Changes in Lincoln Cent Proofs over the past 100 years (COLOR ALERT!)

WingedLiberty1957 · October 26, 2014 3:40AM

Interesting to see how the detail was slowly lost on Proof Lincolns from the early 1900's to the 1950s/60's. Then a somewhat cartoonish redesign was done in 1969. This leads to the sandblasted finish the last few years, devoid of much detail.

How I wish the U.S.Mint would return to the beautifully-artistic and finely-detailed rendition that they were using 100 years ago. This is one case where newer was definitely not better and improved.

Wouldn't it be cool if the U.S.Mint commemorated the 100 year anniversary of the ending of the Matte Proof Lincoln series. By issuing a limited edition (maybe 10,000 coins only, limit 1 per customer) 2016 Matte Proof Lincoln in 100% copper, using that old Matte technique using a retooled die that mimics the razor sharp detail of the 1916 along with the wide razor sharp rims. I bet they could sell those for $500 to $1000 each and would be turning away orders. If they wrapped them in high sulfur tissue paper like they did in the early 1900's, all the better. Bring on those toning colors!

Photos by Phil Arnold (PCGS TrueView)

1915 (PCGS PR66BN)

1941 (PCGS PR64RB)

1951 (PCGS PR67RD)

1955 (PCGS PR66RB)

1961 (PCGS PR67BN)

1966 (PCGS SP66BN) ... not a Proof, but SMS

1972 (PCGS PR68RB)

1989 (PCGS PR68RB)

2004 (PCGS PR69RB)

2013 (PCGS PR68RB)

MilkmanDan · October 26, 2014 3:44AM

This is really visually powerful. Not being a Lincoln cent guy I'd never seen it laid out like this before. You make a strong point and I agree that we've lost the artistic beauty that used to be.

Tookybandit · October 26, 2014 4:01AM

The 1915 is breathtaking!

LanLord · October 26, 2014 4:04AM

2013 is an abomination.
That whole snake skin crap needs to go into the refuse barrel and never see the light of day again.

gummibear · October 26, 2014 4:30AM

<< 2013 is an abomination.
That whole snake skin crap needs to go into the refuse barrel and never see the light of day again. >>

Yes, We went from a small Piece Of Sculpture to a POS!

Richard

Baley · October 26, 2014 4:35AM

All of them after the first are a horror. The last one, the 2013, gawd how I hate that modern pixillated "frost" they're using now.

lostincoins · October 26, 2014 4:46AM

2013 welcome to the year of the laser.

JRocco · October 26, 2014 5:18AM

Awesome thread.
I wish we could pin this to the top for a while.

We went from a somewhat realistic depiction to a barely detectable imprint.
From hair to spaghetti to ????
The overall size of Lincoln's portrait also changed to improve die life.
This is why there will always be a demand for classic coinage.

Bodin · October 26, 2014 5:28AM

Seriously, it wasn't until I scrolled BACKWARDS starting with 2013 then up to the top of the page, that it really hits you. Amazing job, as always.

WingedLiberty1957 · October 26, 2014 6:12AM

1915 upper left ... to 2013 lower right

MarkInDavis · October 26, 2014 6:50AM

<< 2013 is an abomination.
That whole snake skin crap needs to go into the refuse barrel and never see the light of day again. >>

+1

stealer · October 26, 2014 6:55AM

This is seriously awesome. Thank you.

BaronVonBaugh · October 26, 2014 7:26AM

<< 1915 upper left ... to 2013 lower right

>>

Impressive.
If they went back to the design of the matte proofs they would still look like crap unless they drop that snake skin frosting.

lkeigwin · October 26, 2014 9:14AM

Nothing to debate here. The decline is obvious and very sad.

What happened to Lincoln's chin and back of the head on the '55?
Lance.

BustHalfBrian · October 26, 2014 10:17AM

That '55 looks very, very familiar...

keets · October 26, 2014 11:10AM

this typical for most of the Modern series' and though not acceptable it is to be expected when a coin design is used for the length of time these have been. the span of time from 1915 till 1936 means the Master Die for the Proofs had to be remade so it is understandable that it would be different, and the need to strike several million instead of several thousand excuses the lack of detail to facilitate production. IMHO it is a case wanting to have your cake and eat it, too. cost is always a component at the Mint, as is time.

the solution is simple, change designs more frequently and rid our commerce of the Cent.

lasvegasteddy · October 26, 2014 12:04PM

i thought 1916 was the epiphany year in high relief designs until i saw stewart blays 1919 business strike

this isn't confined to proofs at all nor denominations by any means

seems like a form of pride went out the window and the mints reputation with it
now they produce limited "high relief" work just to show they can

great thread though paulness...amazing examples as always too

one thing is different
there was a time...one really had to study die diagnostics to tell a proof from a business strike
today
some business strikes out do whats offered as proof

WildIdea · October 26, 2014 12:57PM

Very nice presentation Winged

One can see the same sort of erosion of quality when looking at architecture, furniture, firearms, etc and when there is an advancement in technology, there is still a lack of styling and detail.

Early date Lincoln's are part of the Art Nouveau movement. The craftsmen of that period were talented in a way that the world will probably never see again.

Kaline6 · October 26, 2014 1:18PM

<< Very nice presentation Winged

One can see the same sort of erosion of quality when looking at architecture, furniture, firearms, etc and when there is an advancement in technology, there is still a lack of styling and detail.

Early date Lincoln's are part of the Art Nouveau movement. The craftsmen of that period were talented in a way that the world will probably never see again. >>

I would disagree not with the gist but with the specifics of that; the matte proof Lincolns, as well as the entire coinage renaissance prompted by Theodore Roosevelt, were a direct offshoot of the American Arts & Crafts movement. The rustic nature of the fields and the honesty of the portrait link directly to Gustav Stickley, William Grueby, Arthur Wesley Dow, and the American A&C movement, not to Majorelle or Bugatti or Galle. I do however agree about the quality of craftsmanship, which really hit a high point in many fields just before WWI.

Thanks to the OP for a fantastic thread, the best in my memory.

Text

steveben · October 26, 2014 4:50PM

it's like a visual metaphor for the decline of the dollar. awesome thread. the 1915 is an amazing piece of art.

amwldcoin · October 26, 2014 9:47PM

Is the 66 a typo? Is it an SMS. Didn't know there were any proofs.

Very nice layout!

OldEastside · October 27, 2014 12:31AM

<< it's like a visual metaphor for the decline of the dollar. awesome thread. the 1915 is an amazing piece of art. >>

I Agree, and might add, a decline in a lot of things this Country once stood for, AS can be seen by Mr. Lincoln tears
in quite a few of the later pieces shown here.

Steve

nwcoast · October 27, 2014 12:41AM

Great thread and thank you for putting this together.
Yes, "a picture is indeed worth a thousand words"!
Your point is very well made..
With a pretty sad overall conclusion IMO.
That 15 is one insanely gorgeous coin though!

WildIdea · October 27, 2014 1:54AM

<< 

<< Very nice presentation Winged

One can see the same sort of erosion of quality when looking at architecture, furniture, firearms, etc and when there is an advancement in technology, there is still a lack of styling and detail.

Early date Lincoln's are part of the Art Nouveau movement. The craftsmen of that period were talented in a way that the world will probably never see again. >>

I would disagree not with the gist but with the specifics of that; the matte proof Lincolns, as well as the entire coinage renaissance prompted by Theodore Roosevelt, were a direct offshoot of the American Arts & Crafts movement. The rustic nature of the fields and the honesty of the portrait link directly to Gustav Stickley, William Grueby, Arthur Wesley Dow, and the American A&C movement, not to Majorelle or Bugatti or Galle. I do however agree about the quality of craftsmanship, which really hit a high point in many fields just before WWI.

Thanks to the OP for a fantastic thread, the best in my memory.

I typically see the American arts and crafts movement and the American masters as being inspired by the European masters, maybe perfecting or polishing it to our tastes here, but not the creators of it. Not taking any credit away from the artist you mentioned, I'm glad they produced their bodies of work as I'm a fan. I don't see the Europeans as taking art cues from us at that point in history. The reverse lettering on the wheatie screams nouveau to me.
I could be wrong, I haven't studied it at the collage level, just an observation

Text >>

WaterSport · October 27, 2014 5:15AM

Send this photo spread to the mint director....

WS

Changes in Lincoln Cent Proofs over the past 100 years (COLOR ALERT!)

Comments

Leave a Comment