Hi everyone, I have all the early proof sets from the 1950-1955 in original boxes that I opened, so I know they are original sets. Almost all the coins are still brilliant without any ugly toning. My question is how can I store them to keep them looking as nice as they are now. I keep them as they came in the original cello, wrapped in the paper, in box in a safety deposit box. I know the paper and box are probably the biggest threats to the coins.I've debated removing them from the cello and putting them in a "Capital" year set holders, or perhaps individual airtites, or maybe even sending into NGC and having each year graded and slabbed in a multi-holder? I could just leave them as is, but cant really enjoy them if they stay in the orig box, to worried about handling them, and causing any damage to the coins. Any ideas, thoughts? Jim
I'd get rid of the paper and keep that with the box . I store my '53 proof set in the original cellophane bags inside a Intercept Shield Slab box inside my SDB . So far they're the same as when I bought them and that's about 6 years ago . I keep the original box separate as it must give off some carbon .
I look at how the coins have done just the way they are. I view changes in holders as a bigger risk if they are already happy. If they are not happy, I'll put them in some type of hard plastic to slow down the process.
I agree. If they have been in that packing since being put together and haven't toned up since. Any change in anything could negatively effect the coins. I'd leave them the way they are. If you are really picky get a food saver bag and seal the coins in them. Then throw them in the SDB. The end
I've kept my 'earlies' in a small metal box (which I've had as a kid and in which they've always been stored) and at last look (a few days ago) they still look great. No need to do a thing.........
Well if they're still brilliant I'd say what you've been doing is working but if it were me I'd use the BadThad method of using 2 ziplock bags putting the coins in one bag with a desiccant pouch and a sacrificial pre 82 lincoln that has been scratched up to expose the copper then put that ziplock in another ziplock
Original Proof Sets from the '50s can be worth significantly more when in original packaging than out of that original packaging. And removing them from that original packaging - destroys that additional value. They've been just fine for over 50 years, as they are. If stored properly they will be just fine for another 50.
They're worth more in the original packaging than a slab at this point. Get them away from oxygen and moisture, that's all. Ziplock bags, dessicant packs, maybe a couple freshly-brushed sacrificial coins in the bag too.
A bit off topic, but never buy these proof sets on eBay as original "unopened" sets. I would say that 100% of these proof sets have been repackaged in some way. The coins inside the "unopened" packages are probably genuine proof coins, they may even be encased in the original mint plastic, but you're simply not at this point in time going to find any beautiful, spot free, cameo coins - it just isn't going to happen. I feel this is actually true for all of the proof set years up to 1964. The eBay sellers offering these as "unopened" proof sets are in my opinion, nothing more than clever fraudsters.
That's debatable. The early Proof sets were absolutely sealed. The brown packing tape on the boxes is proof of that. Once they switched to flat packs in pliofilm and envelopes, that's where the argument or disagreement comes into play. But I personally never received one that was not sealed, others claim they have. Later Proof sets, which started in '68, when the packaging switched over to hard plastic cases, those you can call it either way. Most came in outer cardboard boxes that could be opened and re-closed. The inner hard plastic cases, I've opened many of them with nothing more than a table knife. But yes the cases did have little clips on them that held them closed. So you could say they were sealed or say they were not sealed - and be right on both counts. Now I haven't bought a set in well over 10 years, so today's - I have no idea.
I've heard the sealed/not sealed argument so many times from either side, from people I usually trust, that I'm beginning to think the Mint issued them both ways. Perhaps a downstream handler sealed some of them.
So, by this do you mean the gummed envelope was sealed, or that the box the envelopes came in was sealed?
The proof sets that were sold in the "envelopes", from the research I have done, and from my experience in collecting them as a kid in the 1970's, they absolutely were NOT sealed when shipped from the mint. They sold for cheap back then, usually the 1960's sets were $3.00 or less. It was so cool as a kid, and frankly still is cool to me, to see these beautifully minted proof coins. Back then if you wanted to upgrade your proof sets, the only alternative was to look at the sets at coin clubs and coin shows. I didn't realize it back then, but I was trying to upgrade from 66 to 67 to 68 etc, and I used to love looking at a beautiful set, with beautiful coins, knowing it was an upgrade, and buying it. Brought this up because I don't recall running ever into a sealed set in the envelopes with any dealer. I think what happens is elderly coin collectors, when they sadly get a bit feeble minded and lose interest in collecting, may just place their collections in the attic or basement, and I think what happens is the gum on the envelope gets moistened from a damp attic or basement, the gum then seals itself to the envelope paper, eventually the collection gets passed on to the kids or grandkids, they see the sets are sealed, and they just figure the sets were sealed that way from the mint. That's my two cents.