Options
Pictures of the 1953 Proof Set I picked up last week
ModCrewman
Posts: 4,028 ✭✭✭✭✭
Picked this set up from my local B&M last week, and took some shots this weekend. They turned out pretty good so thought I'd share them:
Apologies to the Lincoln fans, it appears I didn't get those images uploaded.
Apologies to the Lincoln fans, it appears I didn't get those images uploaded.
0
Comments
Successful BST Transactions!SIconbuster, Meltdown, Mission16, slothman2000, RGjohn, braddick, au58lover, allcoinsrule, commemdude, gerard, lablade, PCcoins, greencopper, kaz, tydye, cucamongacoin, mkman123, SeaEaglecoins, Doh!, AnkurJ, Airplanenut, ArizonaJack, JJM,Tee135,LordMarcovan, Swampboy, piecesofme, Ahrensdad,
Free Trial
WS
Ron
Edited to add:
Please tell us the grades on the coins. They look to be in slabs.
<< <i>I Very nice looking Proof Set. I too own a 53 Proof Set. Not because I collect Proof Sets but my dealer told me it was a beautiful set and I should buy it. The Nickel is beautiful blue tint and I just love it. I hope you enjoy the set and good pick up.
Ron
Edited to add:
Please tell us the grades on the coins. They look to be in slabs. >>
Those aren't actually slabs. They are just the individual coin holders anyone can get. Notice the little foamy circles around the coins?
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
OOPs!
Ron
<< <i>Those aren't actually slabs. They are just the individual coin holders anyone can get. Notice the little foamy circles around the coins?
OOPs!
Ron
All PR70DCAM's from my dining room table slab factory! LOL
Yeah, they're in AirTites, 'cept for the nickel that is in a 2x2, still hoping to upgrade that one.
<< <i>Dippin time! >>
Dippin' time?????
No Way! Don't listen to him. There is no reason to dip that set. And I hope you don't take this wrong, but I think the dime already has been dipped. It has that look to me.
Is the set an original set in the government packaging? Or is it in an aftermarket holder?
If it is in the OGP then it possibly is an original set with five coins that have been together since they were made. If so, it is amazing that an original set would have the nickel (obverse only), the dime (both sides, but the obverse looks weak), quarter (both sides) and half (both sides) to have frosted devices. Does the cent have any frost on the devices?
With respect to whether to dip or not, that is a difficult question to answer.
Originality does have merit and as time goes by there are less and less "original sets" and "original", untampered with, coins. However, just because a coin or set is "original" does not mean that it is attractive and eye appealing. For the pictured coins, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some may like the haze on the coins. Some may not.
I like getting my hands on proof coins and sets that have frosted devices and haze. It is a challenge to look at the coins under good lighting with a loupe to evaluate the haze and what lies underneath.
Some kinds of haze will come off without any detriment to the resulting coin. However, the coin will not make your jaw drop after the haze comes of.
Some coins really need to have the haze come off since a jaw dropper of a coin is located underneath.
Some kinds of haze, if removed, will show an ugly coin underneath. For those coins haze is like make up or a soft lens. It hides flaws and makes a coin look better than it really is (sort of like the before and after makeup photogrpahs of actors and actresses).
Looking at hazed over proof coins presents a challenge. What kind of coin lurks beneath and should the coin be allowed to emerge like a beautiful butterfly from its cocoon? Or should the coin remain shrouded?
For the pictured coins my opinions [which could change if I saw the coins in hand] are:
1. Half - The frost on the devices is all there, smooth, thick and even. The unknown is the fields. Are they hairlined? If so, how many (one or two very small hairlines tucked away adjancent to rim letting on the reverse, or multiple big hairlines traversing the entire coin). The more hairlines present the more reason to leave the haze on the coin. Further how deep, watery and black are the fields? If the fields are deep, watery, and black, that is more reason why the haze should be removed. Is there attractive toning (i.e. multi colored rim toning) covered by the haze? If so, that is another reason to remove the haze (but only if you can do so without removing the toning). Finally, has the haze developed to the point where it has eaten into and damaged the fields of the coin, or has covered damage to the fields that existed prior to the development of the haze? If so, the haze should not be removed.
Just from the picture of the half, I can see possible hairlines in the right obverse fields and above the bell, can see underlying fields that have disturbances in them (flow lines?) which impair the deep, watery blackness of same and can see areas where there may be damage to the fields beneath the haze (around the 53, the right obverse field, around WE, around the right reverse field, around the eagle and around DOLLAR). I would definitely want to look at the coin in hand for a long time before deciding whether or not to remove the haze.
2. Quarter - Same as for the half. However, the fields appear to be very shallow on both sides of the coin. Removal of the haze may very well result in a coin with nicely frosted devices and ho hum fields. In other words a very average, stripped down blast white coin that one would lose interest in quickly.
3. Dime - Same comments as the quarter.
4. Nickel - Moderate frost on the obverse devices looks nice, though it seems to weaken as you go towards the bottom of the bust of Jefferson. Reverse is brilliant. Very little haze on the coin. I would probably leave the coin as is.
The half is the most appealing coin in the set. It could possibly be a jaw dropper underneath the haze. You are very lucky to have found the set and bought it (especially if you paid bid for it).
Let us know what you are going to do with the coins, particularly the half.
As usual, I think Sanction's analysis is pretty well on-point as to the coins. The cent doesn't have much (if any) frost on it; though I'll admit, identifying the cameo cents is definitely an area I need to work on. I'll need to put the half and quarter under a light and loupe to analyze what's under the haze. It's good advice to weigh what's underneath rather than to just dip away, which I'm inherently slow to do, without consideration of what might lie underneath. Unfortunately, my very limited experience with PCGS grading would indicate that a coin would be unlikely to receive a CAM (or certainly DCAM) designation with haze in the fields such as that exhibited on the half and quarter of this set.
if you hold your focus on this niche of the Hobby for long enough the "challenge" becomes clearer: being able to discern the truth that lies beneath the packaging. being able to pick and choose as this dealer allowed isn't a given very often and the rule tends to be trusting your instincts because the problems are so many. scratched up holders, aged cello packaging that's yellowed and dirty, poor lighting, haze, uncooperative dealers and fellow collectors all work against anyone finding gems. i've actually had a dealer snatch a Proof Set out of my hands while i was looking at it because he felt i was wasting his time. on another occasion i had a nicely toned coin that looked to be a DCAM.......................until i dipped it and the color as well as the "frost" i thought i was seeing dissappeared.
there have been plenty of successes for me and i think that's why i stay at it.