grades I am a bit more stringent, but don't really bother with MS and grades of UNC much.

Good Fine - American VF - The coin will have clear detail and even moderate to light wear. All details are at least clear and sometimes wear may be uneven. This dime is VF on Seated side, but likely VG/Fine on wreath side (Uneven wear). Again appearance is pleasing and some details are sharp, whislt the rest is at least visible.

Very Fine - a lot more detail with just light overall wear. To the uninitiated such a coin can appear UNC. This grade equates to XF40/50 in American contexts. Closer looks will reveal areas of pronounced wear and latter details. Areas of high relieft will also appear worn. Lustre especially on silver and gold will appear.

good Very Fine/about Extremely Fine = AU50 - All details are clear and bold. Wear is visible and light in high relief areas and light rubbing in others. Overall the coin looks nice and has some deep recessed lustre in parts. Wear should not be flat in any part. Yes this is my best Barber dime too!

Extremely Fine - US AU 55/58 - By now the coin is barely distinguishable from UNC. Such a coin will likely have full lustre, sharp detail and look really pretty and new, but there are traces of wear. With sovereigns I look for areas above the eye, high hair detail and the cross on the top of the orb jewel on the crown. There is wear, but its light and usually does not deflect from the coin. For American coins - I check cheeks on people, high hair detail and any part of an Eagles breast.

Uncirculated - But not necessarily perfect - such coins look like EF ones, but they have cartwheel style lustre and details almost appear “frosted” especially in high parts. Coins will have a fresh out of mint look and gleam, There should be no wear, but dings, tone and even areas of slight flatness caused by bad strikes are fully permitted (Pine tree and hill are flat here). This dollar is a lovely UNC piece, but its not perfect, dings, tone and some weak strike on tree and king's temple take into the lower MS states (62?).

Choice/Gem/Superb Uncirculated - these are coins that are really special Uncirculated meaning they are nearly flawless, no dings, tone, distracting marks or anything. Imperfections need to be seen under a scope. This mint dollar is likely at least a MS67 or FDC (Fleur de coin) in the British world. Any coin pretty much in an uncirculated or special set, or direct out of a coin roll will be like this.

Proof - specially struck coins, that are perfection, struck more than once, polished and often cameoed, these coins are never meant to circulate and often remain in high grade, unless one opens the case/packet and starts handling them. This is the peak of coins in my opinion.

Thanks for the time to put together that detailed answer!

My pleasure, been wanting to do a condition scale for a long time.

It's amazing how we all have differing scales.

Using Moneytane's photos, I'd have considered everything up to & including the 1860 penny as “worn” - varying degrees of course, but worn nonetheless. I wouldn't turn down coins in that condition if I didn't have them, but I'd always be seeking to upgrade.

The 1911 florin I would only consider as “fair”; virtually all the design elements finer detail has gone but it is immediately identifiable, and the deeper detail very much present.

The Parliament florin I would consider “good”; a reasonable amount of fine detail is still there, but a lot has still been lost too.

The 1944 florin would be “very good” as most of the finer detail (feathers, claws, King's hair etc) are there. A couple of minor circulation knocks.

The 1934 florin (a gorgeous coin btw) would be “fine” or “extremely good”. The finest detail (King's moustache hairs, crown, eyes) are very well distinguished.

The 2023 dollar, assuming it was pulled from circulation, would be my “very fine”.

But I appreciate my era of core collection (1968 to present UK circulating coins) is much more recent & thus more higher grade circulation coins still exist. So I'm judging Moneytane's older coins by my modern coin standards.

I imagine if I had to revise my scale for older coins, I would be more generous with the “acceptable” amount of loss to allow for the greater amount of time passed.

P.s. thanks to Moneytane for taking the time to take photos of his each grade. 🙂

From the pictures I would switch the Barber dime and the Kiwi coin.

A Collector

It's amazing how we all have differing scales.

 

Using Moneytane's photos, I'd have considered everything up to & including the 1860 penny as “worn” - varying degrees of course, but worn nonetheless. I wouldn't turn down coins in that condition if I didn't have them, but I'd always be seeking to upgrade.

 

The 1911 florin I would only consider as “fair”; virtually all the design elements finer detail has gone but it is immediately identifiable, and the deeper detail very much present.

 

The Parliament florin I would consider “good”; a reasonable amount of fine detail is still there, but a lot has still been lost too.

 

The 1944 florin would be “very good” as most of the finer detail (feathers, claws, King's hair etc) are there. A couple of minor circulation knocks.

 

The 1934 florin (a gorgeous coin btw) would be “fine” or “extremely good”. The finest detail (King's moustache hairs, crown, eyes) are very well distinguished.

 

The 2023 dollar, assuming it was pulled from circulation, would be my “very fine”.

 

But I appreciate my era of core collection (1968 to present UK circulating coins) is much more recent & thus more higher grade circulation coins still exist. So I'm judging Moneytane's older coins by my modern coin standards.

 

I imagine if I had to revise my scale for older coins, I would be more generous with the “acceptable” amount of loss to allow for the greater amount of time passed.

 

P.s. thanks to Moneytane for taking the time to take photos of his each grade. 🙂

I want to see your scale.

PS want to tell the US mint, that their Uncirculated strike coin, that has never been touched by human hands and was struck 3 times, is only Very Fine. There is strict grading and then there is being on another planet.

 I call this a proof, you would call it around “Oh thats very good, maybe even pressing fine, very dirty though, its not gleaming”

What is “extremely good” - that grade does not exist on any scale I know.

I mean would your UNC be MS70 or 100 and then EF is MS69, VF is MS67.

I actually think my grades are very strict. The American 1872 dime is probably barely Fine in British money. And it shows wear heavier on its tails side.

The 1944 Florin, does look nice, but on George the hair strands are barely visible and face,cheek etc nearly all blended. Like a lot of coins, I suspect this coin was cleaned in the past. A lot of VF to EF early NZ silver can appear UNC to the uninitiated and the Tails sides had higher rims, meaning coins at VF have basically all the detail. The monarch side is really where you grade for coins VF and better.

I use the Australian/NZ system which is British standards, but the Grades  Very Good and Good are equivalent to British Fair, where as our Fair is like that 1688 Reiderschilling I showed.

Not getting at you, but the post was a bit mean spirited and kind of rubbished my opinions.

Those coins sum up the difficulty of unifying grades. Actually finding photos of coins at various grades was hard enough, as very few coins slip nicely to exact grading standards. Plus we have the problem with coins of uneven wear, where one side has heavier wear due to more use or higher relief detail which wears quicker. Then you have cleaning which can make a worn coin look better and everything else.

Pretty much all the coins under VG were cheap and mainly parts of big accumulations, and photos from when I started collecting again in 2019/2020, when I was a less seasoned collector. The later photos are mostly coins I have bought in the past 2 years.

Most collectors will have more coins grading, about, nice, good, almost and near, a grade rather than exact grades. I may have 10 VF coins and 10 EF coins, but I will have 37 coins that grade goodVF and 5 that grade gVF/aEf etc.

@Moneytane I apprecate that you mention grading by a serious collector, then there is the “American grading” where dealers and collectors alike often overgrade coins, usually world coins where they lack experience. If a coin has significant wear but has some lustre is it really an UNC coin? Or just a nice collectable piece. In fact I've been going through my collection the last year and regrading coins I've obtained the last 10-15 years, and many EF coins and some worse I've graded UNC; some F graded as VF or EF. At least how I see it, using the Numista boxes for grades a coin can be graded UNC if it can no longer be upgraded. Any scratches or slight wear is an AU for me. Besides, the collection is for me anyways so why would I inflate the grades and make things more difficult for myself?

Hey Moneytane,

Genuinely wasn't trying to rubbish your scale or opinions. As I do note, I am a modern circulating coin collector for the UK so I am much harsher because:

1. Higher grades of modern circulated coins are much easier to find
2. My chosen core area of collection is much narrower.

In specific regards to the dollar: I say “if it had been pulled from circulation”. Very fine is my highest grade. It looks as good as though fresh off the dies. Proof circulation coins is, for me, an oxymoron so that grade doesn't exist. Obviously, I acknowledge proof coins do exist. But not in circulation: proof coins come specifically as presentation sets. That's the crux of my scale.

And I did say that I would obviously need to re-assess my grading if I was looking at older coins. But that's not my chosen area, so I don't really have a scale for them.

I think we're getting our wires crossed. If you imagine that your all your photographed coins were actually 2010-2024 issues (i.e. very recent releases) and pulled from circulation, you probably wouldn't grade them as highly.

Given their actual ages, your scale largely seems pretty fair. Like Idolenz, I'd flip the barber dime & kiwi florin, but otherwise yeah, I'd say it's about right.

Your scale is designed to equate seemingly infinite global coins over centuries. Mine is something like ~250 coins over ~55 years within the UK.

As such, of course our scales are going to vary considerably because we aren't really measuring the same thing.

I do apologise if it came across harsh. Certainly was never my intention. More just a “huh, how odd” curiosity levels of how we grade things, and then noting why we have such differing scales.

Hope that smoothes things out. 🙂

Absolutely, I would grade much harder for modern coins. Especially now most circulation pieces are some kind of steel or plated steel muck metal, which seems to keep its lustre and shine long after the wear sets in.

I have some modern coins, but those coins show where my heart lies, mostly classic silver coins of the 1750 - 1950 period with a huge focus on the 2nd half of the 1800s and Queen Victoria.

Agree about the Barber Dime, probably chose the wrong example.