@BillJones , I can see what you're saying about the potential that they were simply unable to prepare a die in any manner other than to have it be cameo from the start. My understanding would follow that the master hub (raised image) would include a detailed carving of the design which was etched by hand (?) and then used to create a die (impressed image) that would receive the hand-etched frost from the master hub, the die would in turn lose that frost after a few dozen strikes.
@RogerB 's contention that contrast was never reapplied to the dies after initially worn away doesn't jive very well with my experience of some of the heaviest contrast I've seen on modern era proofs (1950 and following) were from dies that had clearly been reworked. For example, this 1953 Franklin (click on image to see max image) that includes an extreme amount of polish to the devices, to such an extent that the cameo contrast is significant. I have a hard time believing that this level of frost came simply as a byproduct of cleaning the dies with a wire brush, and was not intentionally applied.
I believe I've read in multiple places (likely Webb or Tomaska's books and/or David Lange's Red Book on proofs) that there was a "pickling" process for the dies to create the contrasted appearance. I'd not contend that their research is more accurate than anything Roger has dug up, but their experiential knowledge would mirror my own (as well as that of @Keets and @SanctionII).
@SanctionII said:
If there was no intention to make proofs with frosted devices, what was the reason for acid treating the dies and then polishing the fields of the dies?
Perhaps it was the quickest and easiest way to get all the crud off the dies before they were put into service.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Working dies were dipped in weak acid to remove any scale left by annealing. It was routine for all dies.
RE: "ModCrewman's" comment - I was referring to the 1936-42 period and earlier 1950s. This was the process used and the conditions of the operations. The large increase in proof coin orders in the 1950s clearly required significant operating changes from those in the per-war period. unfortunately, no one had located meaningful information on these changes.
@elmiracoin said:
You are being haunted by a dipped coin.
I was thinking something similar when I saw it in the flip......
But guessing that some of the slabbed CAM designated examples are also dipped.
I would be shocked if most of them weren't dipped in the past. The original mint packaging can produce unsightly brown toning and haze, which would detract from the eye appeal and obscure the mirrored fields (possibly even precluding a designation). Truly attractive toned examples from this era are scarce and command premiums.
@elmiracoin said:
You are being haunted by a dipped coin.
I was thinking something similar when I saw it in the flip......
But guessing that some of the slabbed CAM designated examples are also dipped.
I would be shocked if most of them weren't dipped in the past. The original mint packaging can produce unsightly brown toning and haze, which would detract from the eye appeal and obscure the mirrored fields (possibly even precluding a designation). Truly attractive toned examples from this era are scarce and command premiums.
I learned that as a dealer. I had a very nice original surface PR-66 Mercury Dime that I couldn't sell. The problem? The still had the haze on it from the orginal mint packaging which made it look duller than it really was. A dealer told me, "That should have been dipped before it was certified," and he was correct. You couldn't sell it at a decent price the way it was.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@keets said:
what was the "original Mint packaging" for 1936-1942 Proof coins??
cello
Yes, cello sleeves that were similar to the ones that were used from 1950 to mid 1954. The examples I have seen were not stapled together. Sometimes the stuff took on a brown color which could imparted to the coins. Many coins also ended up with a cloudy haze. The haze can be dipped off the silver pieces, including the 1942 war nickel, often with impairing the coins. The haze is a distraction which adds nothing to the beauty of the coins.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
I believe those coins in cello are repackaged, sort of like the occasional early 1950's set that comes in polybags. I may be wrong, but I haven't seen evidence that the Mint shipped coins out in cello pouches during the 1936-1942 timeframe.
@keets said:
I believe those coins in cello are repackaged, sort of like the occasional early 1950's set that comes in polybags. I may be wrong, but I haven't seen evidence that the Mint shipped coins out in cello pouches during the 1936-1942 timeframe.
Was cello even around then? I know they had a crude form of it created in the early 1900s by a guy looking to invent a spill proof tablecloth but that was used primarily in restaurants and butcher shops I believe.
WW2 was the genesis for many of today's modern plastics and the like. I'm guessing the cello bags didn't start showing until the 50's due to it coming from war labs or from further advances made post war.
@keets said:
I believe those coins in cello are repackaged, sort of like the occasional early 1950's set that comes in polybags. I may be wrong, but I haven't seen evidence that the Mint shipped coins out in cello pouches during the 1936-1942 timeframe.
@keets You may remember this thread by @Darth5oh from many years ago (10 years this week actually). This post from that thread is the best evidence to me that the OGP for the early proof sets was indeed cellophane similar to that used in 1950-54. I can't guarantee the accuracy of that, but it's what stands out in my mind causing me to support that contention.
Edit - Also this post with images of a 1937 set. And this post with pictures of a 1939 set and this post with images of a 1940 set and this post with a 1942 set.
Don, understand I'm not trying to be argumentative, but some of the "Darth" pictures look like polybags and most of the rest simply look too "fresh" to be genuine, unless they have been sealed in something and never moved/opened/inspected. it is much like the occasional Proof Set from 1950-1953 that shows up in Polybags.
I may indeed be wrong and these sets came in cello pouches, nothing certain(or close to it) has been presented by anyone yet.
Cellophane was in mass production by DuPont in 1924 and accounted for 10% of DuPont's sales by 1938. See Wikipedia History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellophane
So, it is conceivable that 1936-1942 proof sets could have been encased in cellophane. Hopefully some of the dealers on this forum can recall purchasing 1936-1942 proof sets and their packaging. The ones posted 10 years ago could have been repackaged into cello by the collector or the dealer whom he bought them?
Back in the mid 1970s, I bought a couple of Proof sets at a local New Jersey show. The person from whom I bought them was a very old dealer (in his late '70s or 80s) who had been in the business since the 1930s. He had connections with the Stacks' auction house.
One set was a 1950 in the usual box and stapled together cellophane, and the other was a 1942. All of the 1942 coins were in cellophane sleeves not connected by a staple, and the sleeves were aged to say the least. The sleeves were not in bad shape, but a couple of them had yellowed. It was a five piece set with the war nickel. The coins all had original surfaces with the haze that is often seen on undipped Proof coins of this vintage. My take was that this was an original set at had been together since 1942.
Most all of the people who bought these sets from the mint have passed on. It's hard to get information from original buyers these days. My perception is this was how the coins were packaged from the mint. I'd have to look it up, but I think Dave Bowers who this in his "Whitman Redbook" on Proof sets.
I know that earlier sets were wrapped bare in tissue paper. That's why so many of the original silver coins have the blue toning. The 1936 - '42 silver coins seldom have it. That's why I think that those coins were housed in something more than just tissue paper.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
I was under the impression that proofs of this era could vary in packaging depending on how they were ordered. Some coins were indeed placed within individual cello sleeves. They would have been stapled no?
Might as well post a cello and tissue example. In putting my set together set i remember encountering many 1939's and 1942's with beautiful rim toning and glassy "cello "fields. The 1940 & 1941's seemed to have many more " tissue" paper effect.
mark
Typical cello toning with glass fields.
This is impossible to photo. I can tell you it's dramically tissue papered toned in the coolest array of colors in hand.
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Keep in mind that the cellophane sleeves and boxes were more or less seen as packing materials. It was not uncommon for the coins to be removed from the cellophane sleeves and placed in aftermarket holders (by choice or because of deterioration of the sleeve), which can account for the wide range of toning patterns seen. Since someone asked, my comments are based on a limited number of original sets that I have seen offered for sale including a 1942 original set with the original postmarked shipping box that I almost bought.
Edited: To be clear, I am not suggesting that it is impossible that more than one type of packaging could have been used. I'm only saying that the different toning patterns are not conclusive. I can only comment based on the sets I have seen as I was wasn't alive in the 1930s and 1940s.
@keets said:
Don, understand I'm not trying to be argumentative, but some of the "Darth" pictures look like polybags and most of the rest simply look too "fresh" to be genuine, unless they have been sealed in something and never moved/opened/inspected. it is much like the occasional Proof Set from 1950-1953 that shows up in Polybags.
I may indeed be wrong and these sets came in cello pouches, nothing certain(or close to it) has been presented by anyone yet.
I guess your comment about "too fresh" is really the whole point of the @Darth5oh thread, the collection he was revealing was an extraordinarily fresh set, put away over decades by his grandfather and much of it was in OGP. There are a couple of photos that look like poly bags, but if you look at the rest of those series of images, you can see other photos that show either the fold/crease of the bag, or the crimping of the ends that is IMHO unmistakable as cellophane similar to that used in the early 50's.
the natural next question is --- If the Mint was heat-sealing the individual coins in cello bags during 1936-1942, why did they cease that and regress to using a staple??? that doesn't make sense since everything the Mint did regarding Proof Set production went from a lower order to higher. a staple seems lower tech than a heat-seal.
ok, I hadn't really looked at anything that close. to be honest, I remember that thread but don't think I replied to it or really followed it closely --- an oldie but goodie.
The cello bags were stapled to the order I believe. I thought they were then placed in a evelope or box depending on the size of the order.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
What would this be worth? I want it. They won't sell individual but only as a complete 1939 proof set. Has original box but not original plastic or staples. They ask $1,000. Anyone want to pull a cent, dime, quarter from the set to help defray my expenses? Coins all look nice around 65 or better? Scratches in Pic are on the flip not the half.
Pm me if interested. I don't need the other denominations.
@Aspie_Rocco said:
It's not a cameo like I thought. I got pics but they don't do justice to the frost. Non on the sun.
Comments
@BillJones , I can see what you're saying about the potential that they were simply unable to prepare a die in any manner other than to have it be cameo from the start. My understanding would follow that the master hub (raised image) would include a detailed carving of the design which was etched by hand (?) and then used to create a die (impressed image) that would receive the hand-etched frost from the master hub, the die would in turn lose that frost after a few dozen strikes.
@RogerB 's contention that contrast was never reapplied to the dies after initially worn away doesn't jive very well with my experience of some of the heaviest contrast I've seen on modern era proofs (1950 and following) were from dies that had clearly been reworked. For example, this 1953 Franklin (click on image to see max image) that includes an extreme amount of polish to the devices, to such an extent that the cameo contrast is significant. I have a hard time believing that this level of frost came simply as a byproduct of cleaning the dies with a wire brush, and was not intentionally applied.
I believe I've read in multiple places (likely Webb or Tomaska's books and/or David Lange's Red Book on proofs) that there was a "pickling" process for the dies to create the contrasted appearance. I'd not contend that their research is more accurate than anything Roger has dug up, but their experiential knowledge would mirror my own (as well as that of @Keets and @SanctionII).
I do appreciate the discussion.
Perhaps it was the quickest and easiest way to get all the crud off the dies before they were put into service.
Working dies were dipped in weak acid to remove any scale left by annealing. It was routine for all dies.
RE: "ModCrewman's" comment - I was referring to the 1936-42 period and earlier 1950s. This was the process used and the conditions of the operations. The large increase in proof coin orders in the 1950s clearly required significant operating changes from those in the per-war period. unfortunately, no one had located meaningful information on these changes.
I was thinking something similar when I saw it in the flip......
But guessing that some of the slabbed CAM designated examples are also dipped.
I would be shocked if most of them weren't dipped in the past. The original mint packaging can produce unsightly brown toning and haze, which would detract from the eye appeal and obscure the mirrored fields (possibly even precluding a designation). Truly attractive toned examples from this era are scarce and command premiums.
I learned that as a dealer. I had a very nice original surface PR-66 Mercury Dime that I couldn't sell. The problem? The still had the haze on it from the orginal mint packaging which made it look duller than it really was. A dealer told me, "That should have been dipped before it was certified," and he was correct. You couldn't sell it at a decent price the way it was.
what was the "original Mint packaging" for 1936-1942 Proof coins??
cello
Yes, cello sleeves that were similar to the ones that were used from 1950 to mid 1954. The examples I have seen were not stapled together. Sometimes the stuff took on a brown color which could imparted to the coins. Many coins also ended up with a cloudy haze. The haze can be dipped off the silver pieces, including the 1942 war nickel, often with impairing the coins. The haze is a distraction which adds nothing to the beauty of the coins.
I believe those coins in cello are repackaged, sort of like the occasional early 1950's set that comes in polybags. I may be wrong, but I haven't seen evidence that the Mint shipped coins out in cello pouches during the 1936-1942 timeframe.
Was cello even around then? I know they had a crude form of it created in the early 1900s by a guy looking to invent a spill proof tablecloth but that was used primarily in restaurants and butcher shops I believe.
WW2 was the genesis for many of today's modern plastics and the like. I'm guessing the cello bags didn't start showing until the 50's due to it coming from war labs or from further advances made post war.
@keets You may remember this thread by @Darth5oh from many years ago (10 years this week actually). This post from that thread is the best evidence to me that the OGP for the early proof sets was indeed cellophane similar to that used in 1950-54. I can't guarantee the accuracy of that, but it's what stands out in my mind causing me to support that contention.
Edit - Also this post with images of a 1937 set. And this post with pictures of a 1939 set and this post with images of a 1940 set and this post with a 1942 set.
Man I love that thread.
Don, understand I'm not trying to be argumentative, but some of the "Darth" pictures look like polybags and most of the rest simply look too "fresh" to be genuine, unless they have been sealed in something and never moved/opened/inspected. it is much like the occasional Proof Set from 1950-1953 that shows up in Polybags.
I may indeed be wrong and these sets came in cello pouches, nothing certain(or close to it) has been presented by anyone yet.
Cellophane was in mass production by DuPont in 1924 and accounted for 10% of DuPont's sales by 1938. See Wikipedia History
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellophane
So, it is conceivable that 1936-1942 proof sets could have been encased in cellophane. Hopefully some of the dealers on this forum can recall purchasing 1936-1942 proof sets and their packaging. The ones posted 10 years ago could have been repackaged into cello by the collector or the dealer whom he bought them?
OINK
Back in the mid 1970s, I bought a couple of Proof sets at a local New Jersey show. The person from whom I bought them was a very old dealer (in his late '70s or 80s) who had been in the business since the 1930s. He had connections with the Stacks' auction house.
One set was a 1950 in the usual box and stapled together cellophane, and the other was a 1942. All of the 1942 coins were in cellophane sleeves not connected by a staple, and the sleeves were aged to say the least. The sleeves were not in bad shape, but a couple of them had yellowed. It was a five piece set with the war nickel. The coins all had original surfaces with the haze that is often seen on undipped Proof coins of this vintage. My take was that this was an original set at had been together since 1942.
Most all of the people who bought these sets from the mint have passed on. It's hard to get information from original buyers these days. My perception is this was how the coins were packaged from the mint. I'd have to look it up, but I think Dave Bowers who this in his "Whitman Redbook" on Proof sets.
I know that earlier sets were wrapped bare in tissue paper. That's why so many of the original silver coins have the blue toning. The 1936 - '42 silver coins seldom have it. That's why I think that those coins were housed in something more than just tissue paper.
I was under the impression that proofs of this era could vary in packaging depending on how they were ordered. Some coins were indeed placed within individual cello sleeves. They would have been stapled no?
Might as well post a cello and tissue example. In putting my set together set i remember encountering many 1939's and 1942's with beautiful rim toning and glassy "cello "fields. The 1940 & 1941's seemed to have many more " tissue" paper effect.
mark
Typical cello toning with glass fields.
This is impossible to photo. I can tell you it's dramically tissue papered toned in the coolest array of colors in hand.
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Keep in mind that the cellophane sleeves and boxes were more or less seen as packing materials. It was not uncommon for the coins to be removed from the cellophane sleeves and placed in aftermarket holders (by choice or because of deterioration of the sleeve), which can account for the wide range of toning patterns seen. Since someone asked, my comments are based on a limited number of original sets that I have seen offered for sale including a 1942 original set with the original postmarked shipping box that I almost bought.
Edited: To be clear, I am not suggesting that it is impossible that more than one type of packaging could have been used. I'm only saying that the different toning patterns are not conclusive. I can only comment based on the sets I have seen as I was wasn't alive in the 1930s and 1940s.
I guess your comment about "too fresh" is really the whole point of the @Darth5oh thread, the collection he was revealing was an extraordinarily fresh set, put away over decades by his grandfather and much of it was in OGP. There are a couple of photos that look like poly bags, but if you look at the rest of those series of images, you can see other photos that show either the fold/crease of the bag, or the crimping of the ends that is IMHO unmistakable as cellophane similar to that used in the early 50's.
the natural next question is --- If the Mint was heat-sealing the individual coins in cello bags during 1936-1942, why did they cease that and regress to using a staple??? that doesn't make sense since everything the Mint did regarding Proof Set production went from a lower order to higher. a staple seems lower tech than a heat-seal.
@keets I see the heat seal as being on the bottom of the bag, with the tops open.
ok, I hadn't really looked at anything that close. to be honest, I remember that thread but don't think I replied to it or really followed it closely --- an oldie but goodie.
The cello bags were stapled to the order I believe. I thought they were then placed in a evelope or box depending on the size of the order.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
What would this be worth? I want it. They won't sell individual but only as a complete 1939 proof set. Has original box but not original plastic or staples. They ask $1,000. Anyone want to pull a cent, dime, quarter from the set to help defray my expenses? Coins all look nice around 65 or better? Scratches in Pic are on the flip not the half.
Pm me if interested. I don't need the other denominations.
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=142753
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
It is hard to price without seeing the other coins. I would say probably $850-$950, maybe more if the coins are very nice.