I got this 1962 Proof Franklin half this week. It was in a proof set that I got for $8.50.:whistle: :hammer: Charlie
good God! anyone say Deep? I DO! What a great pick up at 8.50 for the set! any others in the set good?
Not by a longggggg shot....a half dollar only has .36169 % silver in it....with silver being about $13.69 that means that the silver in the coin is worth $4.9479932. Speedy
NGC said it was PF-66 Ultra Cameo. Not bad considering I sold the other 4 coins in the proof set for $2 each. Charlie
I'd really like to get one of the Franklins (first post), but I have a question. For the most part, when I look for the proof sets, it looks more like mint sets (wrapped, in envelopes) and the ones that aren't unopened (at least in theory) seem... more like modern uncirculated finishes. Just... blah. Maybe it's the picture? Also, while some appear to have a nice cameo like the first post, some appear to be fully mirror-like. I included a picture below and even in this one picture you can see what I mean. The one with one dot is the fully mirrored one and the two red dot has the cameo. I'd like one of both, though $8.50 for a set sounds good, heh, but I can't figure out why there's a difference, and what is inside the envelopes.
I'm not sure I understand your questions samjimmy - your pics didn't show up by the way. But I think you are asking why there is such a difference in between the coins in some Proof sets. The answer is quite simple really. When the coins in these Proof sets were struck with new dies the coins turned out with mirror finish fields and frosty cameo devices. But as the dies wear, these effects lessen until all you are left with are Proof coins with a brillant finish - no cameo & no perfect mirror finish fields. It's not just the pics - it's the coins. The only way to find the sets with the cameo coins is to search for them. But over the years, so many collectors, who also know this, have picked through the sets so much that finding them anymore is a rare occurrence. For some dates, it's almost impossible to do so.
Yeah, I realized that I forgot to attach the image. Here it is... What I mean is that some of them looked almost chromed (fully, including the bell and the head), while others have frosty devices. The picture belwo compares the two reverses (one showing the frosty version, the other the mirror-like version), but you can also see the full-mirror on the obverse by looking at the coin to the left of the two dots.
Yes - that is a good example of exactly what I was trying to explain. It is completely normal and to be expected. Those that you call "chromed" were struck with worn dies. Those that are frosty were struck with new or refinished dies.
I have a question simular to that. I have noticed this "chromed" finish on older proof sets but it seems that all (or at least all that I have seen) of the newer proof sets only have the mirror finished proofs. Is this because they change/refinish the dies more often than before. It seems that since the proof set production moved to San Francisco rather than Philadelphia this has been the case. Is that true?
Newer proofs are usually cameo proofs, because the mint knows collectors like cameos; and it refinishes the dies when the cameo effect wears off. I don't think the mint actively started doing this until 1973 though. Charlie
But if you figure the quarter and dime into the total the whole set is about melt value, isn't it? Madspec