Technical and/or artistic error in 1982 George Washington commemorative half dollar?

Dentuck

Take a look at the Proof format of the 1982 Washington commem half.

The small sliver of field between Washington's right arm and the waist of his
coat --- shouldn't that be mirrored, instead of frosted?

What you're seeing is the field behind Washington; it's not part of his figure.
Like the rest of the coin's fields, it should be mirrored.

coinsarefun

<< <i>Take a look at the Proof format of the 1982 Washington commem half.

The small sliver of field between Washington's right arm and the waist of his
coat --- shouldn't that be mirrored, instead of frosted?

What you're seeing is the field behind Washington; it's not part of his figure.
Like the rest of the coin's fields, it should be mirrored. >>






Never paid attention before, but I think you are right as it is the field not part of the devises.
It could be either it didn't look good with a slice of frost missing or it may have been cost of strike?
Just a wild guess.


Not the best image but going to have Trueviews next week.



Ont the other hand after posting I do see a sliver of field and appears the frost is his jacket.

MsMorrisine

variety similar to the frosted freedom?

MsMorrisine

newb question and it's such a small sliver:

is it haze vs. frost?

Overdate

Could be Washington at Valley Forge with some frost in the air.

Dentuck

I'm fairly sure it's a thin layer of frost.

Dentuck

A concerned letter should be written --- but I don't know to whom?

Coin World? Numismatic News? The Numismatist

Dare I even think it --- the United States Mint itself?!

coinsarefun

<< <i>A concerned letter should be written --- but I don't know to whom?

Coin World? Numismatic News? The Numismatist

Dare I even think it --- the United States Mint itself?! >>






Yes to all of them.......then the value of mine will go up

Forget the mint, the will want them back

Dentuck

Think of all the frosting that was wasted. . . . and the thousands of extra
man/hours it took to frost those tiny slivers of field with a delicate
camel-hair brush.

Kaline6

If we're looking at the same thing, I believe it's meant to be the back of Washington's coat, not the field.

tahoe98

<< <i>A concerned letter should be written --- but I don't know to whom?

Coin World? Numismatic News? The Numismatist

Dare I even think it --- the United States Mint itself?! >>



...absolutely all of them minus the mint!

Baley

<< <i>If we're looking at the same thing, I believe it's meant to be the back of Washington's coat, not the field. >>



Agreed. I think that area would look odd if it were mirrored.

LanceNewmanOCC

<< <i>If we're looking at the same thing, I believe it's meant to be the back of Washington's coat, not the field. >>


+1
.

ricko

I vote coat....not field....Cheers, RickO

Cocoinut

I'm sure it's part of Washington's coat. No big deal.

Jim

Constantine

Looks like part of his coat not field.

CaptHenway

<< <i>Take a look at the Proof format of the 1982 Washington commem half.

The small sliver of field between Washington's right arm and the waist of his
coat --- shouldn't that be mirrored, instead of frosted?

What you're seeing is the field behind Washington; it's not part of his figure.
Like the rest of the coin's fields, it should be mirrored. >>



I think you are right. That is not part of his coat. It should be mirrored.

TD