Options
1909 VDB Proof?
Sam1966
Posts: 9 ✭
I believe this is a proof. The rim is wider and shiney, it sets on the rim all the way around without effort.
0
Sam1966
Posts: 9 ✭
Sam1966
Posts: 9 ✭
Sam1966
Posts: 9 ✭
Sam1966
Posts: 9 ✭
I believe this is a proof. The rim is wider and shiney, it sets on the rim all the way around without effort.
Comments
Without a good picture of both sides of the coin I’m going to say no.
Martin
THIS!
Spend 5 minutes with the 09 VDB proofs (or any other date's MPLs) in CoinFacts. Then come back and tell us why not.
Some things that are very square on proofs are rounded on business strikes. What do you see?
Nope. Designated markers must be exact, not kinda like those documented. Just the reverse rim is enough to say it’s not.
WS
no
In the no camp.
4th pic down sure looks more like rounded rims. Remember only around 420 Minted have survived (?). The Proofs were stuck twice at low pressure to provide better detail so I'm thinking MD would not happen during the proof strikes. ??
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
No
If you want an answer, show the whole coin. Pieces only work after pictures of all of it.
Sorry, here is front and back.
Not a proof 🤓
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
No. Why do you think it’s a proof?
Not a proof. Hope it wasn’t bought as one
Martin
The rim is flat all the way around front and back. Edges drop off sharp and rim is wider than the other 1909 VDB's I have and shinier. I have looked at multiple photos of the proofs and they are not exactly the same, also there are 2 different Die states.
The coin looks nothing like a Proof. And my guess is that if Proofs weren’t (far) more valuable than business strikes, you’d be thinking business strike, rather than Proof.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Rounded rims on the reverse would force a no.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
The little half moon by the M is in the wrong position.
Yours is closer to the rim and closer to the M and is not as bold. Yours is PMD
@sam1966 these guys that are replying to this thread are mostly experts. Trying to convince them that they are wrong about this will get you nowhere.
The inquiry here about, is this a 09 vdb proof happens quite a bit and over 99% of the time it is not the money coin they have hoped and a ill founded debate incurs
Martin
I see your photo, but my question is why this photo which is from the Kevin Flynn 1909 VDB Die Characteristics post is in a different position and has a totally different angle than the one you posted. I am not trying to be sarcastic, just please help me understand, like I was saying before all I have seen are pretty much different and you are saying they all have to be exactly the same? Professional opinions or not I am confused.
If you are asking why the following two photos might appear to show the artifact in a different spot, then it is almost certainly due to the angle of the coin to the camera lens during photography. The red coin appears to be shot by PCGS with a TrueView and this is an almost straight on shot, whereas the brown coin shows substantial amounts of the flat side of the rim in the upper right corner indicating the coin was placed at a strong angle relative to the camera lens. Such change in angle between coin and lens at high magnification or short distance can distort how far away from the rim an item might appear. Regardless, in both of these images the artifact appears to float at just about the height of the lowest portion of the downward vertex of the M.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/vm/dx72a70m66aa.png
https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/50/xitib7h6bs7l.jpg
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Anyway, there is just too much concentration of what seems to be die markers and the whole coin is ignored.
It is easy to look at the whole coin and see it is not a proof
I would have to disagree, the one you posted is way closer to the rim. Like I was saying almost everyone I have seen is different. Also, if you can tell by just looking why do we even need the die characteristics?
With all the photos available in CoinFacts that show the crescent in the same spot, you’re going to pin your argument on this photo. All CF photos are with the coin flat and level with lens. The photo in Flynn’s book shows the coin is tilted which skews the placement of the die chip. Lighting is also a factor as it throws a different shadow than it does with the coin lying flat.
Take some clearer photos of the chip and also in front of the nose. The scratches in front of the nose run along the bridge of the nose to below it and is easily seen. I’m not seeing that with your photo. I see a few lines below, but not parallel with the rest of the nose.
No matter what die state the coin may have have these die scratches and die chip are easily seen.
It’s a no from what I can see.
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
peacockcoins
I just wanted some insight and to understand it. There is a flip side to the quote posted though.
IF WE DON'T WANT TO SEE IT
THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO BELIEVE IT
Those of us who have replied would have likely been perfectly happy to have seen an actual Proof posted by you. I’ve seen numerous instances in which a forum member has posted pictures of a valuable discovery and received confirmation and congratulations from other posters.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You are not confused, you are in denial.
No need to ask questions if you are not going to believe the answers. Just pay to have it graded by PCGS and be done with it.
Is it possible that this is a normal business strike using a proof die? I believe that the mint would sometimes recycle proof dies by using them for regular coin production after striking the yearly run of proof coins.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
@Sam1966 - Have you looked at any pictured from CoinFacts yet? You could go to ha.com and look at a full page of VDB proofs at one swoop.
Want to learn? Study.
Die markers do not indicate how a die was used. Proof strikes are different. Surfaces are different. LOOK! READ!
Seriously. I helped found NGC. I taught grading at ANA. Post a picture of a proof here to compare against and be informed further. No picture? No study? If you won't devote your own time, I won't expend mine either..
@sam1966... Welcome aboard. You are being advised by some of the top professionals in the hobby - free of charge. I would recommend you listen to them. As another avenue, submit it to PCGS, pay for their opinion, and you will find it is the same. Good luck, Cheers, RickO
Here are pics with different lighting. The coin is uncirculated, without damage.
You do realize that the proof Lincolns of that era were issued as MATTE PROOFS, no? Look at the images you just posted. The rims don't look squared-off enough either, as would be expected for a proof. There is one die pair known, and your coin is missing detail in Lincoln's hair and beard. There should be an obverse die marker, running from Lincoln's coat to the R in LIBERTY---I don't see this in your images. Your coin is not a proof.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Die markers serve as a secondary confirmation
For poor counterfeits, the absence of them can highlight just how poor they are.
Even on this small pic, the obverse die scratch and the reverse half moon are visible.
On the larger pics of the coin in question, neither are visible.
The OP seemed to suggest (?) at one point that the die markers could be in slightly different places because online photos seemed to show that.
To restate a point that was already made, the die markers must be in exactly the same place, and any supposed variations in comparison photos from other sources is due to different camera angles.
What has also been mentioned is that proof dies were occassionally used for business strikes after proof production ended.
So...the coin here does not have the necessary die markers. Even if the OP believes it does, then the coin was struck as a business strike from former proof dies.
Either way, this coin is not a proof.
If you can be more correct that multiple experts with a few centuries' worth of experience, why do you need to ask a question here?
You forgot to circle ⭕️ the scratches in front of the nose.
There is also a die scratch on the upper right curve of the B in LIBERTY which is visible in the CoinFact photo.
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
not my circles. just borrowed the pic. good enough to show 2 missing elements
I think the word is Chamfered, right?
Pete
- Bob -
"Central Valley" Roosevelts
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
You sure it wasn't Chameleon time? Why not . If we can have Emerald, we can have Chameleon - LOL!
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
You mind was already made up before you posted and facts don't sway you. Did you come here just to increase post counts be just say "uh-uhh" to everything?
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Uh-uhh