I purchased this one from ebay with a little help from desertgems link. http://www.cointalk.org/showthread.php?t=41101 As much as I wanted an IHC proof, I love toning and might have overpaid a little. Funny thing how pics of a coin can be so different. The top three are my photo's, and the bottom two are from the seller. Keep in mind I am a novice coin photographer. Harry
ok gret pics and nice coin ill trade you for my corroded IHC with your choice of toning ever since i got fire bird i can heat up pennies to the desired temps
The seller Hiked up the contrast some to emphaisze the colors. That is what I like about the older proofs, they have such beautiful toning if they haven't been dipped. I have 2 matte proof Lincolns, 1910, and 1912, and they have the same iridescent toning like yours on the rev. I think all of the early proofs are undervalued, although the 1909-1916 lincoln matte are reaching. If you paid some over even coinvalues prices, you got a good deal in my opinion. Jim
I'm not going to question NGC about this coin being a proof. My question is, "How do they know?" Just its surface appearance doesn't do it for me. Is it safe to say there are die characteristics and/or strike characteristics that give it away? (This is a learning question for me.)
My thoughts, exactly. I don't see this as a proof. Look at the edges. Look at the surface, unless the photos are just bad. Look at the strike.
First let me say it is one nice coin. To me the edges look okay (from 4 or 5 o'clock to 12 or 1 o'clock) in the pictures. Those parts look nice and square. It almost looks like an uneven strike. The large pictures make me think MS, but the smaller pictures look like proof surfaces. Of course most proofs that I have seen have that wild toning from dipping(or whatever). I think this is a proof where the OP tilted the coin to keep the glare off the holder making the surfaces look different. Just my opinion and a sweet coin no matter what.
Could you expand on your description? I don't have many IHCs, but the few I do have are high grade (MS-64 to -66). Mine aren't proofs, but I'd like to know how one could tell. What differences should I look for if I were to compare my MS-66 with his proof?
Congrats on your NEWP. Looks very nice for a 62. Beware. 19th and early 20th century proofs can be VERY addicting.
p.p.s. here's a great way to tell a proof from a prooflike MS strike. Look for reflectivity (i.e. mirrors) inside the shield on the reverse. The other way is to look for squared rims (which are hidden in a slab, but almost immediately obvious in a raw coin once you've seen a few).
Very nice proof , the reflective surfaces in the bottom pictures give it away , sometimes on IH proofs you have to rotate the coin a little to really see the reflectivity of the surfaces , your 62RB is just as nice as my PR64RB mine was in an early NGC slab and is more brown then red , but the iridecent coloring is still there , very nice for a 62 . rzage
Rims and surfaces. When you set a proof next to a business strike you can see how square the rims and dentils are. Plus look at the reflectivity that leadfoot mentioned. The last two pictures on this post show it in my opinion. Have I said nice coin!
Nice coin.....someday, I'll own a proof Indian too. As Leadfoot said, they can be addictive and drain one's finances to boot.
