Do either of these look like proofs to you?

I think the sixpence looks like a proof and I'm not sure about the shilling. Please help!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

No it's not a proof, just a typically weak business strike. Would have been nice if it was though

 

Drat. I figured. The reverse is pretty nice and has some great luster.

 

no

 

I would say: not proof but brilliant uncirculated.

 

Nope.

 

The 1954 6d is nice, but the obverse is obviously a later die state of a business strike. 1954 proofs are very rare/valuable. Also, the San Francisco mint did not strike proofs of wartime Aussie coinage.

 

The surfaces look "different," but no, doubt those are proofs. Nice coins, though. I have the 1943-S, but minus the rough surface and polish lines.

 

Nothing there tells me that I am looking at "polished dies," which usually is how "proof" coins are made.

 

What's that on the 1943-S, if not, as I said, "polish lines?" That die was worked over.

 

Perhaps "worked over". But worked over to make a proof strike?

 

The coin was struck in San Francisco--no proofs were made of wartime issue Aussie coins. As for what caused all those lines, I think a close inspection would be the only way to find out...

 

Worked over because it was deteriorating. The SF Mint just had the contract on these. They were economy-class, business strikes, not proofs. Australia was right in the middle of the fighting. She had neither the time nor the inclination to be collecting proofs.