Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
history of proof coins
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="GDJMSP, post: 1245140, member: 112"]It's not a question of getting it right. It's a question of definitions, and which definitions a person (or the TPGs) choose to use. Example - here are the definitions of the words Specimen and Proof that PCGS uses.</p><p><br /></p><p><i>Specimen </i><i>Term used to indicate special coins struck at the Mint from 1792-1816 that display many characteristics of the later Proof coinage. Prior to 1817, the minting equipment and technology was limited, so these coins do not have the “watery” surfaces of later Proofs nor the evenness of strike of the close collar Proofs. PCGS designates these coins SP.</i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p><i></i>Proof <i>A coin usually struck from a specially prepared coin die on a specially prepared planchet. Proofs are usually given more than one blow from the dies and are usually struck with presses operating at slower speeds and higher striking pressure. Because of this extra care, Proofs usually exhibit much sharper detail than regular, or business, strikes. PCGS recognizes Proofs (PR) as those struck in 1817 and later. Those coins struck prior to 1817 are recognized as Specimen strikes (SP).</i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p><i></i>Here are the definitions that NGC provides for the same two words.</p><p><br /></p><p><i><b>SP</b> - Specimen</i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p><i><b>Proof</b> - a high-quality coin for collectors made in small numbers from specially prepared dies</i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p><i></i>As you can see, there is a lot left to be desired as to how the two different companies differentiate the two words. But as we all know, the two companies have long made a point of using different designations on their respective slabs. They do this quite intentionally in order to set themselves apart from one another. And yes I will agree that that practice does lead to and cause more than a little confusion to those who do not understand this.</p><p><br /></p><p>However, to my point that Specimen and Proof are entirely different things and are not interchangeable or synonoumous, I will give you the following evidence.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here for example is an article on the NGC web site that clearly illustrates that NGC agrees that Proof and Specimen are two different things - <a href="http://www.ngccoin.com/gallery/jacklee.aspx" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.ngccoin.com/gallery/jacklee.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.ngccoin.com/gallery/jacklee.aspx</a> Here is another - <a href="http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=229" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=229" rel="nofollow">http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=229</a> - now clearly, if this coin were the same as a Proof NGC would have called it a Proof. But they did not, they called it a Specimen because it is different than a Proof.</p><p><br /></p><p>And here is the difference, as NGC sees it, between Specimen and Proof - </p><p><br /></p><p><i>Proof coins will be so noted with the use of the prefix PF for all grades 1 through 70. Less commonly, but where appropriate, <u>coins displaying proof characteristics indicative of special handling <b>that are not true proofs</b></u> are described with the grade prefix PL, prooflike, <u>or SP, specimen.</u></i> - <a href="http://www.ngccoin.com/coingrading/grading-scale.aspx" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.ngccoin.com/coingrading/grading-scale.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.ngccoin.com/coingrading/grading-scale.aspx</a></p><p>Also, it is important to note that NGC will also use SP (specimen) to designate certain varieties, as clearly illustrated by this article - <a href="http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?IDArticle=2265" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?IDArticle=2265" rel="nofollow">http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?IDArticle=2265</a> </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Now given all of this, and there is a ton more, do I understand why some people are confused ? Absolutely. The TPGs intentionally use the SP or Specimen designation differently. So it's bound to confuse people. But the evidence that Proof and Specimen are indeed two different things, and that it has always been that way, is plain to see for those who take the time to study.</p><p><br /></p><p>So to use your words - to get in your head - you have to know all of this, and more.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="GDJMSP, post: 1245140, member: 112"]It's not a question of getting it right. It's a question of definitions, and which definitions a person (or the TPGs) choose to use. Example - here are the definitions of the words Specimen and Proof that PCGS uses. [I]Specimen [/I][I]Term used to indicate special coins struck at the Mint from 1792-1816 that display many characteristics of the later Proof coinage. Prior to 1817, the minting equipment and technology was limited, so these coins do not have the “watery” surfaces of later Proofs nor the evenness of strike of the close collar Proofs. PCGS designates these coins SP. [/I]Proof [I]A coin usually struck from a specially prepared coin die on a specially prepared planchet. Proofs are usually given more than one blow from the dies and are usually struck with presses operating at slower speeds and higher striking pressure. Because of this extra care, Proofs usually exhibit much sharper detail than regular, or business, strikes. PCGS recognizes Proofs (PR) as those struck in 1817 and later. Those coins struck prior to 1817 are recognized as Specimen strikes (SP). [/I]Here are the definitions that NGC provides for the same two words. [I][B]SP[/B] - Specimen [B]Proof[/B] - a high-quality coin for collectors made in small numbers from specially prepared dies [/I]As you can see, there is a lot left to be desired as to how the two different companies differentiate the two words. But as we all know, the two companies have long made a point of using different designations on their respective slabs. They do this quite intentionally in order to set themselves apart from one another. And yes I will agree that that practice does lead to and cause more than a little confusion to those who do not understand this. However, to my point that Specimen and Proof are entirely different things and are not interchangeable or synonoumous, I will give you the following evidence. Here for example is an article on the NGC web site that clearly illustrates that NGC agrees that Proof and Specimen are two different things - [URL]http://www.ngccoin.com/gallery/jacklee.aspx[/URL] Here is another - [URL]http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=229[/URL] - now clearly, if this coin were the same as a Proof NGC would have called it a Proof. But they did not, they called it a Specimen because it is different than a Proof. And here is the difference, as NGC sees it, between Specimen and Proof - [I]Proof coins will be so noted with the use of the prefix PF for all grades 1 through 70. Less commonly, but where appropriate, [U]coins displaying proof characteristics indicative of special handling [B]that are not true proofs[/B][/U] are described with the grade prefix PL, prooflike, [U]or SP, specimen.[/U][/I] - [URL]http://www.ngccoin.com/coingrading/grading-scale.aspx[/URL] Also, it is important to note that NGC will also use SP (specimen) to designate certain varieties, as clearly illustrated by this article - [URL]http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?IDArticle=2265[/URL] Now given all of this, and there is a ton more, do I understand why some people are confused ? Absolutely. The TPGs intentionally use the SP or Specimen designation differently. So it's bound to confuse people. But the evidence that Proof and Specimen are indeed two different things, and that it has always been that way, is plain to see for those who take the time to study. So to use your words - to get in your head - you have to know all of this, and more.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
history of proof coins
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...