Nice, I've been considering getting one of those but the stock images nearly all looked the same! So, thanks for the photos. IMO, the proof strike is better than the reverse proof at bringing out the details of the devices. The enhanced one is pretty good, too, so I'll have to choose between the two. What's interesting is that the enhanced one's obverse looks nearly identical to the proof obverse with deep mirrored fields, but the enhanced one's reverse looks to have satin, semi-mirrored fields. So, I'm leaning towards that one. P.S. Ridiculous stock photo, right?! How do you tell the differences among the different strikes from this?: Image from the 'net.
That Liberty (and I'm sure whoever the girl was who modeled for it) is stunningly beautiful, but I think it's one of the ugliest coins because of those stupid over-sized Burger King crown stars! And why only 4? If we assume the stars go around her head fully, that puts it at 9 stars max. What's the significance of 9 or 4 stars? Did I miss something in history class those days back in '78 when I had pinkeye? To me, it's one of those "What was the Mint thinking?" coin designs.
I believe that it's supposed to mirror the capitol building's statue below. The star tiara does look strange though. I'm more irked by the partial eagle's tail on the reverse. Why not show the whole eagle?
@Beefer58 good point on the stars. I think this set is well underappreciated. I agree about the artwork but it has grown on me. I would say this coin is much better then they Lion coins UGG now that is an ugly coin
Green18 - In some of your photos you managed to make an ugly coin look half way decent - great job!. Yes - the large stars make no sense what so ever. It should have been 13 small, tasteful stars all the way around. So I guess we'd see 7 (one in the center of the forehead and six along each side.) And I don't care for the position of the wings on the eagle. Usually the wings of an eagle are depicted it the up position, not the down, for good reason. Perhaps the 'artist' was working for a 'different' look. But you can be different and beautiful at the same time. In the case, the artist clearly missed the mark by a long shot.
Great pics! Does the eagle have purple wings in that first pic, or have I had too many shots of tequila?
All the random sets of initials on the reverse are weird. Even the mintmark! Why not place them closer to the eagle instead of floating out in space?
LOL Topcat........I have no idea where the bloody purple came from. Shoot, I had a brown shirt on when I shot these, and the room was completely dark. Must be something in there that's throwing the color off. Once I get all of the wifes' quilting fabrics out of here (hey? dat it?) maybe this anomaly will cease to exist.
Those are beautiful pictures - gorgeous. Seriously, the mint should pay you to use them in lieu of the less-than-ideal pictures they are using. Sadly, I still think these coins are exceedingly unattractive. The giant star tiara is one of the worst abominations I can recall. And it looks like the poor eagle on the reverse had his tail feathers chopped off, and he got so upset that he barfed up the alphabet soup he had for lunch. Yurz.
You fellows are being most kind in your seemingly unapplauding assessments. I understand that the design is not well received, but in my opinion the future will bear out the desire. The Morgan dollar was one vilified (back in its' day) and I do believe his medal will gain in popularity down the road. Time will tell. I'll be dead.....
I really hate that this was a coin that was made in a PC overly sensitive way, but that is really one of the prettiest coins that the mint has made in quite a while IMHO. An artistry stunning piece; especially with the high relief.
