Home U.S. Coin Forum

Question about WLH proof superb gems

I would like to know when considering purchasing a WLH in 67 or better what would be the finest detail on the devices of a WLH that needs to be there that's typically missing dull?
Example the left hand, anything else to consider as far as strike is concerned?
I study the true view images.
Seems the coins vary.
That's not to say the grades are off I'm trying to learn the grading variables.
Looking at the fields are any marks at all considered a deduction or are there any reasons not to deduct. Example a spot that could have been on the planchet. Blep or die substance.
I don't want to just assume that a 67 or 68 exists because of the number. I want to really learn about the coin elements. Especially when spending this kind of money.
Right now I am asking about the 1942 proof I don't know if it varies with different years, that would be good to know too.
Grading is not as simple as a couple of youtube videos and your a pro.
I'm studying and these are some of the questions I've come up with so far.

Comments

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,845 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Watchtower said:
    I would like to know when considering purchasing a WLH in 67 or better what would be the finest detail on the devices of a WLH that needs to be there that's typically missing dull?
    Example the left hand, anything else to consider as far as strike is concerned?
    I study the true view images.
    Seems the coins vary.
    That's not to say the grades are off I'm trying to learn the grading variables.
    Looking at the fields are any marks at all considered a deduction or are there any reasons not to deduct. Example a spot that could have been on the planchet. Blep or die substance.
    I don't want to just assume that a 67 or 68 exists because of the number. I want to really learn about the coin elements. Especially when spending this kind of money.
    Right now I am asking about the 1942 proof I don't know if it varies with different years, that would be good to know too.
    Grading is not as simple as a couple of youtube videos and your a pro.
    I'm studying and these are some of the questions I've come up with so far.

    Have you looked at the PCGS photograph guide? Have you looked at auction photos and TruViews?

  • DeplorableDanDeplorableDan Posts: 2,532 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Why don’t you check out some of @FlyingAl ‘s threads? He specifically studies 36-42 proofs and has posted quite a bit of useful content about them.

  • @ChrisH821
    I see exactly what your talking about. That's a beautiful coin.
    It's examples like this that made me ask the question to begin with.
    Your coin is immaculate but as you mentioned some of those details were softened due to wear on the dies.
    Is this what kept your coin from grading higher?
    I only see a couple of small specs to the left of Y do you think had an affect on the grade?
    When I look at the true view images of other coins I see that some coins look different than others in the same grade.
    Some of them don't look like they belong at the grade level.
    So if it seems like a dumb question that might give some explanation why
    I posted this thread.
    I don't think learning to grade happens overnight. It takes lots of time and effort.
    I won't ever be a pro but I at least want to become a humble capable collector.
    Thanks for being patient with me.

  • @DeplorableDan said:
    Why don’t you check out some of @FlyingAl ‘s threads? He specifically studies 36-42 proofs and has posted quite a bit of useful content about them.

    Thanks Dan I will do that for sure!

  • TomBTomB Posts: 20,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Mid-century proof coinage has its grade determined more by the presence, location and severity of wispy hairlines than by any other single determinant. Strike is rarely an issue with these coins as they had limited production runs and nearly all are available with whatever detail was on the die at the time of striking. Also, for the great majority of folks, a PR65 is essentially the same as a PR66 as a PR67 as long as you are looking at untoned silver. I don't like the idea of buying a wildly toned coin in super-high grade just to get the high grade. The reasons are at least two-fold and include the fact that you should like or love the toning and also because of the toning premium. These coins often get a grade bump for terrific color and then to obtain them you have to pay a premium on top of the assigned grade bump. Therefore, you are pretty much double-taxed for terrific toning.

    If you like an untoned coin, then buy an untoned coin. If you can't tell the difference between a PR65 vs. a PR66 vs. a PR67 then don't worry about it.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

    In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson

    image
  • @FlyingAl
    That is of tremendous help.
    Is that in a book?
    I'd like to get my hands on one with that kind of information.
    I've been looking for the book published by Bruce Fox but the only one I can find is $150 which seems like a price gouge. If it isn't please just tell me.
    Sorry if the questions I ask make me look dumb.
    I'm doing the research. These questions just come up. I mull them over long before I ask. I wish it was just as easy as looking at true view images but as you just pointed out Flying all there are other variables at play.
    I now know more than I knew before thank you guys again for the help.

  • TomBTomB Posts: 20,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I just did a quick look at ebay and there are at least three of the Bruce Fox books listed with the least expensive being $120 or best offer. You may get it for less than $120, but there is also $4 or so shipping and perhaps tax. Interestingly, when you asked about the Fox book about ten-days ago I realized I could not find my old copy so I went to ebay and there were nine listed as low as $45. That is when I ordered a hardcover copy and paid just over $50 with shipping and tax.

    If you are interested in the series, the incremental extra cost would not be a deal breaker, in my opinion.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

    In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson

    image
  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 2,845 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 18, 2023 1:43PM

    @Watchtower said:
    @FlyingAl
    That is of tremendous help.
    Is that in a book?
    I'd like to get my hands on one with that kind of information.
    I've been looking for the book published by Bruce Fox but the only one I can find is $150 which seems like a price gouge. If it isn't please just tell me.
    Sorry if the questions I ask make me look dumb.
    I'm doing the research. These questions just come up. I mull them over long before I ask. I wish it was just as easy as looking at true view images but as you just pointed out Flying all there are other variables at play.
    I now know more than I knew before thank you guys again for the help.

    This is my original research, which is available for free. You just have to go to this link at the NGC forums here:
    https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/429771-completed-1936-42-cameo-proofs-die-catalog/#comment-9835511

    There is a lengthy intro to the die study that will explain what the study is much better than I can here. Check it out!

    Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.

  • Good stuff, thank you.

  • @TomB I'll wait for one to come up at the right price. There out there somewhere.

  • gumby1234gumby1234 Posts: 5,425 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Most of the WLH books are for sale in the $120 to $200 range from what I can see, but I found this. You may want to check it out and FAST.

    Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 2,845 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'll add that Roger Burdette's book United States Proof Coins 1936-1942 (Eightieth Anniversary Edition) is the authoritative reference on these proofs. I highly recommend it.

    Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.

  • Thank you

  • ChrisH821ChrisH821 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Watchtower said:
    @ChrisH821
    I see exactly what your talking about. That's a beautiful coin.
    It's examples like this that made me ask the question to begin with.
    Your coin is immaculate but as you mentioned some of those details were softened due to wear on the dies.
    Is this what kept your coin from grading higher?
    I only see a couple of small specs to the left of Y do you think had an affect on the grade?
    When I look at the true view images of other coins I see that some coins look different than others in the same grade.
    Some of them don't look like they belong at the grade level.
    So if it seems like a dumb question that might give some explanation why
    I posted this thread.
    I don't think learning to grade happens overnight. It takes lots of time and effort.
    I won't ever be a pro but I at least want to become a humble capable collector.
    Thanks for being patient with me.

    What kept mine from grading higher are a few very minor scattered hairlines. It's just the nature of these coins but on PR67 you should really have to look for them to find them, a harsh light will usually make them pop out. I took this picture with the specific intent to show them and I had trouble even doing that.

    At PR65 they will be more apparent but still not distracting, PR64 and below is where they will be noticeable and possibly a distraction from the coin.

    Here is the same area on a PR65 with the exact same lighting as above, notice that there are many more hairlines visible

    Collector, occasional seller

  • calgolddivercalgolddiver Posts: 1,396 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @winesteven
    outstanding examples. thanks for sharing.
    @FlyingAl
    thanks for the research share as well.

    Top 25 Type Set 1792 to present

    Top 10 Cal Fractional Type Set

    successful BST with Ankurj, BigAl, Bullsitter, CommemKing, DCW(7), Elmerfusterpuck, Joelewis, Mach1ne, Minuteman810430, Modcrewman, Nankraut, Nederveit2, Philographer(5), Realgator, Silverpop, SurfinxHI, TomB and Yorkshireman(3)

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @FlyingAl... That 1942 WLH is a superb coin... and for me, a special date indeed. I have a few, but none as nice as that one. Cheers, RickO

  • That's the way to roll.
    3 67+'s.
    Nice cameo appearance on that 1942.
    67+ is a tough grade to make. Whoever submitted them must have a good eye.
    Thanks for posting them.

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 5,842 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Proofs are graded differently than business strikes.

    Ultra high proofs need clean fields with very few hairlines. Hairlines are difficult to see with head on photos, but become more obvious at lower grades. This is because they are larger and more frequent. You need magnification, a good light, and view at an angle.

    If you want a proof with a strong strike and complete details, you can usually find one at a lower graded one with many hairlines.

    There are many more high grade proof Franklins, look at pictures of those and see what you can tell.

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 2,845 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ricko said:
    @FlyingAl... That 1942 WLH is a superb coin... and for me, a special date indeed. I have a few, but none as nice as that one. Cheers, RickO

    Rick, I do not own the coin. It is the CAM plate coin from CoinFacts. :smile:

    Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 2,845 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Watchtower said:
    That's the way to roll.
    3 67+'s.
    Nice cameo appearance on that 1942.
    67+ is a tough grade to make. Whoever submitted them must have a good eye.
    Thanks for posting them.

    There are a few truly amazing CAM 1942's that rival the best of the 1938s. Here's an older picture of one (PF66CAM), I believe @cameonut2011 is the owner:

    Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.

  • I have absolutely no doubt that there are.

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited February 19, 2023 5:56PM

    This is as close as I have come to a cameo. I don't think it compares to the one that cameonut2011 owns but it's decent. They are hard to image. If I move it just right I get black fields and white devices no question. I just cannot get a proper image so this is the best I can do.
    I do believe there is some cameo there.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file