I would appreciate any comments on this note as to grading opinion

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

I was wondering if members can give their personal opinion on what grade they would give this note and explain their reasons as to why they gave it that grade....

I will post a pic of the graded note later in the weeK.
I would like to get a few opinions first
Thx
FRIEDSQUID

[attachment deleted by admin]

What grade was it given? I would say CUnc because it is cut off kilter.

The note looks good in the photo, yet I think the obvious thing is that it is not centered well within the margins.  LIkely a choice unc.
ABYSS

I"ll comment on this further once everyone's given their opinion.  Right now i'll just say this......centering isn't the only thing to keep in mind when assesing a note.

The note graded as a GEM UNC65 by the TPG but I quote from their website

"GEM UNC" - 65/66/67

For a note to fall under the Gem UNC category it must have perfect paper quality and perfect centering

Regardless of how poor my picture is....the note does not seem to be centered with even margins.....I'm I missing something or interpreting the description of what a GEM UNC 65 note is? 

.

Hello all

Indeed, decent centreing is required for the grade of Gem UNC 65/66/67.  I must admit, looking at this picture and reviewing my graders notes on the piece in question, perhaps the centreing should have bumped it down to a CUNC-64.  As far as other desireable qualities go, this note is amazing.  So I would say that my decision to call it Gem-65, in spite of it's centreing was taking into account it's other desireable qualities.

Perhaps I should change the grade description to "reasonable" centreing instead of what it is now, "Perfect" centreing.  IN truth, I've graded many notes in the Gem UNC range that are noticeably off centre.  "Perfect" centreing is nearly impossible.  There has to be an allowable range of "off-centred-ness" before it is deemed too off centre to be Gem.  I often shed a tear when I have to call a note CUNC-64, simply because it's off centre.  For this note, I didn't feel that it deserved such harsh sentenceing.

On another note, I welcome discussion about grading.  Feel free to question my logic.  It's important to me that you understand and approve of my methodologies.  Only through that will a healthy market for TPG be established.

BCS

.

I welcome discussion about grading.  Feel free to question my logic.  It's important to me that you understand and approve of my methodologies.  Only through that will a healthy market for TPG be established.

BCS

BCS,

If this is the case your logic, I will then have to dust off the question about grading missing circle notes, you consider them off-center, but yet some of them are perfect, deserving of a possible higher-grade?

Question, when does the exception make sense to give the note a higher grade? and should grading not be consistent no mater that the note?

http://www.cdnpapermoney.com/forum/index.php?topic=8540.0

I'm going to jump in on the mention of MC notes. If a potential MC note is perfectly centred, the missing circle will cut off and not visible on the note. The missing circles only exist if the left margin is wider than it should be, although the general Bank of Canada tolerances do allow for some variation in the cutting alignment and missing circles do appear within these tolerances.

For example (see my image below): If you draw a line down the left-hand edge of a note that is considered to be the theoretical definition of "perfectly cut" (green line), the missing circles will be to the left of that line. However, the Bank's tolerance for a "normal" note might be that the cut be within 1.5mm (just an example) of that theoretical perfect line (two red lines).

(Click to enlarge)
(Note: the above image was stitched together from two separate
images, but you can easily get the point I'm trying to make).

So by definition of perfect, if a note is perfectly cut, it will not be a missing circle note. However, if it is imperfectly cut with an excessively wide left edge, it may be a missing circle note. It thus follows that if for a note to be considered "Gem" (65/66/67) it must be perfectly centred, then any missing circle note cannot be considered Gem regardless of the perfection of any of its other features.

Hello all

Indeed, decent centreing is required for the grade of Gem UNC 65/66/67.  I must admit, looking at this picture and reviewing my graders notes on the piece in question, perhaps the centreing should have bumped it down to a CUNC-64.  As far as other desireable qualities go, this note is amazing.  So I would say that my decision to call it Gem-65, in spite of it's centreing was taking into account it's other desireable qualities.

Perhaps I should change the grade description to "reasonable" centreing instead of what it is now, "Perfect" centreing.  IN truth, I've graded many notes in the Gem UNC range that are noticeably off centre.  "Perfect" centreing is nearly impossible.  There has to be an allowable range of "off-centred-ness" before it is deemed too off centre to be Gem.  I often shed a tear when I have to call a note CUNC-64, simply because it's off centre.  For this note, I didn't feel that it deserved such harsh sentenceing.

On another note, I welcome discussion about grading.  Feel free to question my logic.  It's important to me that you understand and approve of my methodologies.  Only through that will a healthy market for TPG be established.

BCS

Hello BCS,
From what i've learned, understand and practice near perfect centering is a must
and of course only one part of the assesment for a grade of Gem UNC 65.
Even though being amazing in every aspect, the centering of this specific note
should have  bumped it down to a CUNC-64.
It is in my opinion that your decision to call it a Gem-65 was not a good one.
I understand you shedding  tears when you have to call a note CUNC-64, simply because it's off centre.
I think in this case we can all agree the note is deemed too off centre to be Gem.
Unfortunate but that's the way it should be.
In my opinion centering is an extremely desirable quality in a bank note.
Might be a harsh sentence; but should be no exceptions and done in a consistent matter everytime.
Thank you
Carl

.... In my opinion centering is an extremely desirable quality in a bank note.

I agree strongly with this comment. Banknote collecting, like stamp collecting, is largely an aesthetic hobby. We like to look at our notes and enjoy their "eyeball" appearance. Stamp collectors have understood this concept for several decades and they will often pay many multiples of catalogue value for mint unhinged stamps with large even "jumbo" margins. Personally speaking, I prefer an Unc note with large even margins and a trivial handling mark to a poorly-centered Unc note without any handling marks. After all, poor centering jumps out at you every time you look at a note whereas a trivial handling mark is usually invisible when looking at a note through a plastic holder. 

Hello all

Sorry for my late reply.  I've been spending the last week on a beach in Costa Rica so I was unable to keep up with my correspondance.

In reading all of your comments I must say that I agree, centreing is an extremely desirable quality in a note, and this is why it is the only desireabe quality that can make a technical grading difference between the choice and Gem UNC ranges.  If you caught one of my seminars over the past year, I spend a great deal of time establishing the significance of this emerging convention in grading paper money.  In deed, a larger consideration must be given to centreing then other aspects of eye appeal.

I want to clarify that in this case, and indeed in any subsiquent cases, an "exception" is not made for off centreing just because of other desireable qualities.  If the centreing is off to a great enough degree, there is no amount of embossing or quality inks or ripples in the paper (early 1954 series) that could redeem the note past the Choice UNC 64 range.  There is an acceptable range of imperfect centreing that may be allowed on a Gem UNC.  In this specific case, I considered the note within the range.  Upon review, I may have been too generous.  Never have I consciencely broken the rule of reasonably perfect centreing on a Gem UNC note (I'm working on changing the "perfect" wording on the website).  I will stick to that rule to the end, mostly because I believe in maintaining the significance of the "All Mighty Gem UNC"

In response to Morgage Guy I must say that that charlton standard catelogue gives a broad definition of what a "Gem UNC" note is.  Here's an example. "Colours must be bright, original with exceptional eye appeal.  Paper must be bright and fresh" - Charlton Standard Catelogue of Canadian Government Paper Money, 21st edition.  Descirption words like "Bright" and "exceptional" and "Fresh" are qualitative words which are subject to interpretation.  In the end it is someone's opinion whether or not the note is bright enough to be considered "Bright" or fresh enough to be considered "Fresh".  In the end, the difference between a Gem UNC 65, 66, 67 and so on is the varience between these qualitive measures.  The TPG companies have taken it upon themselves to establish a benchmark for these descriptings of "Fresh" and "Bright" which are all relative to eachother.  In the seperation between the Gem UNC grades, BCS is putting a quantitative measure to a qualitative attribute.

I hope that has clarified my stance on the whole subject.  If you have any more questions, fell free to ask

Thanks for keeping me on my toes.

BCS

Upon review, I may have been too generous.  Never have I consciencely broken the rule of reasonably perfect centreing on a Gem UNC note (I'm working on changing the "perfect" wording on the website).

So does this mean that if one received a less than GEM Unc grading simply because of centering that note would be regraded since the wording will be changed. The biggest concern is that consistency is the most important thing in TPG as far as I am concerned. IF I personally believe and always have believed that a BCS UNC 64 is always atleast an unc 64 or better if graded by another TPG I would hope that this continues as opposed to going in the opposite direction whereby a a BCS UNC 64 now gets graded by another TPG as an UNC 63.
The fact is that in many notes the difference between a CHOICE or GEM can result in huge dollars when it comes to selling/buying notes....and no one wants to be on the losing end.
Of course this is only my opinion....and others will obviously have their own.
Thanks for you comments

.