Who approved the Frosted coins ?

I for one absolutly hate the new frosted look on proof coins. If they were to be graded, they would not pass the scale of G-4. Whom ever approved of this process needs to be banned from the design department. The frosted images of George on the Washington quarters are completly washed out to the point of no hair details.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I gotta admit, those are some fugly coins, more than normal. I never like forsted proofs to begin with, preferring BU coins, but those are gawdawful.

 

Wow. Those are bad. I order one silver proof set a year. I hope that set doesn't have this "new and improved" frost treatment.

 

Hate them! Plus the heavy frosting covers up possible defects.

 

What year did they start with this, anyway?

 

Some proof gold eagles have the same stupid look to them. If you look at them closely it looks like the design is made up of small circles or something. The 1/10 proof AGE's I have in front of me at the moment show it on the 2011+, but not on the 2008 or earlier. So sometime in between then 2009 or 2010 the mint changed something. I'll have to check out the 2009 and 2010 when I get a chance.

 

They're NOT grrrrreeeaaat

 

I agree the frosting really looks fake. What really frost my cookies pun intended is that the US mint at one time minted some of the most beautiful coins in the world.
Now a days it's trash..... to think the coins minted between the 1860's through the early 1940's were some really nice timeless designs. And just like now we're minted for commerce . Yet over the last 20 years the mint products are junk. As well as the quality control.
You receive coins loose in the box, and dealing with the no nothing mint employee's on the phone is another story.

 

Not frost......laser etching. I like the look, but I'm definitely in the minority.

 

This comment deserves more likes.

 

50 or 100 years from now folks will be singin' a different tune.......

 

I agree. I like them too!

 

I feel that they have look cheap and mass produced since they went to the laser etched dies. There is no art left in the process. Is it really that difficult to give the dies the old blast and polish like they used to. I would pay extra for a proof set if they would go back to the old school pickling technique and wrap the coins in the old acid paper. That would just be cool.

 

When they first went to laser production, I noticed a big difference in the sharpness of the coins. The laser removes the surface area so it doesn't lend to the fine detail in the image. This is why I stopped buying their new products and why I only buy classic coins now. I do buy one silver mint proof set every year but nothing else. We have been brain washed to believe every new technology is better. I think it's more like, new technology saves money and allows for quick mass production. These two have, and will continue to; out way quality in all areas in our future. IMHO.

 

Snakeman Ellington on the obverse of the DC Territory Quarter Proof"

 

I hadn't realized how horrible they've made them look. Wow.

 

Wow, snakeskin really is an applicable name. Dude looks like an extra on a cheap sci-fi film.

 

By 2010 most issues were ruined with this laser-etching method of frosting. Below are the images from my post back in 2012 on the NGC forums that @geekpryde linked above.

The current quarters are (IMO) the absolute worst offenders. They are beyond hideous. I didn't show the proof presidential dollars, but all of them have been made with this laser etching. According to some information from Roger W. Burdette, experimentation with the process began around 2002, and according to John Baumgart (messydesk) the 2006 ASE proofs were the first coins to exhibit this laser-etch finish.

2006: Silver Eagle
2007: Presidential Dollars
2009: Washington Quarters
2010: Lincoln Cent, Jefferson Five Cent, Roosevelt Dime, Kennedy Half
2011: Native American Dollars

Based on close-up investigation it seems that the mint was doing something differently even with the sandblasting technique starting in 2007. I'd have to use my true macro imaging setup to look at these very up close and personal -- true macro as in more like what most people think of as microscopic!

 

brg5658;

I "liked" it in your other post and it's worth another here.