Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="rmpsrpms, post: 2858052, member: 31773"]Sometimes common sense is not enough to understand and explain what is happening. It is true that luster is created by metal flow, but in a more complex way than "common sense" can explain. What I think you are saying is that you believe luster is created by metal flow on a given coin, but this is not the case. When the die strikes the planchet, the resulting coin looks like the die. Planchet metal flow due to striking is obscured by the surface qualities of the die. I think you've moved into the realm of VLDS and later die states, correct? Certainly there is a lot of excess die wear in these states that cause distortion of the devices and non-uniform field surfaces (I think this is what you mean by "inconsistency"). These later die state coins can have very poor eye appeal (and thus lower grades) because of these qualities. I think perhaps you have a different definition of luster than the rest of us. The classic type of luster that is created by metal flow lines is "cartwheel luster". Proofs have none of this. Their dies have been polished to eliminate this quality, and planchets polished to ensure the best transfer of the polished die to the coin.  While what you say seems like common sense, it is clear that you need to refine your definition of "luster". Proof coins have very little luster. They may be shiny, but that is not luster in the sense used with coins. In this sense, mirrors have no luster at all, yet they are perfectly shiny and reflective. I think this incorrect use of "luster" is the root cause of your misconception.[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches