What is a Prooflike coin?

DisneyFan

I just found a picture of a non silver dollar coin in a slab described as Prooflike.

Is a Prooflike coin

BryceM

Your poll choices aren't mutually exclusive. Besides, proof coins have been made at the branch mints at times too.

There has always been (and always will be) much confusion about what is meant by the terms "proof" and "proof-like".

Actual proof coins are made by different manufacturing methods. The particulars of these methods, and the look imparted to the resulting coins, has varied over the years. The most commonly understood meaning of "proof", at least in the US, refers to the sort of coins showing up in modern US Mint proof sets. These coins often have frosted devices and mirror-like fields. Matte-proof, and sandblast proof coins have also been produced by the mint. Check out the history of early Peace dollar proofs. Specimen, or other "specially-struck" coins also show up here and there throughout our minting history. Their existence serves to muddy the waters even further.

Some business-strike coins have been minted with qualities that are proof-like. Maybe the best known example is DMPL Morgan Dollars, especially from the San Francisco mint. These coins were made from polished, basined dies which imparted a mirror-like quality to the fields, very similar to actual proof coins. Even though they have nicely mirrored fields, they don't have the same quality of strike, perfectly square rims, and other qualities more commonly found on true proof coins. A few years back, the TPGs began assigning PL designations to other series.

Any coin that is manufactured from sufficiently polished dies can have these so-called "proof-like" qualities. Newly installed, highly polished dies might progress from creating a few deeply mirrored proof-like coins, a few proof-like coins, a few satiny coins, typical coins, and finally, highly lustrous coins as the dies gradually develop flow-lines.

Namvet69

You can tweak your poll options if you want.

DisneyFan

@Namvet69 said:
You can tweak your poll options if you want.

I'm open to suggestions.
I've found coins that appear to be prooflike; but, are not labelled as such.
The picture I found above is the first time I've seen a non dollar proof like coin look like it's a proof. Compare it to this one, also labelled prooflike.

Both coins are from the same auction.

MFeld

@DisneyFan said:

@Namvet69 said:
You can tweak your poll options if you want.

I'm open to suggestions.
I've found coins that appear to be prooflike; but, are not labelled as such.
The picture I found above is the first time I've seen a non dollar proof like coin look like it's a proof. Compare it to this one, also labelled prooflike.

Both coins are from the same auction.

PCGS didn’t apply the PL designation to most coin types prior to 2019. I believe that NGC did so quite a while prior to that, though not when they first started grading.
See here: https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-announcement-about-prooflike

Jzyskowski1

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

In 2019 there was a large group of coins that were given PL designation. That seemed to reopen the PL door.
Before that most PL designation were on Morgan’s.
I know I know others received PL’s but that’s what little I have to opine about the subject
MS is a requirement for the PL designation as Proof coins are well proof like 😁

ironmanl63

Here are 2 PL Barbers I tried to have certified as such. PCGS did not agree.

DisneyFan

@ironmanl63 said:
Here are 2 PL Barbers I tried to have certified as such. PCGS did not agree.

Did you show them to any dealers who agreed they were Prooflike?

Were they originally NGC Prooflike?

ironmanl63

@DisneyFan said:

@ironmanl63 said:
Here are 2 PL Barbers I tried to have certified as such. PCGS did not agree.

Did you show them to any dealers who agreed they were Prooflike?

Were they originally NGC Prooflike?

No on both questions. The 1892 I purchased before PCGS labeled other coins prooflike. The dealer I bought it from said it was the most prooflike barber quarter she has ever handled.

I love the coins and the label does not change that. If I was selling I would try again. I have no doubt they will be in a PL holder someday.

DisneyFan

@ironmanl63 said:

I love the coins and the label does not change that. If I was selling I would try again. I have no doubt they will be in a PL holder someday.

>
Maybe CACG?

OAKSTAR

@DisneyFan said:
What is a Prooflike coin?

Here's your official definition:

https://www.pcgs.com/news/differences-between-proof-and-prooflike-coins

Jzyskowski1

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

Sapyx

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

A "proof coin" needs:
- Specially prepared dies
- A specially prepared planchet
- A specially rigged press that slowly and carefully stamps a coin twice, rather than just once.

All that specialness generally requires an entire separate facility from the circulation coinage press rooms, especially in a modern minting facility. A mint either has a proof coin production facility, or it doesn't, which is why proof coins can only be struck at certain mints.

"Prooflike" coins can come from any mint. If a coin "kinda looks like a proof", but isn't, then it can be classified as a prooflike. But a prooflike coin has none of those three qualities necessary for "true proofs".

It gets confusing when, in certain coin series from the 1800s, the dies used to strike proof coins were recycled and subsequently used to strike regular circulation coins. Such traditional "prooflikes" theoretically tick the first box, but not the second and third.

Coinscratch

@BryceM Is it really that few of PL coins derive from any one set of Business strike dies? I assumed it was higher like 2 or 3 hundred.

FlyingAl

Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

Prooflike coins are coins struck with dies in a regular production press with dies that happened to be slightly polished in the normal die production process. No extra care was taken to polish the dies before use in most cases, so it was completely accidental. Planchets are normal and no care is taken to preserve the coins post strike.

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s around where the mint could produce DCAM coins consistently). The dies are highly polished and the planchets are specially prepared. Special care is taken in handling and packaging the proofs.

Prooflikes can exist for any coin, so long as the conditions are right. The TPGS not changing the designation from only dollars to everything earlier caused a bit of confusion.

DisneyFan

I understand the explanations.

@ironmanl63 said:
Here are 2 PL Barbers I tried to have certified as such. PCGS did not agree.

I guess what I am trying to understand is why seemingly "prooflike" coins are not graded prooflike as seen with the above two examples. Are graders expecting to be coins 75% prooflike or is it !00%? Similar to copper coins being graded Red, Red/Brown, & Brown. Bowers in his Guide Book of Commemorative Coins states many of the gold commemoratives are prooflike and partial prooflike.

BryceM

@Coinscratch said:
@BryceM Is it really that few of PL coins derive from any one set of Business strike dies? I assumed it was higher like 2 or 3 hundred.

I suppose it depends on your definition of a few. It's probably more accurate to say "a few percent", but I doubt it's several hundred. A few dozen, perhaps. Maybe Dan Carr can chime in. Calling @dcarr.

I stole this from a random website pertaining to DMPL Morgans:

When new dies were loaded into the coining press, the first few coins to come off the press had the deeply-mirrored fields and frosted devices. As the metal of the coin die made its impression on the planchets, the friction of the metal of the coin die being pressed into the metal of the planchet would start to deteriorate the mirror-like surface of the die. The next twenty to thirty coins would have a semi-mirrored surface in the field. These are known as Proof-Like or PL. Eventually, the mirror-like qualities of the die would be worn away.

lilolme

@BryceM said:

@Coinscratch said:
@BryceM Is it really that few of PL coins derive from any one set of Business strike dies? I assumed it was higher like 2 or 3 hundred.

I suppose it depends on your definition of a few. It's probably more accurate to say "a few percent", but I doubt it's several hundred. A few dozen, perhaps. Maybe Dan Carr can chime in. Calling @dcarr.

I stole this from a random website pertaining to DMPL Morgans:

When new dies were loaded into the coining press, the first few coins to come off the press had the deeply-mirrored fields and frosted devices. As the metal of the coin die made its impression on the planchets, the friction of the metal of the coin die being pressed into the metal of the planchet would start to deteriorate the mirror-like surface of the die. The next twenty to thirty coins would have a semi-mirrored surface in the field. These are known as Proof-Like or PL. Eventually, the mirror-like qualities of the die would be worn away.

.
There is some Morgan information stating that PL Morgans could be produced for at least a couple/few hundred coins from a fresh die. Also that new bags were found with 200 - 300 PL's in them. However, also states that it depends on the amount of polishing / basining of the dies. A die could be 'highly polished' and produce strong DMPL's and then PL's. But it could also have been less 'highly polished' to where it barely produced a DMPL and thus fewer of them. Then a Morgan die might not have been polished enough to produce a PL. It was not fully consistent. Then some dies get polished after some use and if sufficiently polished could produce PL's again on a worn die. Also states Peace dollars had a different system and partly due to the form of the die itself and therefore either not polished or not so much. How other series were or were not polished I don't know. I would also assume the planchet material and strike pressure would factor in to how long a die could potentially produce a PL.

lilolme

@DisneyFan said:
I understand the explanations.

@ironmanl63 said:
Here are 2 PL Barbers I tried to have certified as such. PCGS did not agree.

I guess what I am trying to understand is why seemingly "prooflike" coins are not graded prooflike as seen with the above two examples. Are graders expecting to be coins 75% prooflike or is it !00%? Similar to copper coins being graded Red, Red/Brown, & Brown. Bowers in his Guide Book of Commemorative Coins states many of the gold commemoratives are prooflike and partial prooflike.

I am not sure exactly what you are asking about with the 75% to 100%. But in theory the entire field surface of the coin should have the PL (or also DMPL for Morgans) reflectivity requirement met. Reflectivity is stated as at least 2" for PL.

Rexford

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

Prooflike as a designation is a measure of the reflectivity of the fields on a business strike coin. The two Barbers posted above, while frosty and lustrous, do not merit the designation because they exhibit cartwheel luster rather than the watery/mirrorlike luster required.

lilolme

The PL designation can have noticeable luster and/or cartwheel in the fields. Below are a couple from coinfacts. The DMPL will have less and some none or nearly so. This is some wording from the pcgs book for PL:

"A slight amount of cartwheel luster may be evident, but this must not impede the clarity of reflection. If the cartwheel effect or the striations cause an area to lose clarity, then the designation of PL will not apply."

These are PL's in coinfacts. Photos can enhance or reduce carthwheel depending on how the photo is taken. I am taking some with more cartwheel showing and of course there are many with less.

.

.

MFeld

@DisneyFan said:
I understand the explanations.

@ironmanl63 said:
Here are 2 PL Barbers I tried to have certified as such. PCGS did not agree.

I guess what I am trying to understand is why seemingly "prooflike" coins are not graded prooflike as seen with the above two examples. Are graders expecting to be coins 75% prooflike or is it !00%? Similar to copper coins being graded Red, Red/Brown, & Brown. Bowers in his Guide Book of Commemorative Coins states many of the gold commemoratives are prooflike and partial prooflike.

I’ve seen a number of Barber coins of each denomination that exhibited fully PL surfaces. With no disrespect to the two coins above, I can’t tell (and won’t assume) from the images that they’re fully PL and deserving of the “PL” designation.

jmlanzaf

@FlyingAl said:
Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

Prooflike coins are coins struck with dies in a regular production press with dies that happened to be slightly polished in the normal die production process. No extra care was taken to polish the dies before use in most cases, so it was completely accidental. Planchets are normal and no care is taken to preserve the coins post strike.

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s around where the mint could produce DCAM coins consistently). The dies are highly polished and the planchets are specially prepared. Special care is taken in handling and packaging the proofs.

Prooflikes can exist for any coin, so long as the conditions are right. The TPGS not changing the designation from only dollars to everything earlier caused a bit of confusion.

Could be done isn't the same as actually being done. Roger Burdette would disagree with your assertion. Do you have any references or Mintb documents indicating that Philly did this?

jmlanzaf

@DisneyFan said:
I understand the explanations.

@ironmanl63 said:
Here are 2 PL Barbers I tried to have certified as such. PCGS did not agree.

I guess what I am trying to understand is why seemingly "prooflike" coins are not graded prooflike as seen with the above two examples. Are graders expecting to be coins 75% prooflike or is it !00%? Similar to copper coins being graded Red, Red/Brown, & Brown. Bowers in his Guide Book of Commemorative Coins states many of the gold commemoratives are prooflike and partial prooflike.

100% that's why coins with partial mirrors or partial frost don't get the designation.

Onastone

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

@Sapyx said:
A "proof coin" needs:

• A specially rigged press that slowly and carefully stamps a coin twice, rather than just once.

I was wondering what would happen if a coin was stamped more than twice....would it look even more amazing or is twice is enough? Then I saw FlyingAl say they were struck more than twice before...

@FlyingAl said:

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s

I just think striking more than once would require amazing precision.

And lastly, I can't help but think of that age old expression....The Proof is in the pudding. Oh yeah, Australia did that in 2006.

ricko

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

The designation PL has created considerable controversy since the application was formalized. I have used the official PCGS definition since it was issued. I do see the technical issues - as mentioned above - that discuss manufacturing methods that may produce PL coins in varying degrees. However, I am a big supporter of standards, though, given good study and factual, repetitive results, standards can evolve. Cheers, RickO

Sapyx

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

@Onastone said:
I was wondering what would happen if a coin was stamped more than twice....would it look even more amazing or is twice is enough? Then I saw FlyingAl say they were struck more than twice before...

It's a diminishing returns thing.

Suppose a coin has certain physical characteristics (size, composition, thickness, relief, amount of fine detail and die pressure) so that when it is normally struck, 90% of the fine detail on a die is typically transferred to the coin.
One strikes: 90% details
Two strikes 99% details
Three strikes: 99.9% details

There is a significant improvement between one and two strikes; three does not significantly increase the amount of transferred detail, while four or more would be barely detectable even at extreme magnification.

Now, if adding additional strikes came at zero cost, they probably would keep adding strikes. But there is a cost: not only in machine wear and tear, operator time etc, but in the potential for adding flaws and defects: each additional strike comes with a small but non-zero chance of a slight rotation or misalignment, causing doubling and blurriness that undoes the benefit of additional strikes. A mis-struck proof is much more likely to be detected and destroyed, since
there are multiple human eyes on it specifically looking for such defects and flaws. A mis-struck proof will most likely need to start all over again with a fresh blank - which is additional time and labour required.

Now more-than-twice-struck is certainly possible, if the situation warrants the extra effort and cost: imagine a coin made of relatively hard metal, but with a huge surface area and very high relief. Such a coin would need multiple strikes - four or five - to bring out all the fine details.

TwoSides2aCoin

I think I know 'em when I submit 'em. PCGS thinks not. That's the best way for me to explain what a proof like coin is.

FlyingAl

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:
Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

Prooflike coins are coins struck with dies in a regular production press with dies that happened to be slightly polished in the normal die production process. No extra care was taken to polish the dies before use in most cases, so it was completely accidental. Planchets are normal and no care is taken to preserve the coins post strike.

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s around where the mint could produce DCAM coins consistently). The dies are highly polished and the planchets are specially prepared. Special care is taken in handling and packaging the proofs.

Prooflikes can exist for any coin, so long as the conditions are right. The TPGS not changing the designation from only dollars to everything earlier caused a bit of confusion.

Could be done isn't the same as actually being done. Roger Burdette would disagree with your assertion. Do you have any references or Mintb documents indicating that Philly did this?

Can you clarify what exactly you were referring to?

jmlanzaf

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:
Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

Prooflike coins are coins struck with dies in a regular production press with dies that happened to be slightly polished in the normal die production process. No extra care was taken to polish the dies before use in most cases, so it was completely accidental. Planchets are normal and no care is taken to preserve the coins post strike.

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s around where the mint could produce DCAM coins consistently). The dies are highly polished and the planchets are specially prepared. Special care is taken in handling and packaging the proofs.

Prooflikes can exist for any coin, so long as the conditions are right. The TPGS not changing the designation from only dollars to everything earlier caused a bit of confusion.

Could be done isn't the same as actually being done. Roger Burdette would disagree with your assertion. Do you have any references or Mintb documents indicating that Philly did this?

Can you clarify what exactly you were referring to?

Branch mint proofs.

FlyingAl

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:
Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

Prooflike coins are coins struck with dies in a regular production press with dies that happened to be slightly polished in the normal die production process. No extra care was taken to polish the dies before use in most cases, so it was completely accidental. Planchets are normal and no care is taken to preserve the coins post strike.

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s around where the mint could produce DCAM coins consistently). The dies are highly polished and the planchets are specially prepared. Special care is taken in handling and packaging the proofs.

Prooflikes can exist for any coin, so long as the conditions are right. The TPGS not changing the designation from only dollars to everything earlier caused a bit of confusion.

Could be done isn't the same as actually being done. Roger Burdette would disagree with your assertion. Do you have any references or Mintb documents indicating that Philly did this?

Can you clarify what exactly you were referring to?

Branch mint proofs.

What I posted is what Roger Burdette and I have discussed about them. The only true “branch mint proofs” that bear the same characteristics as the regular proofs were produced at Philadelphia with a medal press.

jmlanzaf

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:
Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

Prooflike coins are coins struck with dies in a regular production press with dies that happened to be slightly polished in the normal die production process. No extra care was taken to polish the dies before use in most cases, so it was completely accidental. Planchets are normal and no care is taken to preserve the coins post strike.

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s around where the mint could produce DCAM coins consistently). The dies are highly polished and the planchets are specially prepared. Special care is taken in handling and packaging the proofs.

Prooflikes can exist for any coin, so long as the conditions are right. The TPGS not changing the designation from only dollars to everything earlier caused a bit of confusion.

Could be done isn't the same as actually being done. Roger Burdette would disagree with your assertion. Do you have any references or Mintb documents indicating that Philly did this?

Can you clarify what exactly you were referring to?

Branch mint proofs.

What I posted is what Roger Burdette and I have discussed about them. The only true “branch mint proofs” that bear the same characteristics as the regular proofs were produced at Philadelphia with a medal press.

Ah... so you're talking about the handful of probable presentation pieces. Gotcha. I miss Roger. He was adamant about the inability of branch Mints to strike true proofs. But I'm also not aware of any evidence of intentional striking in Philly, but that's more Roger's thing.

FlyingAl

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:
Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

Prooflike coins are coins struck with dies in a regular production press with dies that happened to be slightly polished in the normal die production process. No extra care was taken to polish the dies before use in most cases, so it was completely accidental. Planchets are normal and no care is taken to preserve the coins post strike.

Proof coins are struck with a medal press once (this changes to two or more strikes in the 1960s-70s around where the mint could produce DCAM coins consistently). The dies are highly polished and the planchets are specially prepared. Special care is taken in handling and packaging the proofs.

Prooflikes can exist for any coin, so long as the conditions are right. The TPGS not changing the designation from only dollars to everything earlier caused a bit of confusion.

Could be done isn't the same as actually being done. Roger Burdette would disagree with your assertion. Do you have any references or Mintb documents indicating that Philly did this?

Can you clarify what exactly you were referring to?

Branch mint proofs.

What I posted is what Roger Burdette and I have discussed about them. The only true “branch mint proofs” that bear the same characteristics as the regular proofs were produced at Philadelphia with a medal press.

Ah... so you're talking about the handful of probable presentation pieces. Gotcha. I miss Roger. He was adamant about the inability of branch Mints to strike true proofs. But I'm also not aware of any evidence of intentional striking in Philly, but that's more Roger's thing.

Seems like we're on the same page. I haven't talked to him much on the topic, I'll have to ask some more questions over at NGC's forums. I would agree with Roger that the branch mints didn't have the capability to strike true proofs, but they may have tried. They'll just look different from true proofs under close inspection.

Floridafacelifter

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@FlyingAl said:
Branch mint proofs do exist - they are coins struck with a medal press at Philadelphia with mint marked dies. This could be done to test the dies or something else, but this is how it was done.

It’s been a while since I reviewed the topic but is it known with certainty where the 1838-O CBH were struck?

lilolme

@Floridafacelifter said:
It’s been a while since I reviewed the topic but is it known with certainty where the 1838-O CBH were struck?

I did not know about this one. While this is an older auction (2014) it appears to cover the subject fairly well. Anything new since 2014 or opinions / information left out? I do not know but a decent read I thought.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-reeded-edge-half-dollars/1838-o-50c-pr64-ngc-cac-gr-1-r7/a/1201-5249.s?hdnJumpToLot=1&x=0&y=0

Floridafacelifter

@lilolme said:

@Floridafacelifter said:
It’s been a while since I reviewed the topic but is it known with certainty where the 1838-O CBH were struck?

I did not know about this one. While this is an older auction (2014) it appears to cover the subject fairly well. Anything new since 2014 or opinions / information left out? I do not know but a decent read I thought.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-reeded-edge-half-dollars/1838-o-50c-pr64-ngc-cac-gr-1-r7/a/1201-5249.s?hdnJumpToLot=1&x=0&y=0

Nice write up- so basically there is still a lot of speculation and they could have been struck in NO and Philly in two different runs- I’ve always found it fascinating and is the first mintmark coin- they were loud and proud with that mintmark!

Type2

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

Yes yes yes no no no yes. I don’t know where is the ask a question link i just wanted to be a part of this chat I say yes they say no, I say no they say yes. 😜

johnny9434

A MS coin that has prooflike surfaces?

a no brainer on the difference. i hope we all get more of them

Dreamcrusher

If someone above mentioned this, my apologies. A prooflike coin can be circulated and lose its prooflike luster. Since (as mentioned) a proof coin describes a method of manufacturing, a proof coin is always a proof, no matter its grade or condition.