Well I bought this set of eBay last week and just got it yesterday. When I bought it the pics in the add where very blurry, to my advantage it seems. I found this Mint penny with the S in rare form. Also some other areas effected. But from what I have learned being on this site is it looks to be a lamination issue, Would you agree??????
I don't see any laminations (and have never seen a proof with one). Nor do I see any kind of error here at all. That being said, it's a pretty proof cent, and those are terrific close-up shots.
Split plating by the S exposing the zinc core. I used to own and 1890 or 1902 (can't remember which it was) with a planchet lamination about 3 mm square of the reverse. Don't have it anymore, it was stolen.
It must be split plating cause there are distinct splits or rip with zinc showing but is it common for a proof coin??
It's common for all cents that are copper plated zinc which started in 1982. You see the cents are plated with copper before they are struck. The strike causes the plating to tear around the devices expsoing the zinc underneath.
to add to @Evan8 This was an entirely new process for the mint at the time, so it took them a couple of year to figure it out. You'll see a lot of split plating and plating blisters on early zinc Lincolns
Oh o.k. that makes sense seeing the mostly copper penny stopped in 1982 right?? So this error is pretty common and really not worth getting graded??
Definitely not worth getting graded. 1983's with plating problems are actually more common than those with perfect plating.
I wouldn't call it a Mint Error.. Just a normal plating issue.. The major coin graders do not attribute these issues.
