Proof vs. Circulation: do you prefer one over the other?

Do you happen to have these posted somewhere so that we can see them? Not trying to create extra work for you, but i would love to see what you've been able to put together. I thought, for a very brief moment, that I would try to put together a collection of them. I got 1865 - 1871, then hit a major road block, as you pointed out above. I'm not saying that I couldn't find a few more years, but a set wasn't about to happen with my budget (or lack, thereof). So, I'm in "pause" or "time out" or "getting a dose of reality", or.... you get the idea, lol.
Thanks very much, Kenneth

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Mostly business strikes for me, but I do have some proofs, including a run of matte proof Lincolns 1909-16 in 65-66BN (no 09 VDB), a 1936 Satin Buffalo 5c, a nice 1936 25c, some Walkers and Mercs, and an 1889 3c nickel. For me, a proof needs to be as fully detailed (different from fully struck) as possible. That makes the 1936-42 proofs more challenging. I have a bunch of more modern stuff that is proof, but it's probably just taking up space better used for something else. Modern proofs took a bad turn starting in 2006 when the method of frosting the dies was changed such that it wiped out a lot of detail on the coin. Its only viable application is for the reverse cameo coins (I refuse to use the nonsense term "reverse proof"), where there's no field detail to be lost.

 

No I've never been all that interested in photographing my coins. I've been pretty much in pause mode on them as well since I got down to the last two, 1884 and 87. I then picked up the 87 about 10 years ago. I got lucky with the rarest one, the 1885, mintage of 1,000 coins. I ran across a nice AU at a show in St Louis for $300 back in 1987. I've been itching lately though to go ahead and find the 84 and finish off the set. I just haven't decided if I want to remain pure and get a business strike, or cheap out and buy a proof.