Did I buy a Proof Seated Liberty Half?

Guys, picked this up from one of my dealers today for $100. It looked proof, but was in pretty rough shape. As I was looking at it, the dealer said, "You know that thing is probably a proof.. shame it was run over by a train..." I went ahead and bought it because I didn't have even a proof-like seated liberty half. Has a strong mirror finish, and looks like it might have been Cameo on the obverse before it was abused in whatever way it was. My oldest proofs are from the 1930s. Any ideas on determining proof vs proof-like? Not that it matters that much because of condition...

Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Looks like a proof to me. although i am not very versed in this type of coin.

 

I think it is a proof also.... It is beautiful, nice pick-up.

 

I believe it is a proof. The denticles are very sharp, along with the stars around the seated liberty. $100 isn't bad.

For comparisson, here is my proof seated half:

 

Maybe I'll send it to NGC and see if they body bag it or give it a real grade. Wonder what the lowest grade for a proof in their history is..

 

IMO this is a candidate for NCS. The details don't look all that bad but the surfaces are dirty as ****. I have seen proof 45s but I think this could get PF55-62, if conserved by NCS and then sent to NGC. I may be wrong though.

 

I don't think its a proof. Very nice coin for $100 though.

 

I think its a proof and should be sent to PCGS

 

Looks proof to me

 

I will say proof too my AU50 coin does not have fields like that.

Edit to add. Also if it were mine I would be soaking it in acetone right now as that may just be PVC film on it for the most part.

 

I'd soak it like LindeDad said then send it to NCS.

 

I thought I had read that there were no good ways to conserve proofs. Even acetone. Not true? How long of a soak before the wash?

 

I've never attempted to clean a valuable proof, however, I have had pretty good luck cleaning less expensive proofs. Hold by edges, squirt with Windex (or other amonia based cleaner), swirl solution around surface of coin by tilting, rinse with warm water, rinse with cold water, dry with canned air form an electronics store. On a real nastly looking coin it won't return it to gem proof, but it will make it look much more presentable. On coins with light to medium fog, it works fabulous. Best part, it does not dull the mirrors the way a commercial dip would. I've had coins make into PF68 holders afterward, so its not something the grading services are going to notice. The key is to insure the coin is totally, 100% dry when finished. Any kind of moisture left behind will leave a spot that subsquent cleaning by this method will NOT remove.

 

I agree that it certainly appears to be a proof. I do like those SL proofs, own a couple of them myself.

 

I'd soak it overnight. Remember pure acetone in a glass bowl and rinse with distilled water. And NO do not clean with Windex.

 

Giving it a soak.. Will post updated pictures tomorrow. Thanks!

 

The acetone will remove any pvc from the coin and lift some of the dirt. Remember do not rub or pat the coin let it air dry

 

Well, I'm clearly outnumbered on the proof vs. not proof debate. My doubts about it being a proof stem from the lack of frost on the devices. I would expect at least some of the devices would still retain a spectacular frost on them much like the slabbed example illustrated in this thread. Perhaps not as white, but very cameo like. In the absence of that, kind of have to go with "very nice proof-like" striking.

 

Early proofs were not as "frosty" as they are now-a-days, the giveaway for me was the mirrored fields.

 

When determining if something is a proof or not, the finish of the devices or fields can be very misleading. Judging just this, many DMPL morgans would be given proof designation. Always pay attention to the sharpness of details and, in particular, the denticles around the edge.