Options
1933 Washington Quarter, Anyone?
epcjimi1
Posts: 3,489 ✭✭✭
From Dan Carr -
0
Comments
If he could mint these with truly 'mint fresh' appeal I'd be all in.
<< <i>My only, ever so slight complaint is these fantasy 'coins' always seem to have a sort of fake sandblasted appearance.
If he could mint these with truly 'mint fresh' appeal I'd be all in. >>
I agree. That's one reason, if I were to ever buy any of these "fantasy" replicas, I'd buy a I "bag-handled" one; they look more real, if that's even possible.
<< <i>My only, ever so slight complaint is these fantasy 'coins' always seem to have a sort of fake sandblasted appearance.
If he could mint these with truly 'mint fresh' appeal I'd be all in. >>
I do like these, but I agree with the comment on the finish. I'd like to see a few different finishes tried.
Later die states will be less matte. And the photo makes the coin look more matte than it really is.
The "1975-D" over-strike Kennedy half dollar has a more-reflective texture, which developed much quicker during striking due to the harder copper-nickel composition of the host coins.
Overall, I think the "1963-D" over-strike Kennedy half dollar has the best look:
I'm probably in the minority, but these fantasy pieces do nothing for me.
I am with you LeeBone. I go a little farther though, I think they are detrimental to the hobby.
<< <i>RE:
I'm probably in the minority, but these fantasy pieces do nothing for me.
I am with you LeeBone. I go a little farther though, I think they are detrimental to the hobby. >>
I didn`t know how far to go but I`m there too
<< <i>
<< <i>RE:
I'm probably in the minority, but these fantasy pieces do nothing for me.
I am with you LeeBone. I go a little farther though, I think they are detrimental to the hobby. >>
I didn`t know how far to go but I`m there too
+4
I don't care for them either. To me it's one step ahead of the Chinese. If an 1888-CC Morgan dollar without the word "COPY" on it is illegal because it never existed as a genuine coin, why isn't a 1933 quarter illegal?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>RE:
I'm probably in the minority, but these fantasy pieces do nothing for me.
I am with you LeeBone. I go a little farther though, I think they are detrimental to the hobby. >>
I didn`t know how far to go but I`m there too
+4
I don't care for them either. To me it's one step ahead of the Chinese. If an 1888-CC Morgan dollar without the word "COPY" on it is illegal because it never existed as a genuine coin, why isn't a 1933 quarter illegal? >>
+5
Total garbage. What is he trying to do? Create a future collectable? I can proudly state that I will never own one. Too bad he can't think of a better use for a coin press.
Wonder how many pages this will invite? Daniel Carr coins are not for everyone. If you don't like them move along. If you like them, enjoy them.
People who don't like them have a right to post also-not just sit here and be silent.
Bob
I really like them. For many, it gives an opportunity to own a flawless example of an "old" coin. Many are very creative as well.
<< <i>Remind me to have DC produce an additional Mona Lisa, because I don't have one, I hear he can get the exact the exact same parchment paper, ink and can copy the artwork to the T, the only difference will be is that she will have a little dandruff in her flowing locks, but who is gonna know?
Lmao!!!
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
<< <i>What's dcarr gna do when the Chinese copy his stuff? >>
They already have! I'm a big fan of his astronaut dollar design which he submitted to the US Mint. It's already been counterfeited and Dan has pics on his website. The great thing about Dan's work is that it's all documented and easily found via Google.
If the Chinese hired Dan, there would be some real trouble, since he can make a coin as good/better than they could back in the old days! So leave him alone. I don't want him to move to China!
<< <i>Now that they are banned from eBay does the secondary market collapse for these coins? I bet its going to have a serious impact on resale value down the road. Where do people go to buy and sell now? >>
I'm starting to think that was based on using the wrong category. eBay still offers over strikes now, as well as when that thread was active.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>
<< <i>Now that they are banned from eBay does the secondary market collapse for these coins? I bet its going to have a serious impact on resale value down the road. Where do people go to buy and sell now? >>
I'm starting to think that was based on using the wrong category. eBay still offers over strikes now, as well as when that thread was active. >>
Negative, they pulled mine and they were in the correct category...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Now that they are banned from eBay does the secondary market collapse for these coins? I bet its going to have a serious impact on resale value down the road. Where do people go to buy and sell now? >>
I'm starting to think that was based on using the wrong category. eBay still offers over strikes now, as well as when that thread was active. >>
Negative, they pulled mine and they were in the correct category... >>
What's special about the over strike auctions that haven't been pulled? There seem to be a bunch of them.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Now that they are banned from eBay does the secondary market collapse for these coins? I bet its going to have a serious impact on resale value down the road. Where do people go to buy and sell now? >>
I'm starting to think that was based on using the wrong category. eBay still offers over strikes now, as well as when that thread was active. >>
Negative, they pulled mine and they were in the correct category... >>
What's special about the over strike auctions that haven't been pulled? There seem to be a bunch of them. >>
Nothings special, it takes somebody reporting them to get them pulled. Some choose to either just relist, or they haven't been reported yet.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>RE:
I'm probably in the minority, but these fantasy pieces do nothing for me.
I am with you LeeBone. I go a little farther though, I think they are detrimental to the hobby. >>
I didn`t know how far to go but I`m there too
+4
I don't care for them either. To me it's one step ahead of the Chinese. If an 1888-CC Morgan dollar without the word "COPY" on it is illegal because it never existed as a genuine coin, why isn't a 1933 quarter illegal? >>
I agree with all you guys and would add I still maintain the counterfeit dies of US designs he produces are his biggest crime. Even if you buy the BS overstrike argument one can not over look the much stronger laws about the production of dies and counterfeiting esp while in possession of surplused gov equipment.
While he has picked over the hobby protection act for his loop hole I am all but certain the stronger language in the counterfeit deterrence act of 1992 might have implications about the manufacturing process that takes the (opportunistic) artist intent out of revelance legally. I have yet to go over the law for a specific correlation to him as it isn't a priority
<< <i>Is the reason the word COPY isn't required to appear on these because there were never actually coins minted for the year in that design? Not sure if this is a good thing for numismatics with many new collectors possibly being targeted for future sales of these coins. >>
There are many people who strongly disagree with that argument. In my opinion they are imitation numismatic items, subject to the provisions of the Hobby Protection Act.
<< <i>My only, ever so slight complaint is these fantasy 'coins' always seem to have a sort of fake sandblasted appearance.
If he could mint these with truly 'mint fresh' appeal I'd be all in. >>
I, for one, appreciate the fact that he DOES NOT have a US Mint finish so that his work can easily be distinguished from authentic coins.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Jeeze, so much vitriol. >>
Yup. The usual suspects are here wringing their hands.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>Remind me to have DC produce an additional Mona Lisa, because I don't have one, I hear he can get the exact the exact same parchment paper, ink and can copy the artwork to the T, the only difference will be is that she will have a little dandruff in her flowing locks, but who is gonna know?
That's funny.
But I don't think it is an applicable comparison to the coins.
The "1933" is quite a bit more obvious than a speck of dandruff.
A better comparison mignt be a Mona Lisa with a totally different background.
<< <i>these coins to me are like Lithographs/reprints/posters of original works and thusly should be marked. The work is very nice but could and probably will cause confusion in the future. >>
They are marked with a fantasy date which is very noticeable and should aid in avoiding confusion.
<< <i>
<< <i>Remind me to have DC produce an additional Mona Lisa, because I don't have one, I hear he can get the exact the exact same parchment paper, ink and can copy the artwork to the T, the only difference will be is that she will have a little dandruff in her flowing locks, but who is gonna know?
That's funny.
But I don't think it is an applicable comparison to the coins.
The "1933" is quite a bit more obvious than a speck of dandruff.
A better comparison mignt be a Mona Lisa with a totally different background. >>
A Google search for mona lisa shows quite a few unmarked of variations....
<< <i>I don't care for them either. To me it's one step ahead of the Chinese. If an 1888-CC Morgan dollar without the word "COPY" on it is illegal because it never existed as a genuine coin, why isn't a 1933 quarter illegal? >>
Genuine original 1888 Morgan Dollars exist, although not with a "CC". I believe there is a Chinese fake "1886-CC" which didn't originally exist either.
No "1933" quarters (of any mint mark) were originally made. The "1933" Washington quarters are over-struck on legal-tender silver quarters, and are offered with full disclosure as to their origin.
The Chinese fakes are not struck on legal tender coins, so they are currency counterfeits. And they are usually sold in such a way to allow the buyer to assume they are genuine originals. They are also relatively poor quality and usually contain little if any silver. If sold or spent at face value, the maker would still net a profit.
<< <i>I agree with all you guys and would add I still maintain the counterfeit dies of US designs he produces are his biggest crime. Even if you buy the BS overstrike argument one can not over look the much stronger laws about the production of dies and counterfeiting esp while in possession of surplused gov equipment. >>
Molds and dies in the likeness of US coins are necessary to make the numismatic replicas that are allowed under the Hobby Protection Act.
<< <i>While he has picked over the hobby protection act for his loop hole I am all but certain the stronger language in the counterfeit deterrence act of 1992 might have implications about the manufacturing process that takes the (opportunistic) artist intent out of revelance legally. I have yet to go over the law for a specific correlation to him as it isn't a priority >>
From what I can tell, the "Counterfeit Deterrence Act of 1992" relates to the overseas forgery of US securities and obligations (currency, bonds, and other paper and electronic instruments). I have not found any mention of coins in it.
link
<< <i>Wonder how many pages this will invite? Daniel Carr coins are not for everyone. If you don't like them move along. If you like them, enjoy them. >>
To me this encourages counterfeiting, and effects all of us. When something can have an adverse affect upon the hobby, we the the right to speak out against it.
<< <i>
<< <i>these coins to me are like Lithographs/reprints/posters of original works and thusly should be marked. The work is very nice but could and probably will cause confusion in the future. >>
They are marked with a fantasy date which is very noticeable and should aid in avoiding confusion. >>
YOU know that the 1933 quarter was never minted by the U.S. Government, but the vast majority of the U.S. population does not know that. The opportunity for crooked dealings had been created here, and there should be legislation to put at stop to it.
<< <i>
<< <i>Wonder how many pages this will invite? Daniel Carr coins are not for everyone. If you don't like them move along. If you like them, enjoy them. >>
To me this encourages counterfeiting, and effects all of us. When something can have an adverse affect upon the hobby, we the the right to speak out against it. >>
Could you show us a pic of a genuine 1933 quarter? If he is making a counterfeit there must be a real one somewhere. Right? Otherwise, this is a fantasy coin rather than a counterfeit. Anyone see the movie "Groundhog Day"?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
YOU know that the 1933 quarter was never minted by the U.S. Government, but the vast majority of the U.S. population does not know that. The opportunity for crooked dealings had been created here, and there should be legislation to put at stop to it. >>
The vast majority of the population couldn't care less about a 1933 quarter, nor do they want to.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>these coins to me are like Lithographs/reprints/posters of original works and thusly should be marked. The work is very nice but could and probably will cause confusion in the future. >>
They are marked with a fantasy date which is very noticeable and should aid in avoiding confusion. >>
YOU know that the 1933 quarter was never minted by the U.S. Government, but the vast majority of the U.S. population does not know that. The opportunity for crooked dealings had been created here, and there should be legislation to put at stop to it. >>
The vast majority of the U.S. population thinks it's worth 25 cents. There are plenty of opportunities for crooked dealings with genuine coins such as whizzed coins being sold as uncirculated, added mintmarks, polished coins being sold as proofs, etc. You just can't protect stupid people from themselves.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>YOU know that the 1933 quarter was never minted by the U.S. Government, but the vast majority of the U.S. population does not know that. The opportunity for crooked dealings had been created here, and there should be legislation to put at stop to it. >>
I'd guess fewer than 1% of the population knows there were no quarters minted in 1933. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if significant percent of coin collectors thought quarters were minted in 1933.
But I have to admit, I do find the dcarr pieces fascinating.