Cabinet Friction,stacking Or Wear

Yes, because "luster" is a term of exact and specific definition. "Luster" is not possible on devices, for one thing....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Actually not. see red comments above and remember ALL MY POSTS ARE MY OPINIONS THAT NEED TO BE ACCEPTED AS TRUE OR CHANGED BY OTHERS USING CERTIFIABLE FACTS.

 

You just totally edited what I said in my actual post (#279) and added a lot of stuff I never said in the quote above.

 

YES BUT: When we talk about coins, MINT LUSTER is the reflection of light from the radials on a coin's surface caused by wear on the dies. The other usage of luster is the reflection of light from all parts of the coin, its relief, its field, its weak areas, and its struck thru depressions. This is just the "technical" numismatic/Mint production view.

Experiment for you: Take out any uncirculated coin. Look at a device such as a "1" in the date. What do you call the LUSTER (reflection of light) on the top of the original, unworn numeral? Pleas fill in __________________ You will be tested later.

 

You are the ONE here that is in agreement with my opinions. SEE #276 You get it!
I added in red a little disagreement concerning struck thru luster in #279.

PS I just "discovered where to find the Post#'s...LOL.

 

I honestly have no idea what or where your opinions are. Kind of seems all over the map when I try to make sense of it. I am just trying to make sense of what we see as "weak strike" because I think we are discussing a matter that is not so one dimensional, and everyone seems to be talking about it in just one of several dimensions.

 

This is a BEST ANSWER that sums it all up...I like, I like

 

When I post my opinion or reply to a post, I use a lot of ( ) to make sure I cover all the bases so there are few misunderstandings, possible refutes, reasons to go off subject, etc. Your post I quoted above (#287) is simply said, absolutely true, and beyond challenging. Wish I could do that

 

I doubt there is anything that is beyond challenge lol

 

The (apparent) sole disadvantage of online communities for numismatics is the dilution of the language. We practice a relatively narrow specialty hobby here, and like any similar there are certain words which are trade-specific with exact meanings. Too often people - deliberately, or through ignorance of the glossary - play fast and loose with such terms. It's confounding and obscuring, especially when the audience is mixed between those who know specific meanings for these words by habit and those who are hearing them for the first time.

In my Nirvana, everybody's read the Glossary.

But Nirvana doesn't exist here, and we have to be a little more precise if we're going to communicate at all.

 

But the metal DOES flow under pressure of the rollers producing the strip the blanks are cut from. So they do have luster, but it is not the same form/direction as luster produced from striking.

 

Thanks for that explanation, this perfectly describes what I see on weak areas as opposed to worn areas.

 

Oh, I guess this site has a glossary. I'll look for it and try to comply

 

I'm back! Would you believe the black, metal, roller mills had any luster from the reflection from the grease? Just not Mint Luster as we all speak about.

Now, for what it's worth, I agree with Condor101. And any time planchet metal (hot and flowing for a micro instant) is squeezed by the dies LUSTER is imparted to it whether it touched a die face or not. If the strike is off center, the unstruck planchet has LUSTER to (See "frost from original planchet inside a roller mark).

 

Further up this thread is a photo of an Albanian coin. I claim that virtually every line/hairline visible in the photo is a result of die polishing at the Albanian Mint. Some have said I am misinformed. One member (I cannot find his post to quote here) said he collects this country and PCGS graded it due to its rarity ( AM STILL WAITING TO FIND OUT WHAT THEY GRADED IT). The informed poster hinted that the coin is scratched up and not original.

I have added a micrograph of another coin with scratches at the bottom of the post. I'm very interested in comments by everyone here But ESPECIALLY by two of you who originally posted opinions on the cleaning and unoriginality of the Albania 5 Fr. with the unknown (to me)TPGS grade.

Finally, I wrote the following and it contains an error as was pointed out below by Numismat: Correction in red.
Everyone, and I mean everyone...Mint engravers, mint press operators, mint floor foremen, well-known numismatic authorities on the minting process will tell you that the cartwheel effect we all like to see on our coins is caused by die erosion (grooves in the die due to metal flow across the die face as coins are struck. The die wear does not create the luster (on the metal die which REFLECTS LIGHT from its surface) (it is already on the metal planchet [which also reflects light]) it enhances and changes the luster. Because the appearance/quality of the MINT LUSTER on the coin depends on the condition of the die and planchet.

Numismat replied: Dude, this is cringe-worthy. The fresher the die, the smoother the cartwheel effect.Yes, and with really fresh dies the "cartwheel" is different/virtually not there as on coins that are struck later in the die life. When you have a worn die there are tiny stops and gaps I know what you are saying; we call them "radials." that make the cartwheel effect look, well, pixelated is the best word I can use to describe it. This


We have been discussing Cabinet Friction vs wear. In the interest of this thread, I posted (See #224 above) a micrograph of a high point on a gold coin. So far there have been no opinions...

 

This is the image from post #224. Sorry for the delay Mike. Christmas and the flu shut me down. I just flat out missed this post with the postage stamp size picture the first time around and your later post of 'Tube, this is not a test" now makes sense. I have been rereading the entire thread trying to catch up. This thread is REALLY deep. Anyway I am sorely unqualified to comment on this coin but since you posted it specifically for me, here goes.....Just looks like normal wear to me (wear is wear) The high points that should be rounded and lustrous are flat possibly from stacking. The black/darkess appears to be dirt in areas of high point pitting similar to the brow on many Unc Franklins that did not strike up well. The scratches seem to be just normal wear that I see on circulated coins. Coin looks terrible at 15X magnification. The pic looks like it could be a 30X of a gold filling, a brass bell clanger or a manhole cover. Thanks again Mike and rest of you for all the info, there is just flat out VOLUMES of education in this thread alone.

 

Not the same picture as in #224. Again, not qualified but the circular patterns looks like mechanical cleaning. Also Mike you have an option when you post pictures of the small thumbnail size or "Full Image".

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

 

100% Now the rub...the entire coin when held in hand graded AU-58. Possibly due to the dirt and dullness of the rub. If it were a little less dull - a little more shine (coin Doctor's know how to do it) and the dirt was gone a large, heavy, valuable coin with this would probably reach MS-62. You will see $5 Indians with dirt like this all over their relief in 61-62 holders.

 

Thanks, I'll try to do a large image next time. I think the thumb size can be blown up as you did.
I'm not going to tell you about this coin yet. Need to hear from the two experts who believe the Albanian coin is cleaned.