Mystery solved PCGS 1959 1c
RobertLahti
Posts: 328 ✭✭✭
I finally found the mystery of the wide bottom, thin top, proof test UNITED reverse 1959 1c
A doubled removed S in the bottom of 5.
This is "15" in the PCGS numbers ending in "14" and "16" in a series of 3 confirmed UNITED proof test stikes.
We'll see...WHAT? What brought your attention...?
0
Comments
What are you talking about?
A progress checked reverse. It's a test strike.
Provenance of a San Francisco in an immediate area of mention of a likeness of a known proof form.
We'll see...WHAT? What brought your attention...?
I think in the whole of things, it's not so crazy to believe the US Mint had been particularly itching to release a proof version of the new design.
We'll see...WHAT? What brought your attention...?
I have to hand it to you, I'm by far an expert in numismatics, but in all my years in the hobby, I have never seen most of the terminology that you are using to describe your finds. And everytime I look at your coins, I try to use the terminology that you are providing to see what the heck you are talking about. I have failed everytime!
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
https://n1m.com/bobbysmith1
We'll see...WHAT? What brought your attention...?
in other words i found something but not sure if it's interesting so i'll make my own terms up to make it interesting
2003-present
https://www.omnicoin.com/security/users/login
So, I'll pose a question to you. Would you start going through the very detail laden job, the tedious tast of proof die making and never check the increments of your work very closely, but just start minting proof coins and just let the chips fall where they may? Or would you make a test strike, (quite a few) to check if you missed a streak?
We'll see...WHAT? What brought your attention...?
So here's a nice article from the US Mint explaining the coin process. I don't see where they press test stikes. I do see where they inspect strikes and failed coins go to the waffle machine.
https://www.usmint.gov/learn/production-process/coin-production
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
https://n1m.com/bobbysmith1
That's a good discussion about current processes. It doesn't have any bearing on the processes that were followed 60+ years ago.
In this case there's nothing to discuss. The heavily worn dies in the original post are unquestionably not proof dies.
I've worked in manufacturing pilot plants and test facilities. Pilot plants have equipment that is similar to production and are used to do exactly what you describe. There are very strict controls over the disposition of the test samples. They DO NOT go into the production stream. That's a very quick way to lose your job.
Actual Production equipment is rarely used due to downtime costs and risk, but when it must be used, additional product segregation and equipment clean up both at the start and end is required.
In a high speed, high volume production facility like the mint, they would surely have a pilot facility even 60 years ago. It just costs too much $$ in downtime to use production equipment for testing.
honestly all you are doing is pulling terms out of thin air none of your terms make any sense , are not even known in the coin hobby, nor even part of the minting process all you are doing is hyping your everyday finds into something they aren't
2003-present
https://www.omnicoin.com/security/users/login
I do hope you realize that if it truly was a proof die, you'd have a deep cameo test coin? To have a brilliant proof, at a minimum about a thousand test coins must have existed. Of course, your whole theory about your coin being a test is completely and truly false. They don't exist.
For the true numismatists here, here's a description of proof die production in this era (50-64)
A normal die was taken and inspected for flaws, then acid dipped or pickled in 95% alcohol and 5% nitric acid.
A worker would check the die to make sure there was not weakness in frost, if there was a spot with frost weakness then there would be an additional step of taking a swap of the aforementioned solution, and applying it to the die to strengthen the frost and ensure there was no area missing frost. Some 1959 halves show this on the reverse of the bell in the lower right, it's rather interesting to see. I'm not sure if CoinFacts has an example to show, but you could look in both the CAM and DCAM sections to try and find one. I'll check and edit my post here if I see one. Edit: I found one, note the difference in texture and color on the lower right of the bell:
The above step would have created a die with a uniformly frosted surface, so the worker would need to polish the fields with a diamond dust compound. This would be done with a wooden mandril and then a felt tipped mandril. The polishing would not reach the devices, and as such they maintained their cameo appearance.
The dies were inspected to ensure everything looked right and they went into production. There were no test strikes. If there were any in the design process, they would be patterns and they would appear deep cameo and are unknown today, I doubt they ever existed.
During the 1970s, the acid was switched for a sandblasting of the die, which made the DCAM or CAM appearance last for hundreds of thousands of strikes. The frost also appeared different.
Coin Photographer.
@RobertLahti is not making up numismatic terms he is using his time machine to go back in time and discover top secret minting processes and terms that were never disclosed to the numismatic experts and the coin collecting community.
Edited to add: He is also a mind reader so he knows exactly what the mint workers were thinking 60 years ago.
Uh huh.
Very bizarre OP. I’m not even going to ask.
Maybe you should talk to SlickCoins about Master Engraver Marks??
So I'm lost in his theory but without seeing the whole coin I figured that 9 would have some die markers we could work with.
Thanks for sharing
PS I like whole coin views
If we can just get EmeraldATV to take the photos I think we'll finally be able to make sense of all this.
This is truly one of the finest eras in Forum history, at which I will always look back fondly.
Mark your calenders, never before has there been such a trifecta of truly inspirational numismatic savants hard at work investigating such important and overlooked depths of coin manufactory.
Luckily, we are at last able to understand some of the deeply held secrets of our hobby.
Thank you sirs!
What's the frequency Kenneth?
Oh I'm just giving my opinions and from what I've learned is that proof coins have die markers from researching my proof to business 1916 LWB cent.
Along with my 1978 D LMC and 1899 IHC,1909 VDB LWB,, so yes naturally I'm intrigued. All coin wreck examples aka proof to business.
Theirs plenty of room on the list of coin wrecks,,, also I'm just I investigating.
I'm no expert,,, I've just got advanced questions & theories.
Thanks all
Of course Slick is in this thread... He likes to make things up too...
I believe the OP and Slick are the same person and just talking to his self and trolling the whole damn forum.
Your "theories" have been shown too be absolutely incorrect with numerous facts and data. A good researcher knows when the facts disproves his theory. Continuing to push these does nothing more than reduce any numismatic credibility you may have left.
Even Bloom County understands
I was going to comment on all this stuff but as the thread got longer. I have absolutely no idea what to say.
Pete
So many different words and phrases to explain Die Deterioration and Over Polished Dies...........
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
Then you have not learned anything.
Proof coins have die markers. Non-proof coins also have die markers. Proof coins have fields and legends. So do non-proof coins. Proof coins have atoms. So do non-proof coins.
A die marker does not magically turn a coin into a proof if it wasn't a proof coin to start with.
Proof dies have been used by the mint for business strike coins. Die markers can be used to determine this.
This thread reminds me so much of this old TV show…
Please hold for the next available post.
Working 9 to 5, what a way to make a living.
Sorry wrong thread.
I suggest you find out what year micro letters were a staple used in the proofing process of a coin.
Also, when were staples invented.
That's all ....
What ?
After reading this thread I feel like Towlie from "South Park" after he lights up a fat one and says "Man, I don't know what's going on".
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets