Old Proof Question

Cladiator

What causes all the hairlines on the old proof coins? I don't mean early 20th century proofs. I'm talking about 19th century proofs. I've seen many, if not most, are hairlined but this has not stopped them from being slabbed. That fact leads me to believe the hairlines are not from cleaning. Are the hairlines from die polishing?

pheh

Die striations certainly get called hairlines from time to time. I've even seen coins with die striations get called cleaned by one of the two top TPGs.

MrHalfDime

Are these 'hairlines' incuse or in relief?

Cladiator

<< <i>Are these 'hairlines' incuse or in relief? >>

Good question, I don't rightly know. Pretty much all the looking I've done has been looking at photos online.

Cladiator

Here's one. It's NGC PF63 and you can clearly see the lines. It doesn't look like the lines go into the details of the coins, only in the fields. That makes me think it must be die polishing lines. But then I think how these proofs back then were made in pretty limited numbers and were relatively special. I'd think the guys at the mint would take more caution in die preperation as to not impart harsh polish lines to the finished coins. Maybe I'm wrong in that assumption.

MrHalfDime

The coin you pictured is a good example of why I asked whether the 'hairlines' were incuse or in relief. Of course, in a two-dimensional image it is impossible to tell. However, your observation that the lines appear to be in the fields only, and abruptly end at the devices, letters, stars, etc., would indicate that the lines you see are in relief, and are die polishing lines, as you suggested. I have seen this phenomenon many times on Liberty Seated proof half dimes. I agree that it would seem logical that the die shop would be a little more careful in preparation of proof dies, but this is often not the case.

I wonder if perhaps this die polishing occured after the proof issues were struck, and what we are seeing is a business strike produced from proof dies, as was often the case.

lordmarcovan

Cabinet friction, for the most part, I would reckon. And wipe marks from oldtimey collectors giving 'em a rub with their hankies.

Dog97

From storage & handling over the last 100+ years. Proof surfaces are very delicate and easily damaged by the customery storage in drawers & wrapped in tissue paper. The didn't have 2x2, air tites, and albums back in the goodle days.
Since this was standard practice, it's not considered damage though it does hurt the grade, similiar to ticks on MS coins.
Most of what you're seeing is not die polish.

MrHalfDime

If what we are seeing is hairlines from cabinet friction or wiping, the lines would appear on the points of highest relief on the coin, on the devices. But what we are seeing on this coin, and many like it, are lines only in the fields (the point of highest relief on the die), indicating that it is die polishing.

PerryHall

<< <i> wipe marks from oldtimey collectors giving 'em a rub with their hankies. >>



That would also be my guess.

MrHalfDime

Of course if we had the subject coin in hand we would be able to make an instant determination, by observing if the 'hairlines' are in relief (die polishing) or incuse (rub, wiping, cabinet friction, etc.). If we assume that the lines that we see on the pictured 1873 are the result of wiping or cabinet friction, how was the person who applied the wipe able to keep all of the lines entirely in the field, and not allow even one of the wiping lines to carry up onto the devices?

Cladiator

Hm, interesting stuff here guys.

I'm leaning towards Mr.HD's point of view on this one.

So someone needs to buy this coin so we can find out for sure what's going on. Somebody send me $525, I'll buy it and report back

GoldenEyeNumismatics

Scattered hairlines usually don't indicate cleaning. They can happen simply from casual handling.

robec

Here is one I used to own, graded PF62 by NGC

Cladiator

Robec, thank you for posting that photo. It's exactly what I'm talking about. Loads of lines in the fields but none on the devices.

MORGANHUNTER2

<< <i>Here is one I used to own, graded PF62 by NGC

>>



Seems to me that there are a few hairlines in this coin, looking at the dress, and if my guess is taken seriously- the mint could have used a very fine wire brush on the dies to clear it from grease or crud build up, not thinking this would impair the die during minting.

It is a thought only.

pennyannie

I think a lot of the older proofs have been cleaned but the graders cut them some slack. IMO that is why you see pf 60, 61 and 62's. Not sure where they draw the line on them. As the grades move up you do not see many lines at all.

MikeInFL

Hairlines are caused by cleaning and/or mishandling. However, I agree with Mr. Half Dime that the seated (dime?) pictured here is die polish not hairlines. All IMHO...MIke

robec

<< <i>Hairlines are caused by cleaning and/or mishandling. However, I agree with Mr. Half Dime that the seated (dime?) pictured here is die polish not hairlines. All IMHO...MIke >>



Sorry, it's a Half dollar. I should have posted it, but it wasn't covered with hairlines like the obverse.

Cladiator

I think Mike was talking about the coin I posted before you posted that half dollar. The first coin is a half dime.

JRocco

The highly reflective fields are so much more prone to showing a light rub whether by a flip/slide or finger.
Try this on a modern (no I did not say cr@p) proof coin. Take it out of its protective holder and ever so slightly rub your thumb across the coin. You will see immediate damage to the fields yet the devices will not show a thing.
This is a general statement and may not apply to the seated coin in question. They may well be die lines that you need the coin in hand to say for sure.

Dog97

All you guys make valid points but the sure fire way to tell is check if the lines go all the way to the devices (die polish) or stop just short of the devices (hairlines)

MikeInFL

<< <i>I think Mike was talking about the coin I posted before you posted that half dollar. The first coin is a half dime. >>



You were right (and I was wrong!)....Mike

p.s. that half dollar sure is nice too -- thanks for posting the reverse, Robec!

MikeInFL

p.s. While looking at the way they "disappear" around the devices is a good way to tell the difference between cleaning and harilines, the best way I've found to be sure is to look at them under extreme magnification and a low-angle light (i.e. a light held at perhaps 10 degrees to the plane of the coin). You will be able to tell by the areas that are lit (and dark) wether they are incuse (i.e. scratches) or raised (i.e. die polish) -- because sometimes die polish only left in the fields can look like hairlines (and visa versa).