Is this an average 1950 Proof Set?

coinsarefun · June 21, 2008 6:49AM

What is your opinion?
What value do you say it is?

This one is in a capital holder, no box.

I searched on Ebay and I only see a few. I'm going to guess at $550.

Stefanie

STONE · June 21, 2008 6:51AM

My first guess, from the images, is that is a mint set.

The coins really don't look like proofs to me.

bigmansam88 · June 21, 2008 6:52AM

<< <i>My first guess, from the images, is that is a mint set.

The coins really don't look like proofs to me. >>

UtahCoin · June 21, 2008 6:54AM

<< <i>My first guess, from the images, is that is a mint set.

The coins really don't look like proofs to me. >>

My thought too...

But very nicely struck

BlindedByEgo · June 21, 2008 6:56AM

The dime looks nice.

Do you have to make an offer, or is the owner looking for a set price? $550 would be pretty standard retail, IMO.

fivecents · June 21, 2008 6:56AM

Those are proofs...look at the sharp rims and hammered devices.

coinsarefun · June 21, 2008 7:05AM

They are proofs. Its very hard to shoot through the plastic holder.
I'm just trying to update my inventory list with prices.
Not buying or selling.
I have another still in the original box but the cello is starting to affect the coins.
I was thinking to take the other set out and put it in a holder.

I'm going to take better pictures of the set I posted now and re post them.
I'll take them out of the capital holder and post in a few.

Stefanie

ajia · June 21, 2008 7:09AM

Hard to tell through the Capital holder.
Certainly no reflective fields/devices.
If it is a Proof set, just a common set IMO.

coinsarefun · June 21, 2008 7:47AM

Ok, tried a new set of images. Outside the holder.

JustBustDimes · June 21, 2008 7:58AM

They are proofs. In 1950, the mint didn't polish the dies during use like they did in later years. As others have said, look at the strike and the rims.

TomB · June 21, 2008 8:20AM

It is without question a proof set. The coins of 1950 are often found with a more satin feel than the later brilliant issue sets.

ProofArtworkonCircs · June 21, 2008 8:21AM

That quarter reverse is certainly a Type B found only on proof coins until 1956 when a very few started showing up also on circulation strikes.

ksteelheader · June 21, 2008 8:22AM

<< <i>They are proofs. In 1950, the mint didn't polish the dies during use like they did in later years. As others have said, look at the strike and the rims. >>

Indeed. A nice set, too.

streeter · June 21, 2008 8:25AM

The 1950 Pr. Franklin is getting tougher to find raw.

I just saw a set inferior to yours sell at a premium to your valuation.

keets · June 21, 2008 8:41AM

Walter Breen touches on the fact that in 1950 there appear to be two types of finishes on the Proof coins; polished Cameo surfaces and a finish that more closely resembles a Matte finish, weaker mirrors that don't have the depth of later years and look like very well struck circs to a certain degree. apparently it took the Mint some time to perfect the process so the Cameo finish came later in the year. remember, the Mint used the Matte finish until 1916, started 1936 with a soft Satin finish and switched to the polished finish. after the brief hiatus from 1942-1950 i assume the workers had to re-learn the Cameo process with perhaps nobody employed who had done it before.

i have seen coins with both finishes in all denominations. for instance, i purchased a 1950 Proof Set in a Capital Holder back in November of 2007. the Half-Dollar had the softer Mint like Matte finish and graded PR65 at PCGS, the Nickel/Dime/Quarter all are brilliant with a semi-cameo look and the Cent graded PF66CAM at NGC, so there's a bit of everything to be had!!! the Quarter is pictured below, i think it should grade PR67 possibly a point higher, it has absolutely no hairlines whatsoever.

hairlines are the biggest problem with these sets and i always strongly suggest that they be placed in Capital type holders or SaFlips for protection. don't fool yourself into thinking that original is better with these old box sets, carefully remove the coins and save the packaging. also, buying them on eBay or anywhere from a picture is risky at best. discerning the faint hairlines at a shop/show or even your own home is difficult, i can guarantee that you'll never see them in a picture, especially if the seller doesn't want you to see them!!!

as for price, bid/ask is probably about $530/$570 with dealers in my area buying at 10-15% back of bid and selling at anywhere from bid-ask. the 1950-1970 Proof Set arena is an interesting and challenging area to actively collect in. be prepared to look at many, many sets before you buy, but if you're smart you can end up with some nice coins rather cheaply, coins which are prohibitively more scarce than the pundits would have you believe.

this 1950 Jefferson is in a PR67 PCGS first generation holder.

SeaEagleCoins · June 21, 2008 9:04AM

As of the June Grey Sheet... bid price for an average quality (PR63-65) set is $590 and ask is $640...

...so I'd say that $550 is a very fair price...

Raybo · June 21, 2008 12:58PM

<< <i>Walter Breen touches on the fact that in 1950 there appear to be two types of finishes on the Proof coins; polished Cameo surfaces and a finish that more closely resembles a Matte finish, weaker mirrors that don't have the depth of later years and look like very well struck circs to a certain degree. apparently it took the Mint some time to perfect the process so the Cameo finish came later in the year. remember, the Mint used the Matte finish until 1916, started 1936 with a soft Satin finish and switched to the polished finish. after the brief hiatus from 1942-1950 i assume the workers had to re-learn the Cameo process with perhaps nobody employed who had done it before.

i have seen coins with both finishes in all denominations. for instance, i purchased a 1950 Proof Set in a Capital Holder back in November of 2007. the Half-Dollar had the softer Mint like Matte finish and graded PR65 at PCGS, the Nickel/Dime/Quarter all are brilliant with a semi-cameo look and the Cent graded PF66CAM at NGC, so there's a bit of everything to be had!!! the Quarter is pictured below, i think it should grade PR67 possibly a point higher, it has absolutely no hairlines whatsoever.

hairlines are the biggest problem with these sets and i always strongly suggest that they be placed in Capital type holders or SaFlips for protection. don't fool yourself into thinking that original is better with these old box sets, carefully remove the coins and save the packaging. also, buying them on eBay or anywhere from a picture is risky at best. discerning the faint hairlines at a shop/show or even your own home is difficult, i can guarantee that you'll never see them in a picture, especially if the seller doesn't want you to see them!!!

as for price, bid/ask is probably about $530/$570 with dealers in my area buying at 10-15% back of bid and selling at anywhere from bid-ask. the 1950-1970 Proof Set arena is an interesting and challenging area to actively collect in. be prepared to look at many, many sets before you buy, but if you're smart you can end up with some nice coins rather cheaply, coins which are prohibitively more scarce than the pundits would have you believe.

this 1950 Jefferson is in a PR67 PCGS first generation holder.

>>

This is one of the reasons I like these forums.............there is always someone that can shed some major light on all of your questions!

Ray

messydesk · June 21, 2008 1:14PM

Nice proof set. 1950 proof halves are supposed to look almost like business strikes. Pity about the scratch across the bell. I'll say PR64 on the half. I see some PVC coloring on the dime. Since it's been in a Capital holder, I'll assume that's just the coloring. Obverse of the nickel almost looks cameo.

CarlWohlforth · June 21, 2008 1:26PM

Yup, looks like an average PROOF set. Price guess seems reasonable.

coindudeonebay · June 21, 2008 1:35PM

You could actually tell from the first pictures that they were proof. Take a look at the quarter especially, near the date. You don't get mirrors like that from mint set coins. As stated in a previous post, the mint just wasn't up to snuff when making the 50 PS's. The dime was easy to tell in the first pic too, nice frost on the head of Franklin, too bad the mirrors just aren't there.

As far as is this set average? Yea, I'd say average with probably an average plus cent. The cent is usually the problem coin in the 50 PS. Yours is nice and red, that's nice, although in the closeup pix it seems that the coin is starting to spot. Also I'm a bit concerned about the two lines I see on the bell. Are they toning or are they scratches? No matter really, I think that even if they were light scratches, the coin would still grade at 64 which is a pretty average grade for early PS's. So, all in all, a nice set.

mnmcoin · June 21, 2008 2:20PM

For a 1950 set, that set is far from average...especially if there are not hairlines. I have handled about a thousand 1950 sets and would guess that around 40% of the sets had glue spots on the coins...this was actually the biggest problem of the 1950 sets. Typically about 70% of the coins are of a brilliant satin finish. About 15% of the coins have a mirrored non-cameo finish. About 10% have a light to moderate cameo appearance and about 5% have a full cameo or above contrasted appearance.

Values on these types of sets can vary quite a bit. Back when 1950 sets were bid around $300 I bought two sets for pretty big money...one was about $1500 and one was $2000. Needless to say both sets garnished major pop top coins, but even sets that don't have pop top coins in them still bring decent premium. This can range from minimally hairlined coin that have no glue spots to pr66 and above coins.

morris

garsmith · June 21, 2008 2:23PM

they don't appear to be in all that good of condition

sparky64 · June 21, 2008 2:25PM

I am now officially very confused.

Is this an average 1950 Proof Set?

Comments

Leave a Comment