<< <i>I would bet my money on this being a BS struck with retired dies. That is also not a lint mark since that would result in a depression as opposed to a raised mark. >>
Here is a your answer for the lint mark
In his own notes, Harry Bass wrote, "Raised lint circle on neck is diagnostic." There are two lint marks on Liberty’s neck, one in front of the curl, and the other behind the curl. Whether Mr. Bass meant "diagnostic" for Proofs or business strikes of this date is not mentioned. For a lintmark to appear raised the lint must have adhered to the master die, not to the working die.
Also if you do a search you will find lots of dealers refer to raised lint marks on proofs. >>
Now the new question is did Philadelphia create separate master dies for proofs? If both BS and Proofs shared the master die then the "lint mark" should show up on the entire series, which it doesn't. Also, if it did appear on the master die then every proof 1883 IHC should have that marker, it looks pretty deep and probably won't get wiped out entirely by striking pressure until late into the production.
The lint mark is made when the die was sunk, so it is a hub-through (not sure if that is the correct term, maybe hub strike-through is more accurate). A quick check doesn't show it as a diagnostic of a Proof die, but that doesn't discount it as not being a Proof. There are many Proofs made this year due to the numerous five cent design changes. If you wanted to get the "No Cents" nickel, you had to buy the cent and three cent coins as well. Then you would have to buy them again when the "With Cents" nickel came out. I bet many of the excess cents and three cents were spent.
The "doubling" is extra outlines and it a design feature, not a variety.
My opinion is that it is likely a proof, but impaired. The flat spot atop the ribbon, the slight wear on the hair curls above the ear, and the lack of discernible mirrors suggests a lightly circulated coin with a details grade of PR55 or PR58. The real question in my mind is whether there is any premium for a PR55 compared to an AU55. I would think there is no difference in price at all, as collectors of proofs generally do not want circulated coins. Good work sleuthing out the lint mark, though.
Got coin today and mirrors are there just under the toning, It does look better in hand but having a hard time imaging it with my new camera. I will have to try later next week. I had a hell of a day at work and I have to take a break and just relax.
Thanks Mike, I'm gonna post a link to all the grades in my order as soon as they show up in shared orders. You know just for the nay sayers, who probably want proof.
Thank you for posting the follow up grade. If I recall correctly, I had not thought this coin was a proof from the first images. Shows you how much I know...
Yeah It took me awhile to send them in, I was hoping to score more raw proofs before making another submission but I think the wells dry right now. At least my hunt has been stale for months.
I too find it interesting how lint marks show up on proofs, I've seen several different dates with lint marks, including this 1870 that has a lint mark on the cheek. However, this one looks more like a strike-thru, whereas the 1883 mark looks raised.
Comments
<< <i>I would bet my money on this being a BS struck with retired dies. That is also not a lint mark since that would result in a depression as opposed to a raised mark. >>
Here is a your answer for the lint mark
In his own notes, Harry Bass wrote, "Raised lint circle on neck is diagnostic." There are two lint marks on Liberty’s neck, one in front of the curl, and the other behind the curl. Whether Mr. Bass meant "diagnostic" for Proofs or business strikes of this date is not mentioned. For a lintmark to appear raised the lint must have adhered to the master die, not to the working die.
Taken from here
Also if you do a search you will find lots of dealers refer to raised lint marks on proofs. >>
Now the new question is did Philadelphia create separate master dies for proofs? If both BS and Proofs shared the master die then the "lint mark" should show up on the entire series, which it doesn't. Also, if it did appear on the master die then every proof 1883 IHC should have that marker, it looks pretty deep and probably won't get wiped out entirely by striking pressure until late into the production.
type2,CCHunter.
The "doubling" is extra outlines and it a design feature, not a variety.
type2,CCHunter.
type2,CCHunter.
type2,CCHunter.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
type2,CCHunter.
The Penny Lady®
type2,CCHunter.
<< <i>Online grade posted for this PR63BN >>
Looks like I was wrong, congrats!!