Strike through or die dressing?
Creg
Posts: 524 ✭✭✭✭
I posted this quarter thinking… oh well, just look at that thread if you wish.
Members suggested that the marks were strikes through.
I thought that they were marks left from dressing the die.
Thanks—Craig
1
Comments
Strike thru. Curious, what would cause this dressing the die?
Struck-thru error
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
So that's what the grease is for...
When a die is dressed, there is a compound used that when not cleaned off of the die, will leave a Struck Through. So you could say it is a Struck Through caused by die dressing/ polishing.
Oyster dressing with cranberries.
Maybe the cow sneezed.
I guess you could if "dressing the die" can mean anything someone does to it. I am curious because I don't buy your answer UNLESS some die setter put a dirty "just dressed" die into the press. I should rather think it either happened during the press run or some debris got on the die when it was wiped with a dirty cloth. Just a little thought from someone who was not there when the cranberries happened.
Now that angle I had not thought of.
Normally, anything abrasive done to a die would result in raised artifacts of the treatment. But if we're talking about residue from the treatment process then I suppose that could be the source of the struck-through.
But, if we're going to speculate about the substance instead of just calling it grease, there is no end to the possibilities.
I don’t know; I imagine that the person cleaning things up left a shallow relief on that spot on the die. I want to know what happens after workers discover a glitch and rectify it.
What I describe is the polished-looking areas on a coin where I have seen clashes, die chips, and die cracks on other coins of the same type.
Here are two more Phillys with the same surface anomality. I am unaware that through strikes could be repeated.
Leaky bucket—
Little polish mark in that spot on another coin. Someone removed it.
In my post in the extra leaf thread I posted a 2004 P Wis. mistakenly thinking that it was a Denver coin.
I assumed that the “shiny part” was the effort to erase a “leaf”.
I see the chips, cracks, and clashes, and I look for the evidence of the removal. I don’t think that they are valuable, it’s curiosity.
The anomalies still look recessed on the coin so these theories don't add up for me.
Scrubbing/grinding/polishing should lower the area in the die, resulting in a raised area on the coin.
I know, I’m having a terrible time trying to reconcile those types of marks.
It would leave a recessed area if the action of dressing addressed a high areas on the die and left enough to cause an impression.
I don’t know if that makes sense though. The fixed leaky bucket is my example.
JB, you’re a prince.
Thanks for the invite—two o'clock okay?
Surely!
This is the best answer. I joked that the strikes through looked like chewing gum. Thank you.
What about the recess on the Homestead leaky bucket?
As well as the goggles, airplane wings, pony legs, eagle beaks, bison snouts, and tricorns where the chips cracks, and clashes used to be.
Why are the repairs recessed areas?
Ike’s coin has the snot shot.
**The anomalies still look recessed on the coin so these theories don't add up for me.
Scrubbing/grinding/polishing should lower the area in the die, resulting in a raised area on the coin.**
This is true but in the case of a struck through by grease or grit, it sits on top of the die resulting in an impression on the coin. This caused by the mint worker not cleaning the die properly after polishing before putting it back in the coining press.
Also you can have more tha one impression as the grease only comes of the die a bit at a time so there can be several struck through impressions before the die is clean.
See in this example how the grease around the C slowly gets smaller with each strike.