Brilliant clad proof looks like Matte Proof ..... how?

Is this a proof on a BU planchet?

Okay...I have read many threads including the great Beginner Guide to Luster thread (several times) and it does not seem to answer this question.

I have a modern clad proof coin (1979)...found it in an older Dansco binder...and the fields are more like a Matte proof. Did the mint use the wrong planchet? Is this a normal thing? Did someone clean/dip the coin? How does this happen?

Pictures of this Matte coin versus a brilliant proof of same year, same angles, same lighting, no touchups other than crop....

Thoughts please

Obverse

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Reverse

 

Mint Mark Shot....I usually cannot take these on proof coins without a big reflection of my camera...look at the real proof, you can see my camera lens like looking in a mirror...then look at the Matte coin....



Did I find something unique, or something damaged?

 

Looks like the dreaded HAZE to me...!

 

HAZE...please explain. I have never seen this...seen toning, seen the beginning of toning...never this as it is far to uniform. What is the HAZE you are referring too?

 

So here is another view....taken together....the "Matte" coin is completely uniform



Here is a fun shot to show the reflective nature of the proof versus the other coin...having the coin reflect a color completely out of the ordinary, it can be seen how different the fields are on these two.

 

Probably the most popular theory on hazing of proof coins is that it is caused by a chemical reaction of the surface to a cleaning solution the mint used in production. Since not all will develop it, the exact reasons it occurs sometimes and not others are not well known. Storage in certain albums or original mint packaging seem to trigger it over a period of time. Silver proofs were often dipped in the past, and although it helped then it could reappear in the future, so many owners sold them while they were still bright. Clad proofs sometimes can be helped by acetone, but not always. IMO.

Jim

 

It's haze. The matte finish has a much different look.

 

Agree. I've seen many proofs haze in unopened, OMP.

 

So if this is HAZE...does the Verdi-Care stuff make the bad look like the good?

 

I agree with Jeff, Jim, G, and Thad. Looks like a hazed proof that I would try MS-70 or a very quick dip in diluted Jewelluster followed by a thorough washing in distilled water being very careful from damaging the delicate surfaces of the proof coin.

 

I am sorry I am confused. I thought they used the same blanks for the coins, it was just the striking process that was different?

 

Would Acetone work?

 

Acetone would if it was gunk on the surface, but if there has been a chemical reaction on the surface, it would not. However, IMO, it would not hurt the coin surface if done properly, and there are many threads that specific how to do it, but the chances of it helping would be extremely small I am afraid. Someplace ( can't remember where on a PCGS page, they mention that the planchets are "specially prepared" for proofs.

Jim

Jim

 

Okay...I have done some research. I have never cleaned a coin, so this will be a first for me. First attempt will be Acetone...it seems to be an option that has no downside, but does have upside. Will see how that works.

If I do need to step it up...what are everyone's thoughts on Tarn-X. I read some reviews that like this tarnish removal product better than MS70 and Jewelluster, it is just hard to find. I have a source for all three and am leading towards the Tarn-X (this is used on items you put in your mouth after your are done....perception says I like it better for not leaving any residue or other coating on the coin).