This is in the original case and hard to image on my scanner (1200 dpi), any advice? Is it 'OK' to open the case? And if so, how do I seal it back up? I tried tilting and various angles and what not but can't get the scanner to do a good job on the coin in the case. I'll try the camera. 75 photos, later ... have a lot of photographs of mostly reflections. What is the trick to this? Now, I admit to being a noob, so be kind - but do point out obvious things I just don't know yet, OK? Here is the best scans I have of the blobage on the reverse, and obverse scan and of the set for good measure. You can make out in the scan what is obvious to a good naked eye the following: A bleb line from above the B in PLURIBUS to below the U. The entire field is 'wrinkled' in a wave pattern aligned with the bleb line, about 45 degrees. Hard to see with all the reflections from the plastic in the image, but plain as day in real life. Several other blobs exist, for example just next to the first part of the line but straight above the B (making the B appear to have an Umlaut) ; above the O in ONE just under the building (seeable in the scan); 2 blobs just above the T in CENT (also seeable in the scan) ; and over a dozen other smaller ones all over the place. The obverse has the same wrinkle wave pattern in the same orientation and some small blebs. There is a tiny hole on the eye where the pupil would be if he were looking at you peripherally; two spots exist at about 2:30 and 3:30 on the rim appear to be foreign material or corrosion :O ; some sort of die mark (indent like a scratch ) just in front of the chin along the beard section ; a significant dimple in his hair half way between the bottom of the ear lobe and the collar tip which I don't see on any other proof (might be normal, but it is shines in contrast to the rest of the matte finish on the features) ; S mark is a tad cruddy and appears to be doubled a bit at the top edge; even the 5 and 8 in the date seem a bit doubled, but proofs are multistamped anyway right? so does that even matter on a proof? Obviously I need to get better images, please clue me in on how to do this without opening the case. I have a scanner at the office which is probably better, so I'll have to try that I suppose at the least.
You can't open and reclose the cases. Before 1999 the proof set cases were sonicly sealed, not always well sealed, but they were sealed. (After 1998 they are just snap together and can be opened and closed without evidence.) What I think you are seeing are just plating blemishes on the cent.
Thank you. I have just completed an exercise in frustration with the 4800 dpi scanner. Even worse. Seems the distance offset from the glass is the problem. Does anybody know how to get a good image of a coin in a proof case? I am considering opening up the case to get good images. Is there a downside? Is there some loss for opening the case? How is opening the case best accomplished? Further, is there any point in it? Is this sort of messed up proof coin of any interest in the first case?
That bit I said about distance off the scanner glass got me thinking. I jacked the case up on stacks of biz cards and blocked side reflection light sources via a hole in paper, and came up with the best scan yet. Is this enough to say something more about what this animal is? I will keep trying.
At the risk of becoming annoying ... More scans, some show the wrinkly nature of the finish. Yesterday my scanner started overheating and all the scans got whiter and whiter. In the one where Abe is planking you can see that indent in front of his chin as if something extra was on the die. In the one where the building is standing on the initials that coloration is off, but shows contrast to see the wrinkles and extra raised areas. (That stuff by the C in cent is on the scanner glass.) I have been reading ... and this looks like a dropped letter situation, which explains the major piece and all the associated little chunks of crud on both sides - but I don't understand how they end up as a positive equal to the lettering rather than getting smooshed into the coin. On the other hand the major stuff is lined up pretty good, so perhaps a die crack? What causes the lined up wavy wrinkles on the mirror like field? And this may be a stretch, but his hair under the GO in god seems to be growing a little buck fawn nub, maybe another lil extra pieces of stuff. Thank you.
Blockage??? I am going to say No. it looks like a weak strike or a thin planchet to me. but I am Not an Expert.
Not sure what blockage is. Please elaborate. And I suppose we can't test thin without getting it out and measuring and weighing it, and I'd like to avoid opening the case. Thank you for helping.
Re: Let's see your newest acquisitions! Ok a blockage is when a hole area is missing. If you go to your red Book index it has photo of the most common error Red book is a must have book.
That's the problem with scanners, they are designed to focus on a two dimensional object directly on the glass. the further you get from the glass surface the more out of focus the image becomes. Interestingly the lower end cheaper scanners tend to do a better job on coins because their depth of field focus isn't as tight and tends to extend a few mm above the glass. I have no idea what Jello is talking about when he says "blockage". The wrinkled/rippled field can have two causes, one is die wear, and the other is sometimes distortion caused by the plastic case.
But nothing is missing on this coin, there are extra raised areas. And I think we can rule out weak strike, since all the letters and features are there plain as day, even the guy in the chair.
What you are referring to by EPU is a plating blister. These have plagued the copper plated zinc cents including proof issues. Here's a link: http://www.error-ref.com/BlisteredPlating.html
I agree with you, the old HP does a much better job at it than the newer hi res Samsung. Varying the lift of the case off the glass and blocking the side light seems to help a lot. First I tapped the coin to the plastic, they tried varying thicknesses of business cards until I focus on the feature of interest. Takes forever, but it finally works. So what do we call this error? Is this a run of the mill blemish on proof cent, or some one of a kind significant error? I am no coin expert, but it surprises me to see such a messed up proof. Thank you.
Thank you! There is a must read web site Now that does seem to nail it. And it should have been caught at the mint, right? The planchet striations striations explain the overall field pattern, and the rest of the bumps would be blisters. So does this ruin the proof coin or is it enhanced in value?
Those plating striations and blisters are so common that the mint doesn't even worry about them. It would definitely not increase the value, and would honestly probably decrease the value of the proof, even though the grading companies don't seem to pay much attention to them when grading.
