The 100 Greatest (Most Beautiful) Mirror Proof Lincolns

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by WingedLiberty, Apr 2, 2012.

  1. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Though much promotion and press has been focused on Matte Proof Lincolns (1909-1916) over the past 10 years. (Even I developed a "100 Greatest Matte Proof Lincolns" website in 2011!) Until now, very little has been done on promoting Mirror Proof Lincolns (1936-Current).

    Being an enthusiastic collector of colorfully-toned coins and having great interest in attempting to rank colorfully-toned coins by visual appeal (both passions of mine for the past year) -- I wanted to combine these interests into a new sister website (to my Matte Proof Lincoln website) called:

    The 100 Greatest (Most Beautiful) Mirror Proof Lincolns

    I wanted to mention that in my first endeavor into this realm of ranking coins by visual appeal back in the Fall of 2011 (on the Matte Proof Lincoln website), the ranks were based on a "consensus" vote by a number of major registry set owners and field experts. For this second website for Mirror Proof Lincolns, I wanted to develop a new more "objective" system for ranking the visual appeal of colorfully toned coins.


    So the goals of this new website are fivefold:

    1. Promote PCGS by emphasizing their expertise in grading coins, which has become (in my opinion) the industry standard. Every coin participating in this "contest" must be PCGS graded.
    2. Acknowledge and honor the beauty of PCGS TrueView Photography (a group led by Mr. Phil Arnold). Every coin participating in this "contest" must have a TrueView photo.
    3. Promote Lincoln Cent collecting in general. Show collectors just how stunningly beautiful Mirror Proof Lincolns can be.
    4. Honor colorfully toned Mirror Proof Lincolns by gathering the most beautiful specimens into a single location, where those that love the many facets numismatics can easily view (gawk at) them.
    5. Develop a new "objective scoring system" for ranking the visual appeal of colorfully toned coins -- called the "Flash Index".
    6. Make new discoveries about this series based on statistics gleaned from this endeavor. Interesting finds will be summarized on the "Statistics" page.


    The first two objectives, I hoped, would serve to promote and ultimately drive more customers to PCGS.

    In terms of objective 6, thus far two interesting finds have been made on: a.) the ultra rarity of PCGS graded BN Mirror Proof Lincolns and b.) the Enigma of the Year 1961. Both of these finds are detailed in the "Statistics" section.


    So I would be interested to hear any feedback on:

    1. this new website in general (layout, content, look and feel, etc.)
    2. the new "objective method" (called the "Flash Index") for scoring colorfully toned coins at their most "optimal view angle" (in other words, the view typically captured through photography)
    3. any comments on the sheer breathtaking beauty of these colorfully-toned Proofs


    A few final notes:

    - I do realize that the mintages of these Mirror Proof Lincolns are HUGE and I don't pretend to have captured all of the top coins on this website, but I do think this is a good start.

    - Please realize that the ranks shown are based on this PARTICULAR SYSTEM, which includes input from 10 predetermined categories. So the "rank" someone might come up with in their own head could be very different than what I developed, as someone else might emphasize color, mirrors, sparkle, or grade more or less than I did. This is NOT the end-all be-all of ranking, but does, I think, provide at least a preliminary basic framework to make these kinds of judgments.

    - Finally note that I have only accumulated coins down to a rank of #80 or so. I left some space because I am expecting to find more beautiful Mirror Proof Lincolns that will be inserted higher up on the list pushing existing coins down.

    - Along with the overall rank of 1 to 100. I also have coins separated and ranked by date. Both by the four extended runs: "1936-1942", "1950-1958", "1959-1964", "1968-1975", which shows the general types of coins one sees in each major run of Mirror Proofs; and I have also separated and ranked them by individual dates.

    - I cut off the last (final) year shown on this website at 1975. Beyond that date, beautiful, colorfully-toned Proof Lincolns are quite rare and nearly impossible to find.

    capture8.jpg
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. brg5658

    brg5658 Well-Known Member

    Just a few comments:

    Firstly, kudos to you for again creating a beautiful website and in having stellar taste in presentation, layout, and content. It was a complete joy for my eyes to peruse the coins you have listed. They are stunning and truly unique coins with their "toning" fingerprints. This "positives" section is short as compared to the list below, but this is because the site is professional and stellar. Really brilliant idea!

    ---------------------------------------------------
    Now for criticisms / suggestions:

    1. You have listed out a total of 6 goals for the website. I feel that goals 1 and 2 massively limit your ability to claim any "overall" ranking of coins in the market. Though, I feel you have also admitted this shortcoming. As such, I feel your site should be named "100 Greatest PCGS Graded Mirror Proof Lincoln Cents". There are innumerable cents in NGC holders, and even more in albums and/or still in their packaging. As to point 2, requiring that every cent in the listing be photographed by the PCGS TrueView method even further limits the scope of the website.

    2. Be careful of what you are "summarizing" on the Statistics page. Reporting complete PCGS populations on non-PCGS sites requires permission. If you don't have such permission, you could be setting yourself up for legal issues.

    3. As a professional statistician for a living, I question the stability of your "flash index". Are you having 5-6 people independently rank the coins on these attributes based on images and then averaging? Or is this simply your opinion? Either way is fine, but one of the first questions I ask myself is "most beautiful according to whom?".

    4. I find your website to be insulting to those of us who don't buy into the perception that PCGS is the "best and greatest" out there. I have seen obviously AT coins in PCGS holders, just as I have seen them in NGC holders. Claiming one is better than another for the top 2 TPGs is like debating that Coke is better than Pepsi (or vice versa). I think an appropriate naming of the site with PCGS in the title would attenuate this presumptuous and somewhat elitist perception.

    Best of luck,
    -Brandon
     
  4. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I have to say, that may be the most visually impressive coin website I have ever seen. After viewing the site for the last half hour, I really am having trouble coming up with any criticism at all. The ability to sort by different categories is phenomenal and the overall color scheme, text font & color, use of thumbnail images, & overall layout is genius.

    If forced to make a criticism, it would be about the flash index. Not the idea mind you, but the execution. To be honest, it seems as though you created 10 separate categories in order to get to 100 points. However, I find some of the categories to be unnecessary. For example, you have four categories for color. I would rather see just the first category for color and make it worth 30 or 40% of the flash index grade. The other color categories all affect the ranking for color (impression) in some way. The category color (transitions) is my least favorite because it relegates harsh color borders to lower scores. In my mind, this will mean that album toned coins with target toning will get lower scores even though I find them some of the most attractive in the toned coin world. IMO, color (impression) should be worth 30% and the PCGS grade should be worth 20% and lose the other 3 color categories.

    With regards to you allegiance to PCGS, while I don't share your opinion about PCGS, I don't mind the fact that you have restricted your collection or even your website to include only PCGS. You can give all the reasons you want for this but the importance of uniformity of photographic quality in your endeavor can not be overstated. Without the PCGS truview photos, I think your website would fall flat on it's face. Since the success of your site is directly linked to the PCGS truview photos, it makes sense that every coin included should be graded by PCGS and have a truview photos.

    The fact is that there are very few people who are able to capture the beauty of a toned proof coin in a photograph the way Phil Arnold does in the truviews. I can name a few professional coin photographers who are capable and Brandon (brg5658) is a very good numismatic photographer in his own right. But it is hard to convey how difficult this task really is. I consider myself a pretty decent coin photographer, but I have no where near the skill of of Phil Arnold. I know this because I can compare my photos to his since one of the coins in your collection came from my collection. Compare the photo below to the truview and the difference in quality is readily apparent.

    [​IMG]

    BTW, thanks for the pedigree shout out in the description of that coin. Having my name mentioned on a website as cool as yours is an honor.

    I would like to give you the biggest kudos I possibly can. Your site is the first privately owned coin website that I have ever bookmarked on my computer; it really is that impressive. Thank you for your hard work and dedication on this project. Simply FANTASTIC!
     
  5. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Hey brg, Thanks for the great and useful criticism and suggestions!

    I actually did a similar exercise for the Matte Proof Lincolns and posted it on PCGS's Forum back in the Fall and no one from PCGS blinked. I think perhaps because this is a FREE and open website and I am not trying to make 1 red cent off it. Just doing it to promote the field of numismatics. However should anyone at PCGS ever ask me to take it down, I will. I think that PCGS probably realizes this actually PROMOTES their business and only serves to add to their bottom (financial) line.

    Yes exactly right on the PCGS front. I did put "PCGS Graded and TrueView Photographed" on the banner ... so it shows up on every page. I wanted to limit this to PCGS graded and photographed coins to level the playing field so to speak. If I opened it up to raw coins and slabbed coins from any service and photographed by anyone -- it makes it much harder to compare coins (by photos) side by side.

    on item 3, it's most beautiful according to ME, but within the guidelines of the system .. but I agree having 20 people score the coins using the index and averaging would be a better way to rank.

    Sorry you are insulted ... however I DID put PCGS in the banner image so it appears on all pages. ... so you already have your wish ... you just didnt look at the site carefully enough

    In any case this is more of a thought experiment site ... and certainly is groundbreaking in terms of what currently exists in the field of numismatics right now (at least as far as what I have seen)
     
  6. brg5658

    brg5658 Well-Known Member

    Paul, thanks for the quick replies. Let me emphasize, I absolutely love the site. This isn't my arena at all, as I own zero toned Lincoln proofs, but I'm with Lehigh -- the site is awesome, and it's bookmarked on my computer; which says a lot for how much I love it. If it were my site (which it is not) I would soften some of the PCGS "cheerleader" language a bit.

    Cheers,
    -Brandon

    Just for fun, a picture: :)

    Koolaid.jpg
     
  7. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Lehigh, thank you for the feedback! Yes, I just love that 1937 Fire and Ice Proof I bought from you -- and actually the photo you took was GREAT, you captured the colors perfectly. I think your only issue was slab glare -- it's clear what an incredible advantage Phil has shooting the coins out the slab.

    Yes, I agree the Flash Index is a not a perfect system ... but I was hoping it would provide some FOOD FOR THOUGHT in others to perhaps improve on it. I have never seen anyone even attempt to score toned coins in any sort of comprehensive system. It's not an easy task! In developing the system I actually broke down what I do in my own mind when I find I prefer one toned coin over another. My four categories on color was on purpose! Since I am a color guy I wanted the vast majority of the score to come from color alone. Also I broke down the color categories into the four primary ones I use in my own head: Impression (a first glance appeal), Transition (smooth transitions of one color to another or a lack of hard color borders or lines), Coordination (or how all the colors look together, do they clash, or is it pleasing to the eye), and finally Rarity (or how rare is the coloration, a bit of common rim toning would score low, while crazy vibrant color that is rare to find, would score high)

    I suppose my hope was this would start the wheels turning in the minds of others in terms of why they find certain toned coins more appealing that others -- what sort of process do you go through in your own mind to make that determination?

    You EXACTLY understand my restriction of PCGS only!!! And you are so right that if I opened it up to ALL grading companies and all photographers it would be impossible to compare coins through photos. Using a Single photographer for all coins provides the kind of "level playing field" i needed to make this work.

    I totally agree that I think there are a number of fantastic coin photographers other than Phil Arnold, however I think that Phils advantage of shooting coins out of the slab is HUGE and difficult for other through-the-slab photographers to overcome.

    Thanks again for the kudos !!!

    It was a really fun and enlightening project and I hope others get something out of it as well -- even if it just makes them think !
     
  8. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Hey Brg! THat's a great picture ... I admit ... I am a PCGS coolaid drinker .... LOL

    Thanks again for your comments ... I just would add that I have a number of really GOOD and well thought out reasons for wanting to LIMIT the coins shown to PCGS and TrueView photod. The primary one is leveling the playing field.

    Does PCGS get stuff wrong sometimes ... you bet!! However at least every coin listed was put through roughly the same set of standards.

    In any case, THANK YOU SO MUCH for taking the time to provide comments and feedback ... I AM LEARNING TOO here!
     
  9. coppermania

    coppermania Numistatist

    Log Potatoe's current thread "How passionate are you?" comes to mind.
     
  10. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I think the major problem with a comprehensive system for scoring toned coins is the inherent subjectivity involved when evaluating toning. Even among toning enthusiasts, we all have different opinions of what appeals to us and what is or is not a monster. I applaud your effort to create a scoring system and I like the overall concept. I just don't know if I could break down my appreciation of toning to 25% for each of the 4 categories you have listed. I would rather just score my overall opinion of the toning and then multiply it by 4. Right now you use a scale of 1 to 5 for each color category for both obverse and reverse. I would be more inclined to use a scale from 1 to 10 that included half grades and multiply by 4. I don't know much about toned proofs but from viewing your coins, it seems obvious that most coins if toned, are toned on both sides. This is not so in the mint state world and it seems unfair to penalize a monster bag toned Morgan Dollar simply because the toning was only on one side of the coin.

    Again, I do use all four criteria that you use in my analysis but instead of having each worth the same amount, I would rather evaluate the color as a whole but know that my score incorporated each category. In essence, I think that the importance of your subcategories can change from coin to coin. Let's look at the obverse of two of my Jefferson Nickels to see what I am talking about.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Based on your criteria, both coins would have similar grade. I would grade the 1941-D as follows: 5 (Impression), 4 (Transition), 5 (Coordination), 5 (Rarity) yielding a total of 19. I would grade the 1950 as follows: 3 (Impression), 4 (Transition), 5 (Coordination), 5 (Rarity) yielding a total of 17.

    Using my criteria, the coins would have much different grades. IMO, the 1941-D is the finest toned regular issue Jefferson Nickel I have ever seen and would grade a perfect 10 yielding a total score of 20. The 1950 while nice simply doesn't deliver a great impression to the viewer due to a lack of vibrancy in the color and I would grade it a 6.5 yielding a total score of 13. So while the transitions, coordination, and rarity of the color are very similar on both coins, the impression of the color is simply much more important than 25% with relation to both of these coins. So much so that the Impression basically makes the other criteria trivial. The end result is that I paid a premium of over 5X PCGS price guide to obtain the 1941-D while paying 1/2 of PCGS price guide for the 1950.

    My intent here is not to criticize your method which I think is groundbreaking and very outside of the box. I just would like to point out that it may be too specific in order to handle the inherent subjectivity of toning. By creating such specific criteria, there may be times where you paint yourself into a corner. I think the only other time I have seen an attempt to quantify toning was a method proposed by Ron Sirna who was one of the founding members of the TCCS (Toned Coin Collectors Society). Unfortunately, that site no longer exists and I never made a copy of his method.
     
  11. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Hey Lehigh, By the way i LOVE your 1941-D Jefferson. Wow

    Ok, you know I love a good challenge and you threw down the gauntlet!

    First off, just to be fair, you can't change my Flash Index system then say it doesn't work!

    If you take a look at this page that details the system:
    http://100greatestmirrorprooflincolns.com/flash.html

    You will see that No Color or Minor Color on a side scores 0 in all four color categories. Whether that is a good or fair system, I am starting to have doubts as your thoughts on some of the moster toned Morgans have color on only 1 side is a good one. For Lincoln cents, it's interesting but typically the toning is on both sides. In any case, I do wonder if a better system would be to ignore an untoned side completely ... still is THAT fair to coins that have both sides with monster toning? shouldn't that have a some sort of premium. These are all great questions and will have to give that more thought!!!

    So any way back to your Jeffersons. I did the tweak to Flash Index system for MS coins vs. Proofs ... where the Proof Categories "Mirrors and Sparkle" are replaced with MS Categories "Brightness and Luster". (Brightness is basically a judgement of the brightness or shine off the high points of the design (a quality which adds to a toned coin's appeal (IMHO)).

    So I scored your two Jefferson is my Flash Index system below.

    Since your 1950 shows "minor color" on the reverse, it scores 0 in four color categories.

    So using Flash, the 1941-D scores a "Gold Level" toning score with a near perfect 9.6 (out of 10) ... while the 1950 scored a medeocre 5.9, well below the lowest "Bronze Level" score (of 7.0).

    Even if I had given the reverse of your 1950 low scores (2s or 3s) instead of 0 scores in the four color categories, it still would have only scored in the low 7's. So even in that case Flash would have worked fine.

    So, in my opinon, the Flash Index did "work" for your Jeffersons. Completely capturing the monster nature of your 1941-D and the ho-hum nature of your 1950.

    I will definitely give some thought to the question of "how should you handle a monster toned coin with one untoned side. Should that detract from a total score? Or should it simply be ignored and not allowed to hurt the score of the monster toned side?

    I do actually agree with you that for most coins (especially) Morgans the market place is saying "Do not penalize a monster toned coin if it has an untoned side". So I will definitely spend some time rethinking this. Fortunately, this appears to rarely be an issue for Monster Toned Lincoln cents -- which was the basis for my initial study.

    These are the kinds of questions I was hoping to get from other toned coin lovers with an interest in this system! So THANK YOU for providing this great food for thought.

    1941-D.jpg 1941D_Flash.jpg

    1950.jpg

    1950_Flash.jpg
     
  12. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    It's kind of interesting but there was only one memorable coin on the 100 Greatest Mirror Proof Lincolns website that only had color on 1 side. It was one of mine (that actually is a bit of a "cheat" coin since this coin is currently at PCGS awaiting a PCGS grade and TrueView photo). So the score is really a "pending score"

    1962.jpg

    In any case, this coin's reverse markedly hurt the overall score due to lack of color on the reverse, basically dropping the Flash Index from 10.0 to 8.0 right off the bat. This really is an interesting question. I know that for me personally, if this coin had that nice green toning on both sides it would be more valuable and rare. But should the score be hurt? I don't know the answer.

    Perhaps like you mentioned Lehigh, different series of coins might have different rules on that front ... Perhaps, yes, hurt the score for toned Lincolns and perhaps DON'T hurt the score for toned Morgans. With the mitigating circumstance being that one sided toning on Morgans is common! while for Lincolns one sided toning is rare (Lincolns usually are found with both sides toned) ... Like this ...

    1961.jpg
     
  13. brg5658

    brg5658 Well-Known Member

    While I love looking at your website (I've been there half a dozen times just today), I get the feeling that trying to make a science of ranking toned coins is akin to herding cats. For example, the overall ranked #4 piece, should (in my opinion) be somewhere in the #70s. It exhibits almost no color; I'm not even sure why it's on the list?

    Again, I applaud the work it took to bring all of these images together for our viewing pleasure, but the rankings and your "flash index" (upon further detailed viewing) are really subjective. My #1 ranked coin (personally) would be a toss up between what you currently have ranked as #6 and #28. After viewing the site many times today, I think I'd rather see the coins grouped by color profiles rather than subjective rankings. For example, true rainbows (like #6), and other prominent color groupings (reds, oranges, blues, greens, etc). Such a site would still be stunning, but less "presumptuous" and subjective.

    Just a thought...hope you don't mind the continued feedback. Whatever you do, don't take the site down! :)
     
  14. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    Brandon,

    The coin he has ranked as #1 is phenomenal in every respect. I don't ever recall seeing another proof Lincoln dominated by that shade of green and the cornucopia of color on the reverse is jaw dropping. IMO, that coin lives in a class all by itself. I wish I could see it in hand.

    Paul
     
  15. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Hey BRG, yes I totally agree my attempt at an "objective" system is ultimately subjective. Toning is like music ... everybody likes a different song!

    In any case, at least I made the attempt to pull all these beauties into a single place ... at that point you can make your own top 100 list!!!

    This website is really ultimately more of a thought experiement rather than an end-all be-all of ranking ... it's really ranking as I see it using a system I devised ... whether it's good or valid is another whole question!!

    It's kind of the same thing in a Miss Universe contest ... everybody has their own favorite!!

    In any case, it's fun to look at a bunch of toned coins and ask yourself the question ... what qualities am I looking at when I make a personal determination that I like one coin more than another! Then try to objectify that thought process as much as you can. It's an interesting endeavor
     
  16. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Lehigh ... I am with you on the #1 coin ... nothing that I have seen can touch it

    That was the one coin that I (personally) was Absolutely sure about!

    In any case. Forget the ranks for a moment and just gaze at the sheer BEAUTY of the coins on page 1 and 2 ... there are some true WOW coins
     
  17. Cazkaboom

    Cazkaboom One for all, all for me.

    My favorites are number
    19
    27
    47
    49
    60
    And I especially love the purple ones
    #14 and 15
     
  18. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I am having trouble getting past #1.
     
  19. cremebrule

    cremebrule Active Member

    WOW. Great work aand amazing site WL! Just a couple of comments:

    Firstly, your site looks great. While I understand the concerns regarding your qualifications (must be PCGS\photograded), I agree with how the playing field must be level. Honestly, I think it would be impossible to compare ALL the toned beauties out there (though it would be interesting to compare those from different grading companies).

    Secondly, your Flash index is very interesting. I believe it could use a few tweaks, but considering it is your first version it is pretty darn good. Also, about the one-sided monster issue I saw you were discussing. Personally, I would grade extra-conservatively; that way, supremely monster-toned one siders like many Morgans which usually have greater toning and vibrancy than others can be graded extra high (while the non-toned side would still get 0). This would make up for the lack of toning on the other side while still giving the 2-sided toners the grade it deserves. Ultimately, while your Flash Index is a great basis and rough sketch for grading toners (in this case -- most specifically for lincolns); it will need to get minor adjustments in various categories depending on the type of coin it is judging. Ex: Silver mercs will not tone the same as Lincolns; nor will they look the same either.

    Sorry if I came across as critical, just offering my 2 cents to what I think would make your great system even better. :)
     
  20. WingedLiberty

    WingedLiberty Well-Known Member

    Hey cremebrule, thanks for your feedback ... I think you brought up some excellent points

    I totally agree that the my Flash Index was tuned towards Lincolns (or at least copper) ... different series and different metals tone differently for sure!!

    Yes the one sided monster is a tough issue ... fortunately for Proof Lincolns (which i used for at test bed) doesnt show a lot of one sided toned monster coins. It's pretty clear that some tweaking needs to be done around that issue!
     
  21. joedas

    joedas Member

    wow Ive never seen toning like any of that. do coins like that come with a high premium? and how can you tell if they have been naturally toned?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page