Beautiful coin. I honestly prefer the matte satin finish on classic coin designs over the mirror proof. The original artists designed these coins for a matte finish and not a mirror cameo finish.
@olympicsos said:
Beautiful coin. I honestly prefer the matte satin finish on classic coin designs over the mirror proof. The original artists designed these coins for a matte finish and not a mirror cameo finish.
A (1936) Satin finish Proof nickel isn’t the same thing as a (1913-1916) Matte finish. Ditto for the (1909 and 1910) Roman finish Proof gold coins being different from the (1908 and 1911-1915) Matte examples.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I prefer the satin variety to the brilliant one. Great coin!
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Great looking coin, but sure collectors wanted brilliant proofs like the old days. Since there will always be 'Satin' slots for the cent and nickel, sooner or later I'll sell the car to get the Satin cent.
Members I have done business with: Silverman68, jfoot13, GAB, ricman, Smittys, scrapman1077, RyGuy, Connecticoin, Meltdown, VikingDude, Peaceman, Patches and more.
These are a very interesting part of American numismatics. The mint in 1936 was unaware of how to produce any proofs at all, so they had to take a few shots in the dark and it ended up with a few subtle differences as they learned through trial and error, particularly in the brilliant proofs. These satin coins were met with fervent collector opposition and the mint scrambled to remove them as collectors were still mad that they had produces matte proofs at all, as proven by the lack of sales in 1916. They didn't want a repeat in 1936.
@olympicsos said:
Beautiful coin. I honestly prefer the matte satin finish on classic coin designs over the mirror proof. The original artists designed these coins for a matte finish and not a mirror cameo finish.
A (1936) Satin finish Proof nickel isn’t the same thing as a (1913-1916) Matte finish. Ditto for the (1909 and 1910) Roman finish Proof gold coins being different from the (1908 and 1911-1915) Matte examples.
They may have technical differences, but its better than the traditional cameo proof finish as these coins tend to have more detail and are closer to the artists original intent compared to cameo proofs.
Comments
Stunning! Congratulations.
A sweet addition there!
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
Thanks!
Gotta love it! VERY nice my coin brother👍👌
Thanks!
love dem satin finish coins!
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
That is a beautiful Buffalo nickel.... Nice luster..... Cheers, RickO
Very nice
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
wow, the details on those pictures are so pronounced I almost think tooled or counterfeit.
Thanks all!
Congratulations on a very nice looking coin. To show how the 36 Satin Proofs can vary in appearance, my icon is the reverse of a 36 satin proof.
Buffalo proofs are still a fairly affordable set to put together - they really haven’t gone up much in price for at least fifteen years.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Beautiful coin. I honestly prefer the matte satin finish on classic coin designs over the mirror proof. The original artists designed these coins for a matte finish and not a mirror cameo finish.
A (1936) Satin finish Proof nickel isn’t the same thing as a (1913-1916) Matte finish. Ditto for the (1909 and 1910) Roman finish Proof gold coins being different from the (1908 and 1911-1915) Matte examples.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I prefer the satin variety to the brilliant one. Great coin!
Very nice. I look for 1950 proofs with a satin finish rather than the mirrored one - something about that satiny luster.
Beautiful coin. Proof coins in this era, 1936-1942, are always intriguing to me due to so many lives were lost in World War.
Great looking coin, but sure collectors wanted brilliant proofs like the old days. Since there will always be 'Satin' slots for the cent and nickel, sooner or later I'll sell the car to get the Satin cent.
Lovely looking coin. Someday I hope to have one.
Silverman68, jfoot13, GAB, ricman, Smittys, scrapman1077, RyGuy, Connecticoin, Meltdown, VikingDude, Peaceman, Patches and more.
These are a very interesting part of American numismatics. The mint in 1936 was unaware of how to produce any proofs at all, so they had to take a few shots in the dark and it ended up with a few subtle differences as they learned through trial and error, particularly in the brilliant proofs. These satin coins were met with fervent collector opposition and the mint scrambled to remove them as collectors were still mad that they had produces matte proofs at all, as proven by the lack of sales in 1916. They didn't want a repeat in 1936.
The coin is very nice, I like it!
Coin Photographer.
They may have technical differences, but its better than the traditional cameo proof finish as these coins tend to have more detail and are closer to the artists original intent compared to cameo proofs.