Options
Well that's one way to get "cameo"
mt_msla
Posts: 815 ✭✭✭✭
mt_msla
Posts: 815 ✭✭✭✭
Comments
That is weird tarnish... did you say they are proofs?? Sure do not look like it.... well, could be just the picture angle etc.. Cheers, RickO
Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]
Not really very attractive IMHO; but that's not saying I wouldn't have bought it too just for the novelty of it.
I am a little confused by the close-ups but the full shot shows that the cent is loose in the plastic and may have been resting against the dime (are there any tears to the outside air?).
If the cent spent some years touching the dime then I wonder if that caused the excessive tarnish. There is some kind of chemical or electrolytic or metallurgical process whereby certain metals can be protected and others sacrificed by being in contact with each other. For example, I recall two silver bowls in the Titanic debris field and one was resting on the ocean floor and was as crusty as you might expect, but one was sitting on a piece of the steel hull and was as clean and shiny as the day it sank. It had something to do with the iron pulling away all the reactive processes from the silver. (Sort of like the idea behind Intercept Shield, but that is a chemical thing).
It is all voodoo to me, but there might be a scientific explanation. (Or not).
It does appear that the cellophane was compromised, you can see that in the pics.
I have a bunch of 1964 proof sets, the only coins that toned were the nickels, sort of a purple-bluish hue.
I have a 1961 proof set with a nickel like that. I love it. I haven't seen it in a while - I need to check it out.